The death and resurrection of Jesus the Messiah throughout church history has generally been interpreted through a “Day of Atonement” lens. An oversimplification may look something like: The world’s sins are imputed to Jesus as the Father pours out wrath upon the Anointed One. Those who put their hope in this work of redemption will find eternal salvation and “imputed righteousness,” while those who disregard will suffer the wrath of God. I heard a preacher recently say, “If you don’t let Jesus take the wrath of God for you, then it must be dispensed upon you.” The end result is that the saints of God are “righteous” (or viewed as obedient 100%) before God because the sin debt is paid for in full. This is the “Gospel” I grew up hearing.
But I do not believe this view of the atonement is accurate nor helpful. The New Testament authors did in fact see the cross/resurrection through the Day of Atonement but far more, they saw it through the lens of the Exodus (John 1:28, 1 Corinthians 5:7). Jesus is our Passover Lamb who was sacrificed for us; but what does this entail? Where do we stand now? How was our departure from Egypt enacted and what exactly happened? I hopefully will answer these questions and more in the following posts but for now I will begin with the debate around the theological world involving… yes- propitiation and expiation.
These two terms can be a little tricky so I will try to explain them carefully and hopefully simply. Propitiation is the appeasement or satisfaction of a Deities wrath so that it becomes consistent with His character and nature to bless and pardon sinners. Note that propitiation does not make God loving but enables Him to love those who otherwise would be unlovable. Expiation on the other hand deals not with the wrathful person but with the object that causes the wrath. (Example: Sin makes God upset, therefore expiation removes the sin and thus remove s the occasion for anger). “Peace with God” is not the result of the satisfaction of justice or appeasement of the Deities wrath directly but the expulsion of offense that renders the two parties once set at odds, reunited.
Propitiation
Penal Substitution/Satisfaction, since the time of Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109), had become the front runner in the understanding of the cross of Jesus and His subsequent resurrection. Anselm claimed that man owes God everything since He created them and since the fall man has been racking up that debt by the sins that they commit. Man has no way to pay God back since from the start everything man owned belonged to God. Man simply did not have the currency to pay God off for the offenses incurred. God must vindicate His own name by either destroying humanity because of their debt, or God must send His Son to pay the debt for humanity. Only if Jesus dies a bloody shameful death, will the debt for humanities rebellion be payed off. This view is highly rational, however, the deontic, intra-trinitarian exchange poses many problems to a critical mind. Is God punishing or paying off God for a debt that is owed to God? The idea itself becomes abstract in that it neither cordially invites talk of ontological or relational problems of sin, sticking primarily to a deontic conception. This means that Anselm’s atonement, as well as Calvin’s and other propitiatory views, deal almost exclusively with sin as man’s failure to his moral obligation; not even trying to answer the question of “human nature,” and the broken relationships that have now been wrought from sin. Other problems that “come up” from these views is that fact that it makes God out to not only be a tyrant, but a mathematician and Jesus is merely evening the score. Penal Substitution also makes little significance of the life and ministry and resurrection of Jesus; they are seemingly before and after thoughts. It also engages little with any form of systematic and structural evil. It rather views sin as something man chose to do all the while stating that man could do nothing but choose it. Its like asking a child to build a spaceship out of legos and then punishing him because he cannot. When in actuality, there is no way he could. Also it was hardly ever taught with in the first 600 years after Jesus. Of the 50,000 pages written on the death and resurrection of Jesus in the following centuries, it is hardly mentioned… ever.
Expiation
Any view of atonement must solve both ontological and relational issues corresponding to sin. As we have seen, expiation is the removal of sin and, as we have seen, it must function not deontically, but in terms eradicating the “sin nature” and restoring broken relationships. The concept of Kingdom comes to the forefront in the New Testament texts with Jesus and Paul. While proclaiming the message of the Kingdom of God, multitudes were being healed, delivered, and set free from a formidable enemy and diametrically opposed kingdom: Satan’s. Jesus is portrayed as “One stronger than the strong man” who then ties Satan up to plunder his goods (Luke 11:21-22).
Paul also uses Kingdom language, not least in Romans 5-8. Rather than using Satan, Paul uses the image of Sin and Death reigning over humanity since Adam. Though in this section Paul never mentions Satan or the devil, he alludes to the Wisdom of Solomon 2:21-24. Paul says that death entered the world through sin (5:12-14) while WoS asserts it came through the devil’s envy (2:24). Throughout Romans 5:12-21 and even into 6, Paul uses Kingdom language to portray the present evil age and the one Jesus came to initiate. “Death reigning”, “taking dominion” and “grace reigns through righteousness” shows a mere glimpse at the word pictures Paul paints for the reader. Two Kingdoms in opposition to one another, both of which are looking for the allegiance of men. Conveyed from one kingdom to the next, while waging a cosmic war not against mere flesh and blood (Ephesians 6:12) much like that which Jesus warred against from the cross. From the gospel accounts to Paul’s writings, it would be negligent to leave out free will and the working of Satan: the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience. But those are a whole other can of worms. Expiation must be seen as the removal of sin, the old man, “sin nature,” and Satan. These powerful enemies stand between humanity and their God. Forgiveness is a vital part of the atonement but it is not nearly the bulk of it.
Exodus
We now see the a broad scope of a term Theologians call “Christus Victor.” The victory of God at the cross over principalities and powers that have enslaved men and women since Adam and Eve, finally coming to ahead in Christ. The Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world, is our Passover Lamb that marks out the people of God as Pharoah’s household mourns their loss. In the death and resurrection of Jesus, as we will see in a later entry, those, once slaves of sin, who now believe in the faithfulness of the Messiah have crossed through the Red Sea, the waters of baptism, and have entered into the age to come by virtue of their union with Christ in His death and resurrection. As the Greater Moses, Jesus, tied up the strong man, the Pharaoh of this age, Satan, and plundered his goods, he also brought salvation to the captives, while the horse and rider are cast into the sea. As Egypt was made a public spectacle to the surrounding nations, so once again in the sight of all the nations, God, who has been faithful to the House of Israel, has raised Jesus from the dead and defeated sin and death forever.
This was meant to be a broad overview. In the next post we will wrestle with question surrounding words associated with the crucifixion like: ransom, redemption, reconciliation, inheritance, and the idea of being purchased.
