Browsing by Subject "Atonement"

The New Testament book known as the epistle to the Hebrews contains little obvious reference to Jesus' resurrection. Modern interpreters generally account for this relative silence by noting that the author's soteriological and christological concerns have led him to emphasize Jesus' death and exaltation while ignoring, spiritualizing, or even denying his resurrection. In particular, the writer's metaphorical appeal to the Yom Kippur sacrifice, with its dual emphasis on the slaughter of the victim and the presentation of the victim's blood by the high priest, allows him to explain the salvific significance of Jesus' death and exaltation. The crucifixion can be likened to the slaughter of the victim, while Jesus' exaltation in heaven can be likened to the high priest entering the holy of holies. In this way the cross can be understood as an atoning sacrifice. Such a model leaves little room for positive or distinct reflection on the soteriological or christological significance of the resurrection.

This study argues that the soteriology and high-priestly Christology the author develops depend upon Jesus' bodily resurrection and ascension into heaven. The work begins with a survey of positions on Jesus' resurrection in Hebrews. I then present a case for the presence and role of Jesus' bodily resurrection in the text. First, I demonstrate that the writer's argument in Heb 1-2 for the elevation of Jesus above the angelic spirits assumes that Jesus has his humanity--his blood and flesh--with him in heaven. Second, I show that in Heb 5-7 the writer identifies Jesus' resurrection to an indestructible life as the point when Jesus became a high priest. Third, I explain how this thesis makes coherent the author's consistent claims in Heb 8-10 that Jesus presented his offering to God in heaven. I conclude that Jesus' crucifixion is neither the place nor the moment of atonement for the author of Hebrews. Rather, in keeping with the equation in the Levitical sacrificial system of the presentation of blood to God with the presentation of life, Jesus obtained atonement where and when the writer says--when he presented himself in his ever-living, resurrected humanity before God in heaven. Jesus' bodily resurrection is, therefore, the hinge around which the high-priestly Christology and soteriology of Hebrews turns.

Penal substitutionary atonement is a wide-spread, wildly acknowledged, and often-repeated understanding of Jesus’s death on the cross in white, western Christianity. Found in inside the church in hymnody, Sunday school lessons, church pulpits, as well as in influences in the wider culture, it is considered by many to be the orthodox understanding of Jesus’s death on the cross. What is little known is that not only did this theory of atonement take significant time to develop within the history of Western theology, it includes some troubling theological implications.

It also remains true that many Christians, particularly in mainline Protestant denominations, are stumped when it comes to articulating in any coherent way the meaning of Jesus’s death on the cross for their faith and practice. In part, this deficit is due to the fact that while substitutionary atonement swims in the waters of popular white western culture, many mainline congregations do not necessarily hold to a penal view of atonement. Yet, they also do not have a compelling alternative. Additionally, for many Christian traditions, outside of fundamentalist and evangelical traditions, the atonement is not a defining point of doctrine. The cross might be thought about briefly on the way to Easter Sunday, or with a casually mentioned, but marginally understood phrase such as, “Jesus died for my sins.”

In the absence of a theologically rich account of the cross, Christian communities are at risk for being unable to articulate in any meaningful way how exactly this fundamental theology makes any difference for what it means to be Christian, and ultimately to the reality of people’s lives and the salvation of the world.

This paper proposes that the postmodern church must reclaim a robust theology of the cross in three ways: embracing multiplicity and variety, reconnecting the cross to Jesus’s ministry and therefore the first-century Greco-Roman context in which he lived, and articulating a nonviolent atonement. It offers practical resources to assist local congregations in teaching the topic.

Sacrifice often connotes death or some form of lack within popular discourse. The association of sacrifice with death is assumed in some strains of the Christian tradition that employ sacrifice within a penal substitutionary account of the atonement. In this framework, sacrifice is understood as death for the purposes of punishment. This dissertation challenges the identification of sacrifice with death. It presents a reinterpretation of sacrifice through a canonical and literary reading of Old and New Testament texts. Sacrificial practice displayed in Leviticus and Hebrews suggests that sacrifice is oriented at life rather than at death. Specifically, sacrifice in Leviticus aims toward a reinstatement of the good order of creation displayed in Genesis 1. The telos of the Levitical cult is humanity’s redemption and creation’s restoration. Both are achieved on the Day of Atonement described in Leviticus 16 as a Sabbath. Hebrews expands upon the sacrificial logic of Leviticus in presenting Christ’s resurrection as the perfection of the cult. Christ’s sacrifice is his resurrected body, not his death. Christians are called to participate in Christ’s sacrifice, and discipleship assumes a form that challenges society’s deathly sacrifices.

In comparison to Mark and Luke, Matthew's Gospel contains a striking preponderance of economic imagery, especially in passages dealing with sin, righteousness, and divine recompense. This cluster of economic terms is found in every strand of tradition in Matthew's Gospel, and frequently appears to be the result of Matthean redaction. A good chunk of this language occurs in five uniquely Matthean parables dealing either with the pricelessness of the kingdom or judgment and reward (the hidden treasure in 13:44; the pearl in 13:45-46; the parable of the unforgiving servant in 18:23-35; the parable of the workers in the vineyard 20:1-16; the sheep and the goats in 25:31-46). Matthean additions to the triple tradition also tend to contain economic language.

In this dissertation I begin by analyzing Matthew's economic language against the backdrop of similar language in other early Jewish and Christian literature. I then go on to examine the import of this language for the narrative as a whole, arguing that some of the Gospel's central claims about Jesus emerge from this conceptual matrix. To be more specific, the narrative provides a coherent description of how Jesus saves his people from their sins and comes to be enthroned as Son of Man. Matthew draws on images of exile and debt-bondage to depict the people Jesus came to save as captives because of the debt of their sins. Jesus is introduced as the one born to save his people from their sins (1:21), and throughout the Gospel he does this by teaching them how to find debt forgiveness and store up treasure in the heavens in order to acquire eternal life. From the time Jesus begins predicting his death and resurrection he also teaches his disciples to follow him in giving their lives and being repaid with resurrection (16:24-28; 19:29), participation in the rule of the Son of Man (19:27-28), and the price of release for others who are in captivity. The passion narrative portrays the very repayment Jesus told the disciples that both he and they would receive: Jesus is raised from the dead, given all authority as Son of Man, and earns the ransom-price for the many. The end of the age remains in the future, and so suffering and doubt persist. Nevertheless, God's repayment of Jesus' self-giving is a foretaste of the coming settling of accounts.