6. The Atonement in Scripture
Scriptural terms such as the covenant of God, sin, faith, forgiveness and salvation are open to a range of interpretations. Often, the way such terms are applied reflects the interpreter’s own theological bias. The various versions of the Bible follow the preference of the translators, and this includes their beliefs about the atonement. This chapter examines scriptural words and passages relating to the atonement. The next chapter will build on this and discuss associated doctrines.
The biblical authors used many figures of speech in describing the manifold character of creation and its damaged state (e.g. freedom/slavery, covenant/lawbreaker, and garden/wilderness). Regarding atonement, Henri Blocher (2004, p. 645) said, “The burden of the several metaphors of Scripture and of its other teachings is indeed that God was pleased to bring about, through Christ’s work, the fullness of atonement—all conceivable aspects of the undoing of evil and association with the divine life—such a fullness that, in him, we are filled to the full (Col 1:19–20; 2:9).” One such metaphor is the image of God.
Biblical scholars interpret God’s creation of humankind in his own image and likeness (Gen 1:27) in a number of ways. For some, it means God made humans rational and intelligent, for others (2) God gave humanity dominion over the world, and others (3) people are relational.
The first of the three views, takes the phrase “image of God” as a substantive portrayal of God as the archetype for human attributes. But God transcends every detail of creation. God’s attributes are not mere analogies of human traits. The relationships between Creator and creatures are unlike relationships between people. The Creator sustains the creature’s existence. This is why, since God is holy and does not countenance evil, sin destroys humanity’s relationship with God.
The second view sees humanity’s rightful place as God’s representative (image) who rules over the earth. Satan usurped this position when Adam sinned. However, Paul uses the phrase for both a sinful man (1 Cor 11:7) and Christ (2 Cor 4:4) but the context of neither refers to dominion.
The third meaning is that God made people for a life in a relationship with each other and God. The poetic wording and symbolism of the early chapters of Genesis suggest the phrase “made in the image of God” is a metaphor. Its meaning is similar to the “children of God” metaphor (John 1:12; Rom 8:14; 9:25-26). Luke calls Adam “the son of God” in the genealogy list of Jesus (Luke 3:38). Gen 5:3 applies this same likeness and image vocabulary in this sense for the kinship of Adam and Seth. If this reasoning is correct, the image of God metaphor applied to humanity is a prototype statement of the covenant of God, “I will be your God, and you shall be my people”. This phrase used many times in Scripture (see Scripture references), speaks of the steadfast love of the Lord for his children. It is significant that Scripture never uses the phrase “covenant relationship.” This would use the legal term “covenant” literally instead of as a metaphor for relationship. Peter echoes this language when he refers to Christians as “God’s own people” (1 Pet 2:9). Larry Shelton (2004, p. 34) concluded, “The covenant story is thus the framework in which all biblical metaphors of salvation function.”
Salvation is from sin and death. Scripture variously portrays sin as disobedience to God’s law (1 John 3:4), unfaithfulness to God (Rom 14:23; Heb 11:6), and rejecting the word of God (Acts 13:46). Augustine (2009, p. 207) saw the root of sin as pride. Feminist theologian, Valerie Saiving (2009, p. 290), suggested that the root of sin is the self’s attempt to overcome anxiety. Saiving (2009, p. 300) argued that pride is more of a male sin, whereas women tend more towards self-abnegation, both stemming from anxiety at the human condition. Sin has ramifications for the whole of creation (Rom 8:22).
Sin damages all relationships but in the case of the divine-human relationship, it alienates humanity from the source of life, resulting in death. God introduced himself to Moses as “I am who I am” (Exod 3:14). This might refer to God’s self-existence and having life in himself (John 5:26). The Genesis creation story depicts God planting two trees in the Garden of Eden, the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen 2:9). The trees represented respectively, human access to life and access to the knowledge of what it is to be sinful. Adam and Eve did not lose their mortal life on the day they sinned, as God had warned (Gen 2:17), but they lost eternal life. Paul talks this way in Col 2:13 where he said Christians were “dead in trespasses” but “God made you alive … when he forgave us all our trespasses.”
As discussed in Chapter 1, retribution cannot restore life or reconcile people with God, and God cannot overlook sin. But God’s covenant involves God in restoring the world and uniting with his people forever.
Jesus revealed his understanding of eternal life when he prayed, “And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (John 17:3). Eternal life is something other than everlasting life (John 6:51). The quality of eternal life is one of abundance (John 10:10). It is a life indwelt by the Holy Spirit (John 14:16). Paul wrote, “But if Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness” (Rom 8:10). So, God imparts eternal life to his people because Jesus sacrificed his life for them. And the exalted Lord Christ sends them his Spirit of righteousness and the promise of physical resurrection.
God created humans as individuals living in community. Unlike the Creator-creature relationship, people do not uphold each other’s existence, but their relationships can be life-affirming. Social Network Analysis, a branch of sociology, has found that social connections between persons act as channels, conduits or bridges that convey information and influence between people (Kadushin, 2004, p. 31). These are social channels, but since humans are also spiritual beings, they also convey spiritual influence. These social connections may entail conveying material substance but even if this is not the case, the social and spiritual influence imparted is real. Things such as advice, encouragement, forgiveness and trust, conduct ‘life’ to others. Relationships of faith between people create conduits of “faith working through love” (Gal 5:6b). In a similar way, the book of Proverbs uses the tree of life image to refer to life-affirming personal relationships (Prov 3:18; 11:30; 13:12 & 15:4). Also, the book of Revelations describes faith in Christ as a tree of life (Rev 2:7; 22:2, 14 & 19) and uses the image of the river of life (Rev 22:1-2). Faith is a spiritual faculty, a means of receiving or imparting blessing. Another metaphor for faith is the eyes of the heart (Matt 6:22-23; Eph 1:18). Through faith we receive the light of Christ. We are not saved by faith but through faith. Salvation is not the result of a transaction, a deal or contract with God.
Unlike the communion that exists between the members of the Godhead, human relationships do not share a common essence and people are not self-existent. Human beings can engage with the good in others while not approving their sin because they do not maintain anyone’s existence. People, regardless of sin, can befriend one another. The Old Testament calls only one person, Abraham, the friend of God (Isa41:8 & 2 Chr 20:7) because of his faith (Jas 2:23). But in the New Testament, Jesus often called people “friend,” even when they were betraying him (Matt 26:50; Luke 5:20; 12:14; John 11:11). Jesus can forgive and befriend sinners because he shares in their humanity. Sinners stay clear of God the Father because of his holiness. Christ does not overlook or condone offences when he forgives them. After all, when anyone forgives another they indirectly assign blame to them. By the same token, a sinner seeking forgiveness is admitting guilt. Forgiveness and the admission of wrongdoing are both essential for reconciliation between people, and also for reconciliation between people and Jesus, and thereby, with God. These relational elements form a conduit of faith through which flows the love of God, “the only thing that counts” (Gal 5:6b). Through faith, we come to know Jesus, or rather are known by Jesus, and God graciously grants freedom and eternal life to Christians (Gal 4:9).
Paul variously referred to death as “the wages of sin” (Rom 6:23a), God’s judgement (Rom 5:16-17) and punishment for disobeying the gospel (2 Thess 1:9). But God’s concern about the death of people was the reason his Son came to save and restore eternal life to his people (John 3:16 & 36; 5:21). Theological considerations of justice, spiritual warfare, and freedom from sin are additional to God’s work of salvation.
The incarnation of the Son of God provided a sinless “image of God” to humanity in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, who God declared to be his beloved son (Matt 3:17). God’s strategy for salvation hinged on Christ being both Son of God and Son of Man, so he could be the mediator of a new relationship (the new covenant) between God and humanity (1 Tim 2:5; Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:22-24). Jesus was without sin from birth by virtue of his incarnation (as opposed to procreation). He remained faithful throughout his life, withstanding every trial and temptation to commit sin. Jesus’ resurrection and ascension allows him to continue mediating for human salvation. The Christian’s relationship with Christ is the basis for the hope of physical resurrection (John 11:25). Christ identified himself as “the life” (John 14:6) because he imparts eternal life to the faithful (John 3:36). His resurrection assures us of our own resurrection (Rom 6:5). Resurrection signals the end of the sinful human nature because Christians will be righteous when they stand before God. This is why Paul wrote, “For through the Spirit, by faith, we eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness.” (Gal 5:5).
So, sin is not a hopeless condition from which a holy God cannot save his people. God does not demand a ritual sacrifice to appease his anger or to bring about justice. God is patient in the face of humanity’s sin and God’s long-suffering culminated in his Son coming into the world (see Jesus’ Parable of the Tenants in Mark 12:1-11).
Jesus called for repentance and faith. Anthony Bash (2011, p. 138) noted, “to seek forgiveness without confession, repentance and restitution is an oxymoron in the Hebrew Scriptures and in Jesus’ day.” Confession, repentance, restitution, trust and obedience establish relationships with Jesus where the love of God is experienced, faith is reborn and sins wiped out. “Repent therefore, and turn to God so that your sins may be wiped out” (Acts 3:19).
A slave can be redeemed by payment of a ransom. If Christ’s sacrifice of his life was a ransom payment, in what sense was Christ a substitute and what was the reason for the sacrifice? Steve Chalke (2008) wrote, “The spectrum of complementary metaphors used by the writers of the New Testament, in their attempt to express the truth of the atonement, includes a clear substitutionary (though, I contest, not a ‘penal’ substitutionary) element (‘The Son of Man [came] … to give his life as a ransom for many,’ Matt 20:28), along with numerous others …” (p. 37).
When the author of Ps 49:7 says, “Truly, no ransom avails for one’s life, there is no price one can give to God for it.” he is thinking of ransom in terms of a payment of money. But, he then speaks metaphorically in Ps 49:15, “But God will ransom my soul from the power of Sheol, for he will receive me.” The ransom that Jesus spoke of in Matt 20:28 was from slavery to sin and the inevitability of death. The payment was not part of a transaction, but as the reason for his sacrifice.
If God transferred the guilt for the sins of the world to Jesus, as the penal substitution theory portrays, then God the Father must reject God the Son and Christ must have experienced both physical death (on the cross) and the second death (Rev 21:8), perishing because of human sin (John 10:28). This second death did not occur. Jesus’ divinity entails his not being susceptible to the destruction of the second death. Since the penal substitute must undergo the full punishment for sin, this is another point of failure for the theory. Lumen Christi avoids these problems by changing the object of substitution. So, in reply to this section’s opening question: Christ acted as a substitute for God’s people by being the sinless and faithful Son of God who overcame evil with righteousness and goodness on humanity’s behalf, as their redeemer and champion.
Karen Jobes (2005, p. 51) informed us that “we can thank Peter alone for the familiar Christian tradition that identifies Jesus with the Suffering Servant of Isa. 53 (see Pet 2:24).” Forensic substitution theories appeal for support to the suffering servant passage. But Jobes says that Peter was writing to encourage persecuted Christians, “Peter reminds his readers that Jesus’ unjust suffering did not mean that God had abandoned him, to the contrary, unjust suffering was God’s mysterious way to accomplish the redemption of humanity.” (Jobes, 2005, p. 197).
Furthermore, Robin Collins (2012, p. 188) considered that Isa 53:5 conflicts with penal substitution if the Hebrew word muwcar for chastening, discipline or correction is not translated as “punishment” because if the purpose was correction it is not retributive. This accords with the modern English translation of the Septuagint (LXX) which says for Is 53:5 “But he was wounded because of our acts of lawlessness and has been weakened because of our sins; upon him was the discipline of our peace; by his bruise we were healed.” (Pietersma & Wright, 2007, p. 865).
Herbert Leupold (1968, pp. 228-220) in his commentary on Isaiah admits, “Though the word used in almost every other case bears the thought of corrective suffering, i.e., ‘Chastisement,’ we hold with those who take the word in the sense of ‘punishment’ (Strafe), because otherwise the sin-bearer himself would stand in need of correction.” This is a case of allowing one’s theology to dictate Scripture translation.
Collins says if muwcar is translated as chastisement, the chastisement of Christ resulted from his bearing the consequences of the world’s sin. Hence, Isaiah 53:5 goes on to say, “the punishment ‘made us whole’ (and that his bruises ‘healed us’), not that it satisfied some divine demand that sin be punished; hence arguably this passage is actually in conflict with penal theory.” (Collins, 2012, p. 188). Jesus bore our sins in the sense of embracing the human condition in a sinful world to the extent of submitting to his unjust crucifixion. Peter was writing to Christians who were themselves being persecuted unjustly for their faith. Jobe (2005, p, 199) pointed out “Isa 41:8-11 LXX identifies the nation of Israel as Yahweh’s Suffering Servant” and “This is congenial to Peter’s insight into the nature of unjust Christian suffering as that of a kind with Christ’s suffering.”
Isaiah had already prophesied that God will blot out sins for his own sake without requiring a substitute (Isa 43:25) which implies that Isaiah would not agree with the penal substitution interpretation of his suffering servant prophesy.
Maurice Blondel quoted Newman as saying, “To have faith is to enter in a practical way into the invisible world, to realize the presence of God, to wait for his visit, to deliver oneself over to him, to abandon oneself into his hands.” (Blondel, 1987, pp. 161-192). Jesus had such a faith in God for he abandoned his fate to his Father (Médaille, 1960, p. 8).
The faithful self-sacrifice of Jesus met with the Father’s approval (the sin of crucifying the Son of God met with no such approval). Christ’s sacrifice evoked God’s response of exalting Christ, of raising him from the dead, receiving him into heaven, and appointing him Lord of God’s kingdom. God’s grace is on display in the passion narrative. Sinful humanity does not deserve salvation, even as a reward given to Christ. God does not condone sin. As Moses wrote, “The LORD is slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love, forgiving iniquity and transgression, but by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the parents upon the children to the third and the fourth generation” (Num 14:18).
Jesus did not lose his eternal life as did the first Adam when he sinned. Christ is alive and he lives as the peacemaker between God and those who place their faith in him. God the Father found in Jesus the “one person who acts justly and seeks truth so that I may pardon” my people (Jer 5:1b).
Satan used the crucifixion to tempt Jesus to exploit his relationship with God the Father in order to avoid suffering and death. The devil tried to coerce Jesus into calling on God to save him and leave sinners without a saviour. Alternatively, Jesus could side with Satan who would give him his kingdom.
Matthew 4:1-11 and Luke 4:1-13 give the story of Satan’s temptation of Christ in the wilderness at the start of his ministry. Since only Jesus and Satan were present in the wilderness, Jesus must have related this experience to his disciples. Jesus likely used the story in his exhortations to resist temptations. Satan failed in the wilderness and withdrew until an opportune time (Luke 4:13). Christ’s crucifixion presented Satan with that opportunity to tempt Christ away from his mission. Jesus knew that his enemies wanted to kill him and he spoke publicly of his forthcoming execution (Mark 8:31). When Peter rebuked Jesus for saying the Jewish leadership were going to reject and kill him, Jesus recognised the temptation as coming from Satan (Mark 8:33). Jesus knew that Satan had assured Eve in the Garden of Eden that she would not die (Gen 3:4).
Andrew Schmutzer (2008, p. 18) analysed Matthew’s description of Jesus’ temptation as to its Old Testament background and commented, “Jesus obedience during His desert testing (Matt. 4:1-11) was perfected during His final testing starting in Gethsemane (Matt 26:39).” The author of Hebrews said Jesus “was tested by what he suffered” (Heb 2:18) referring to Christ’s final days.
Just as Satan tempted Adam and Eve in the garden, the devil tempted Christ in the wilderness. Luke’s Gospel has the second and third wilderness temptations in the reverse order to Matthew. This is not significant since Luke also states the devil tempted Jesus over the whole forty days (Luke 4:2) and not only on the last day. Although neither Luke nor Matthew explicitly links the wilderness temptations of Christ with the temptations at his arrest and crucifixion, the parallels are clear. Jesus knew of the enemy’s schemes, for at the last supper he said “… Satan has demanded to sift all of you like wheat” (Luke 22:31). As Jesus went to the Mount of Olives with his disciples: “On reaching the place, he said to them, ‘Pray that you will not fall into temptation.’” (Luke 22:40 & 46 (NIV)). Now we will examine the three categories of temptation used by Satan.
In the first wilderness temptation, Satan wanted Jesus to impose on his relationship with God in his own interests. “The tempter came and said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.’” (Matt 4:3). Satan recognised Jesus as the Son of God and did not so much question Jesus’ identity, as point out that it implied Jesus could work miracles. But the Spirit led Jesus into the wilderness to fast and pray for 40 days, and completing this assignment was a matter of obedience. Every detail in life is significant and Christ remained obedient throughout his earthly life. He had to endure in faith until the end (Matt 10:22b).
At Jesus’ arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane, Simon Peter wielded a sword to defend him. Jesus rebuked Peter saying, “Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?” (Matt 26:53). Jesus was prepared for this enticement. He had taught his disciples: “If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it.” (Matt 16:24-25). But Jesus’ disciples had not grasped this teaching.
The temptations continued. Herod wanted Jesus to perform a sign for him (Luke 23:8). When “the King of the Jews” hung on the cross the passers-by echoed Satan saying, “You who would destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross” (Matt 27:40). The chief priest, scribes and elders said, “He saved others; he cannot save himself. He is the King of Israel; let him come down from the cross now, and we will believe in him.” (Matt 27:42). Even a criminal being crucified with Jesus joined in by saying “Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us!?