|
Home
| Back | Next |
Disclaimer:
I am very in touch with the fact that as a limited human I have a
limited perspective. So as you read my take on the work of Christ on
the cross, keep in mind that I offer this as an imperfect argument.
But along with all the rest of the imperfect arguments regarding the
atonement - check your theology book, there are many (ransom,
substitution, etc) - I hope that you can find for yourself the true
parts, and let them change and improve your experience of what it
means to follow Jesus. In as much as theology sends us down
rabbit trails that keep us from figuring out what Love is and
doing it, I think it is not of God. So I hope what you glean
from this is an encouragement rather than a hindrance.
The confusion I have over the
evangelical theology surrounding the atonement was birthed by a
skeptic I met in university. His point was simple but difficult.
"Why did Jesus have to die on the cross?" was his question. I
parroted the standard answer I had grown up with, something along
the lines of: 1. God is perfect, 2. people sinned, so 3. there had
to be a blood sacrifice to atone for the sin and make us right with
God. He was fine with the first two, but he was pretty adamant that
the leap to the third one was broken logic. Why the sacrifice? Why
blood? Is this God not above all things? God is the author of
everything; no concept can exist outside of him that he is bound to.
So why would he set up this elaborate and seemingly arbitrary scheme
in order to make people right with him? Why couldn't God, being
the-almighty-being-who-makes-the-rules-and-is-bound-by-nothing just
speak into history that we are all forgiven and it be done?
This guy's questions left me with
the realization that I was simply toeing the party line with no
honest understanding of what the work of Jesus was all about. So I
told God that I can’t speak passionately about something I don’t
understand or even really believe and that he should enlighten me. I
have prayed for a long time now asking God to make the atonement
really make sense for me.
And here’s what I’m thinking so
far:
What if the demand for a sacrifice,
the capital “J” demand for justice that was satisfied at the cross
came not from God but from humankind? What if the cross was God
submitting himself to humankind’s selfish demands, smashing into
history with a transcendent act of Grace, thereby revealing once and
for all God’s own personality, that of undeserving and perfect Love?
I consider my years of teaching
history. I am fascinated by the way the law pervades every early
civilization. Anywhere people settle down and try to live together,
eventually some sort of law code breaks out. And invariably, the law
code is revenge based. If you poke out my eye, I poke out yours;
kill my dog, I’ll kill yours, etc. And the logical end of revenge
would be a life for a life. If you shed my blood, I’ll shed yours.
What I saw in the early civilizations I studied totally verified
this. Many of them took it to the point of human sacrifice to their
god, assuming, I suppose, that since we demand sacrifices of each
other, surely god must demand them as well to atone for all the
wrong we have done.
Why, since our earliest days as
humans, did we consider this necessary? It is ironic to me that
revenge isn’t really that logical; as we know it perpetuates
problems that grace would end. Yet, it is so deep in all of us. It
is almost an assumption, a presupposition. If someone came and
cracked me in the jaw most people would feel I have the right to
crack him back. Again, why? Because it is the best way to a
solution? No. For the most part, the answer is “just because”. It is
an innate response. I can see that one answer to this “why?” would
be “to create fear in the guy who punched me so he won’t do it
again”. Weak answer, of course, because odds are he is going to
feel a need to create some of that fear in you too once you punch
him back. It points to how the whole thing is based on fear, along
with satisfaction of a very natural (apparently natural isn’t always
good!) desire to avenge ourselves. Revenge provides us with that
quick satisfaction, and is rooted in our own pride/selfishness.
What is so clear about the new way
that Christ trumpets in the kingdom of God is that it is the very
opposite of revenge/law. As far as I can see, all the stories and
teachings of Christ point to grace. Revenge and the law have their
foundation in self-ishness, an orientation to satisfying your
own needs/desires. The foundation of grace, as modeled by Christ, is
perfectly contrary in its self-lessness. Jesus stands apart
from revenge and the law, instead pointing us toward forgiveness and
even the extreme of hospitality (as defined by Miroslav Voth’s – a
proactive doing of what there is no onus on you to do in the first
place).
To me, this seems to be the entire
theme of God’s interaction with his creation throughout history. It
is us following our nature and wreaking terrible revenge and law on
one another. God’s plan is to teach us the divine way, the divine
nature, the way of true Love as expressed in grace. Someone might
protest, “but the law came from God and so is obviously his way”. I
would respond, as I think the epistles do, that God gave the law as
a concession to our hard hearts. The law was given, maybe more like
allowed, for a certain time in order to reveal how badly it worked,
to show how hopeless it was for bridging the distance between us and
God (because it is so unlike God’s way).
So then in Jesus and his death on
the cross we find the most shocking and extreme walking out of grace
in all history; an act of grace so mighty that all the powers of
darkness are sent reeling. Throughout history, humankind demands a
sacrifice. At the cross, God says, “I will give you a sacrifice. I
will give a sacrifice so far and above the pathetic cheapness of
your sacrifices.” But his sacrifice is radically different from ours
in one way: it is unwarranted. There is absolutely no reason why the
God who is over everything should submit himself to the demands of
his creation. But in this act of humility and submission, this is
exactly what he does, and in doing so, smashes the spirit of the law
that is the driving force of human society.
I see hints of this in the Old
Testament like when the Israelites ask for a king. The dialogue went
something like this:
“No, it’s best if I am your king.”
“But everyone else has a king!!”
“A king will enslave you, can’t you
be satisfied with me?”
“No, we want a human king.”
“Ok then, it is not the best thing
for you, it is not my way, but I will do it your way”
And God submits to the wrong
desires of his creation. Again and again, God sets us totally free
to make our own decisions, even to the point of letting us do things
that hurt us, and we end up finding out the hard way. I “kinda”
think that is what the law was all about as well. The law cooperates
with the evil tendency in human nature, and even awakens it. Paul
says it like this, “But sin took advantage of the law and aroused
all kinds of forbidden desires within me!” (Rom. 8:8).
In my experience of evangelical
theology, there is often an awkwardness between what Jesus said and
did during his ministry on earth and what happened with his death on
the cross. Much of his teaching doesn’t meld that clearly with
notions of substitutionary atonement. The result has been that much
of the actual teachings of Christ are ignored or discarded, and the
traditional evangelical understanding of what happened at the cross
is stressed. I am thinking especially of dispensational theologies I
remember hearing in my youth, that had such problems with the sermon
on the mount that they relegated it to an endtimes millennial time
period. But it is the same thing when, because his ideas are so
contrary to the culture we are in, we ignore Jesus’ directives
regarding peace, money, etc (radical self-sacrifice in general).
But if Christ on the cross was a
monumental, history changing act of grace, then his teaching and
action in the rest of his ministry make perfect sense as well.
Everything he did and said pointed us to grace; he began teaching us
how to turn from the darkness of our own selfishness, toward his
light of selflessness. This was the “new way” proclamation of his
ministry, and it found its climax in his ultimate act of grace on
the cross.
|