Living Atonement:
Imparting the Full Life of Jesus,
Christians, and the Church
Kyle Metzger
BIB 654
Mary Schertz
December 13, 2013
Introduction
Many authors and
scholars have sought to deconstruct, reconstruct, nuance, and explicate the
various atonement theories (and their derivatives) of Anselm, Abelard, Aulén, while
often arriving at theories that generally select and/or deselect from the
respective atonement models/motifs stemming from these writers. The atonement
cannot be encompassed by a single existing model or motif; the atonement, like
God, can be explained only with the use of metaphor, boundaries, and
characteristics: what the atonement is
and what the atonement is not; what
the atonement does and what the
atonement does not do. In this essay,
I will seek to explain the atonement negatively (not an inflictor of
unnecessary suffering and not confined to the death of Christ) as well as positively
(a remover of sin, enabler of eternal life, victorious, and active). Though this
“model” of atonement is only viewable through a narrowing of the boundaries of
the characteristics of atonement, I believe we can better understand the
actions and intentions of God through this view, which I call Living Atonement.
What the Atonement is not
It
is a difficult task to define the atoning work of God in a negative sense; the
abundance of theories and models of atonement is an indication of the work of
Christians, scholars, and theologians throughout history to bring their own
meaning to the atonement. Thus, the atonement can mean many things to many
different people across a long spectrum, leaving little room for what the
atonement is not.
Suffering
The work of
feminist scholars such as Rita Nakashima Brock and Rebecca Parker regarding
suffering sheds light on the dark realities of what has been unnecessary but
legitimized suffering of women and ostracized groups. In a sermon to her
church, Rebecca Parker lays out how the atonement theory of Satisfaction has
been misconstrued in reality:
If God is imagined as a fatherly
torturer, earthly parents are also justified, perhaps even required, to teach
through violence. Children are instructed to understand their submission to
pain as a form of love. Behind closed doors, in our own community, spouses and
children are battered by abusers who justify their actions as necessary, loving
discipline. ‘I only hit her because I love her.’ ‘I’m doing this for your own
good.’ The child or the spouse who believes that obedience is what God wants
may put up with physical or sexual abuse in an effort to be a good Christian.[1]
Whether
or not Anselm intended for this theory to be used for unnecessary suffering and
misplaced obedience, that indeed is the reality. The systemic nature of this
abuse proves that it is not anomalous, but is a pattern of misuse and confusion
about the purposes of God. J. Denny Weaver explains that this error stems from
seeing God as the divine child abuser, while in fact the death of Jesus was a
result of his threatening the powers of evil.[2]
Jesus was put to death by the evil powers of the world, not by a divine desire
for satisfaction. Pushback against this abuse has caused many to ask whether or
not Jesus in fact needed to die; that is, in my view, a moot point. Jesus did
die. Rather, our responsibility as followers of Christ lies in understanding
the atoning power uniquely inherent
in the life and death of Christ, a power that cannot be replicated in human
suffering. Living atonement sees God’s love for us as life-giving. In the
fourth gospel, Jesus says, “I am the gate. Whoever enters by me will be saved,
and will come in and go out and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and
kill and destroy. I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly” (John
10:9a-10).[3]
Only
in Death?
The
Apostle’s Creed, spoken in my church community every week, begins in this way:
“I believe
in God, the Father almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, his
only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin
Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried…”
This creed
seeks to biographically state the atoning work of Jesus; however, it also
(albeit unintentionally) exemplifies what is often missing from images of the
atonement: the life and teachings of Jesus. Theories of Satisfaction, Penal
Substitution, and Christus Victor heavily focus on the atoning work in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ;
there is no generally accepted theory that significantly seeks to include the
atoning work of the life and teachings
of Jesus. The atonement is not confined to the death and resurrection of Jesus.
A healthy and comprehensive model of the atonement places the incarnation and
subsequent life of Jesus on a path that eventually leads to death and
resurrection; neither end of the path can be ignored or magnified. Living
atonement considers the whole of Jesus’ existence in the atoning work. Scot
McKnight explains this process in A
Community Called Atonement:
The cross is
the center of the atonement. Of course, there would be no cross were it not for
God becoming human (the incarnation). And without the resurrection, the cross's
work would be incomplete. But neither of those points can be permitted to
minimize how important the death of Jesus is to the New Testament authors and
to theologians like Luther.[4]
The death is central in the atonement,
but it does not stand alone. The historical crux
sola focus led to skewed understandings of the power of death, omitting the necessary process of
life and the conquering of death. The life of Jesus was multi-purposed, not
confined to a life or a death: “just as the Son of Man came not to be
served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:28). This is the focus of Living Atonement.
What the
Atonement Is
As
human beings limited in power and understanding, we cannot see the wholeness of
the atonement: its effects that are cosmic and outside the boundaries of time
and scope. However, we can see what the atonement has consistently meant for us
on this earth and in our time. We can never seek to fully understand God’s
intentions, but the love of God can be revealed even in a limited look at what
God did to make us one with God. This is often done through biography – though
anecdotal, true changes in the lives of humans are still real evidence of the
atonement.
The Removal
of Sin
Standing
alone, the theories of penal substitution and satisfaction have been criticized
and picked apart, often nearly to the point of uselessness. However, the strong
points of these theories cannot be ignored; they serve to remove sin from the
sinner, effectively enabling the sinner to move past the debilitating guilt of
sin. From Richard Gaffin:
United to
Christ in his death and resurrection, believers share in the eschatological
triumph of God over sin and its consequences. While for them that victory has a
still-future aspect, in the resurrection of the body it is a present reality
that has taken hold of, and renewed them at the core of their being. They are
no longer slaves of sin but alive to God; they "no longer live for
themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again" (2 Cor
5:15), a life in union with the resurrected Christ that transforms every aspect
of their existence.[5]
Though we may not fully
understand our sin or our participation in systemic injustice, we can
understand that our sin does not define us; in it we do not find our identity.
We do not have to spend our energy ridding our lives of sin; that work has already
been performed by Christ in fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy: “because he
poured out himself to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he
bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Isaiah 53:12b).
This is an echo of the Psalmist’s words on sin:
He does not deal with us according to
our sins, nor repay us according to our iniquities. For as the heavens are high
above the earth, so great is his steadfast love toward those who fear him; as
far as the east is from the west, so far he removes our transgressions from us.
As a father has compassion for his children, so the Lord has compassion
for those who fear him (Psalm 103:10-13).
These
Old Testament images were fulfilled by the atoning work of God through Christ.
And this forgiveness and removal of sin continues ecclessially. Jesus
commissions the church for this work in Matthew 18: “Truly I tell you, whatever
you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will
be loosed in heaven. Again, truly I tell you, if two of you agree on earth
about anything you ask, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven”
(Matthew 18:18-19). Scot McKnight sees the gospel as a necessarily
transformative agent of the church and world:
The kingdom of God is more than what
God is doing “within you” and more than God's personal “dynamic presence”; it
is what God is doing in this world through the community of faith for the
redemptive plans of God—including what God is doing in you and me. It
transforms relationship with God, with self, with others, and with the world.[6]
The
church becomes the agent of the gospel and the sharer and arm of the
atonement. Jesus clearly meant for his atoning work to be continued through the
work of the church. The church should be continually shaped by the gospel.[7]
The
debate and discourse over the mechanism of
sin removal will always remain, but the reality
of the forgiveness is clear in Living Atonement.
Victory
The guilt of sin
can weigh heavy, but the enslavement
to sin is what perpetuates our allegiance to the kingdom of the world. In
Living Atonement, victory is found in the death and resurrection of Jesus
Christ; these two together destroy both the guilt
and slavery to sin.[8]
Images of victory abound in the New Testament, especially in the epistles,
reflecting on the death and resurrection of Christ. In Colossians, this victory
is over the powers of the world, related to the forgiveness of sins:
And when you were dead in trespasses
and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive together
with him, when he forgave us all our trespasses, erasing the record that
stood against us with its legal demands. He set this aside, nailing it to the
cross. He disarmed the rulers and authorities and made a public
example of them, triumphing over them in it (Colossians 2:13-15).
The
“rulers and authorities” of the kingdom of the world formerly had a hold on us
through sin, but Jesus’ all-encompassing forgiveness of sin escalated us to
victory. This is why we so triumphantly sing “O Victory in Jesus, my Savior
forever,” a hymn that brings a sort of confidence
and assurance to our faith.
The
writer of Hebrews examines the mechanism of this victory. In Living Atonement,
it was not only the death of Christ but Christ’s being like us that made his death and atonement powerful:
Since, therefore, the children share
flesh and blood, he himself likewise shared the same things, so that through
death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and
free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death. For
it is clear that he did not come to help angels, but the descendants of
Abraham. Therefore he had to become like his brothers and sisters in
every respect, so that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in the
service of God, to make a sacrifice of atonement for the sins of the
people. Because he himself was tested by what he suffered, he is able to
help those who are being tested (Hebrews 2:14-18).
Jesus’
humanity – his incarnation and life – bring a sort of feasibility to the atonement. God was not able to atone without becoming human, and in this we can
identify and receive atonement. “Everyone
who commits sin is a child of the devil; for the devil has been sinning from
the beginning. The Son of God was revealed for this purpose, to destroy the
works of the devil” (1 John 3:8).
This
victory, like the forgiveness of sins, is designed to be realized by the people
of God. “It is a victory that is realized when it takes root in the hearts and
minds of people who have eyes to see and ears to hear and who form communities
to celebrate the victory they see and hear.”[9]
The victory is meant for us; it is
not merely cosmological or spiritual in nature. This victory is made real through the changed lives of
believers. Living Atonement acknowledges the existence of two kingdoms: that of
the world and that of God. And in the realization of Living Atonement,
believers choose to move their allegiance to the Kingdom of God, no longer
living under the evil powers that, ironically, crucified Jesus. This is the
image of the victory.[10]
Eternal
Life
In
Living Atonement, the work of Jesus is clearly realized in our lives on earth
in ourselves and with each other, but McKnight exposes this limitation: “Any
atonement theory that thinks exclusively of the earth is inadequate, just as
any theory that shifts to thinking too much of eternity is also inadequate. Nor
is it wise to choose which one to emphasize; the atonement is designed for both
an earthly realization and an eternal destination.”[11]
The atonement is also cosmological and eternal. Humans are fallen and worthy of
death, but in a singular act, Jesus disarmed the finality of death.[12]
Therefore just as one man’s trespass
led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to
justification and life for all. For just as by the one man’s disobedience
the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made
righteous. But law came in, with the result that the trespass multiplied;
but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, just as sin
exercised dominion in death, so grace might also exercise dominion through
justification leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord
(Romans 5:18-21).
This
is the hope for the hopeless. This is the root of the African American
spiritual: “Soon I will be done with the troubles of the world, going home to
live with God.” God desires for the kingdom of God to be realized on this
earth, but Living Atonement realizes that those who believe will inevitably
inherit the kingdom of God eternally, and will escape the oft deceptive powers
of evil: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that
everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life” (John
3:16).
The
Active Living Atonement
Perhaps
the point that is most missed by classic atonement theories is the active and present
nature of the atonement; that the atonement should be constantly changing and
moving through those who believe. Living Atonement takes this into significant
focus. This is the backbone of Green and Baker’s work in Rediscovering the Scandal of the Cross:
We cannot overlook or downplay the
importance of the death of Jesus for our faith and life as his disciples. At
the turn of the third millennium, however, we must face the reality that our
thinking about the cross has actually kept it from occupying a central place in
our lives. Our chief images for interpreting that saving significance of Jesus’
death have kept the word of the cross distant from issues that press is on us…
with the result that the word through which we are to find the hope of
salvation has lost the capacity to challenge us in the day-to-day realities of
our lives.[13]
The
tragedy of an atonement that does not change its beneficiaries was realized
during the period of lynching in America. “White conservative Christianity’s
blatant endorsement of lynching as a part of its religion, and white liberal
Christians’ silence about lynching placed both of them outside of Christian
identity.”[14] In
Living Atonement, the gospel is about
eternal life and salvation from sin; but the atonement is also about current realized
liberation.[15] The
command for this active atonement is found throughout the New Testament:
“I am the true vine, and my Father is
the vinegrower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Abide
in me as I abide in you. I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide
in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. Whoever
does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers; such branches
are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. My Father is glorified by this,
that you bear much fruit and become my disciples” (John 15:1-2, 4a, 5-6, 8).
And in Luke: “If
any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their
cross daily and follow me. For those who want to save their life will lose
it, and those who lose their life for my sake will save it” (Luke 9:23b-24). James
Cone understands this command quite well; it is easy to teach and debate
theology, but it is another situation entirely to live dangerous theology. It can indeed mean risking one’s own life
for the sake of others.[16]
The rationale for this comes from the example of Christ, a piece worth taking
from Abelard’s Moral Influence Theory. “If you endure when you are beaten for
doing wrong, what credit is that? But if you endure when you do right and
suffer for it, you have God’s approval. For to this you have been called,
because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you
should follow in his steps” (1 Peter 2:20-21). This passage has often been used
to justify the history of slavery and even modern “righteous abuse.” But this
is a misplaced focus; it is a reminder that, in seeking to bring the goodness
of the atonement, the followers of Christ may suffer. This suffering is only
made righteous when it is following “in his steps.” This is what Cone is
referring to in “theology…that entails the risk of one’s life.”[17]
Here I repeat the earlier words of Matthew: “but whoever wishes to be great
among you must be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you
must be your slave; just as the Son of Man came not to be served but to
serve, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:26b-28). And the
writer of 1 John echoes the example of Christ: “We know love by this, that he
laid down his life for us—and we ought to lay down our lives for one
another. How does God’s love abide in anyone who has the world’s goods and
sees a brother or sister in need and yet refuses help?” (1 John 3:16).
The specific types
of necessary action will change throughout history; Cone saw a missed
opportunity by white Christians to end lynching, Dietrich Bonhoeffer lamented
at the church’s lack of action against the Third Reich, Martin Luther King Jr.
stepped up to attempt reconciliation between two races with great enmity. This
discernment process will remain malleable, but in Living Atonement, the
command, rationale, and example of Christ remain constant.
Conclusion
The
many theories of the atonement throughout history have given us great insights
to the atoning work of God, though there are gaps and insufficiencies that have
proven potentially destructive. Living Atonement accounts for the strongest
points in these theories, with an emphasis on the full existence of Christ, and
its beautiful ramifications for the followers of Christ. Living Atonement seeks
to dispel unnecessary or unrighteous
suffering and a crux sola view.
Living Atonement also seeks to magnify the realities of the removal of sin, the
presence of victory, eternal life, and lives that are changed through the
example of Christ.
This
is an inherently unfinished work, and I suspect that it will perpetually remain
unfinished. But that parallels the beauty of the atonement; until the parousia, the work of God through Christ
has occurred but is still occurring through God’s people. That
is the centrality of Living Atonement.
[1] Rita Nakashima Brock and Rebecca Ann
Parker, Proverbs of Ashes: Violence, Redemptive Suffering, and the
Search for What Saves Us (Boston: Beacon Press, 2001), 30-31.
[2] J. Denny Weaver, The Nonviolent
Atonement (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
2001), 132-133.
[3] All
Biblical references are New Revised Standard
Version.
[5] Charles E. Hill and Frank A. James III, eds., The Glory of the
Atonement: Biblical, Historical and Practical Perspectives: Essays in Honor of
Roger Nicole (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2004), kindle fire
location 1503.
[6]
McKnight, 9.
[7]
McKnight, 4.
[8] Hill
and James, location 1612.
[9] Theodore Koontz, “Christian Nonviolence: An
Interpretation,” in Nardin, Terry, ed. Ethics of War and Peace: Religious and Secular Perspectives
(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), 174.
[10]
Weaver, 45.
[11]
McKnight, 27.
[12]
McKnight, 58.
[13] Joel B. Green & Mark D. Baker, Recovering the Scandal of the
Cross: Atonement in New Testament and Contemporary Contexts (Downers
Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2000), 33-34.
[15]
Cone, 155.
[16]
Cone, 70.
[17]
Ibid.
