| |
 |
| The atonement in scripture |
|
Rev'd Dr David Peterson
This paper was delivered at the Fourth Annual Oak Hill College School of Theology in May 2000. An expanded version of this paper appears as the first two chapters of 'Where Wrath and Mercy Meet: Proclaiming the Atonement Today' (Carlisle: Paternoster, 2001).
Please click the links below to read the different sections of the paper.
> Introduction
> Sacrifice and Atonement in the Pentateuch
> Sacrifice and Forgiveness in the Prophets and the Psalms
> Jesus and his Sacrifice
> Pauline perspectives on the atoning work of Christ
> Conclusions
> Notes
Sacrifice and Forgiveness in the Prophets and the Psalms
Sacrifice in the Psalms
Although the theme of sacrifice emerges at a number of points in the Psalms, there is very little reference to atonement. Nigel Courtman identifies three distinct motives that are commonly associated with the offering of sacrifice by the psalmists. Thanksgiving and petition are the first two, 'corresponding to the situations of distress and deliverance regularly depicted in the psalms of thanksgiving and lament'.(39) Worship in the sense of homage, praise and devotion is the third motive, corresponding loosely to 'the purpose of the hymnic psalms, that is, to offer praise to God'. A positive view of sacrifice is thus presented in many contexts.
This positive perspective is particularly reflected in Psalm 50:14-15, 23, where it is indicated that God is honoured when people express their dependence on him through sacrifice. However, the same psalm warns about the danger of offering anything to put God in one's debt (Ps. 50:9-13) or to cover up one's disobedience (vv. 16-22). This psalm is one of a number that critique the abuse, rather than the institution of sacrifice (e.g. Pss. 40:6-8; 51:16-17). Here we find no 'axiomatic repudiation of the whole sacrificial cult',(40) but an expression of the true meaning implicit in this whole way of approaching God. In due course we shall note how Hebrews 10:5-10 uses Psalm 40:6-8 to proclaim the fulfilment and replacement of the sacrificial system in the obedience of Jesus Christ. When the ideal of submission to the will of God is perfectly fulfilled in Jesus' death, a definitive cleansing and sanctification is made possible. This inaugurates the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-4, with its promise of a once-for-all forgiveness of sins (Heb. 10:11-18).
Psalm 65: 3 acknowledges God as the one who answers prayer and atones for sin: 'when deeds of iniquity overwhelm us, you forgive our transgressions' (lit. 'it is you who atone for our transgressions'). But the text does not explicitly mention the need for rituals of atonement. Elsewhere, even where sin is acknowledged as the cause of Israel's difficulties (e.g. Ps. 107:10- 20), sacrifice is not identified as a means of securing God's forgiveness. In Psalm 51, which is clearly penitential, sacrifice is only mentioned in a positive light at the end, as an expression of thanksgiving and homage (v. 19). Atonement in the Psalms is fundamentally achieved through prayer, confession, and contrition (e.g. Pss. 25:7, 11; 32:5; 51:1-18; 130).(41)
It would be wrong to conclude, however, that the psalmists recognized no atoning role for sacrifice. Psalm 76:10-12 speaks of votive offerings in a context where God is wrathful and needs to be appeased. Psalm 40:6, with its apparently negative view of sacrifice, nevertheless lists 'burnt offering and sin offering' with the other rituals provided by God to facilitate the true dedication of his servants to his will. Given the sequence of atonement, consecration, and fellowship, that was noted in connection with the pattern of sacrifice in Leviticus, perhaps it was assumed by the psalmists that atonement rituals would have preceded offerings to express praise and dedication to God. Generally, however, the hope of forgiveness in the Psalms is centred on 'the nature and action of God, rather than on what might appear to be the human aspect of sacrifice'.(42)
Redemption and forgiveness in the Prophets
As in the Psalms, so in the writings of the prophets, there are passages that condemn God's people for their corruption of the sacrificial system (e.g. Amos 4:4-13; Hos. 8:11-13; Jer. 7:21-6; Ezek. 16:15-21; 20:25-31). These deal with the introduction of pagan ideas and practices into Israelite worship, or the attempt to worship other gods while still claiming to serve to Lord, or the hypocrisy of engaging in sacrificial ritual without genuine repentance and a desire to live in obedience to God's moral law. Sometimes, in order to clarify the sort of response the cult was meant to inculcate, prophecies are worded in a way that appears to be a categorical rejection of the cult (e.g. Amos 5:21-7; Hos. 6:6; Isa. 1:10-17; 66:1-4; Micah 6:6-8). However, such passages are condemnations of Israel's abuse of the cult rather than of the cult itself.(43)
The prophets also speak with approval of future sacrificial activity, portraying a time when God would renew his people and their worship (e.g. Isa. 19:19-21; 56:6-7; 60:7 Jer. 17:24-7; 33:10-11, 17-18; Ezek. 20:40-1). Some speak of the restoration of the temple after the judgement of the exile, envisaging it as the spiritual centre for Israel and the nations (e.g. Isa. 2:2-3; Micah 4:1-3; Ezekiel 40-8). In this connection, the closing chapters of Ezekiel reflect something of the original exodus structure and its theology: 'just as the meaning of the exodus was proclaimed in the "cultic" response of Israel to divine kingship, so here the new temple will function as Yahweh's kingly setting in the new holy city'.(44) But Ezekiel also indicates that God is going to do something quite new in the outworking of his purposes. His temple-plan, with all its marvellous symbolism, combines a number of biblical ideals and points to their ultimate fulfilment, not by some human building programme, but by the sovereign and gracious act of God (cf. 20:40-4).
The Babylonian exile is regarded by many of the prophets as such a devastating judgement of God that it calls into question Israel's covenant status and future as God's people. It is the final curse that the Law prescribes for a covenant-breaking nation (Deut. 29:19-28; Lev. 26:21-39). For this reason, we read of the need for a new act of divine redemption, paralleling the exodus from Egypt (e.g. Isa. 40:1-11; 42:14-17; 43:1-21). Associated with this are promises that the Lord himself will blot out Israel's transgressions (e.g. Isa. 43:25), 'forgive their iniquity and remember their sin no more' (Jer. 31:34), and cleanse them from all their idols and from all their uncleannesses (Ezek. 36:25; 37:23). Transformed cultic imagery is used to underline the fact that God himself must provide the way of atonement and reconciliation that is needed to renew the covenant and save his people (cf. Jer. 31:31-4; Ezek. 36:24-31). Only in this way can he dwell in their midst again, to bless them and enable them to function as his holy people amongst the nations.
These prophets teach that the removal of God's wrath against sin and the restoration of his relationship with Israel comes from the Lord himself. Although the terminology of atonement is not much used outside of the Pentateuch, some of the same categories of thought are found in prophetic proclamations of salvation. Where the Hebrew verb kipper is used, God is normally the subject, rather than a priest, and sin is the direct object, rather than contaminated objects (e.g. Jer. 18:23; Ezek. 16:63; Ps. 78:38). Other terminology is also employed to convey the need for divine forgiveness and the removal of sin (e.g. Hos. 14:2; Micah 7:18-19). Ezekiel in particular stretches cultic language creatively to speak of 'a forgiveness that knows the depths of sin, that wants to separate God's people from the habit of defection. It knows that sin stains, and that sin estranges people from God.'(45)
But how is God's wrath to be satisfied and how will his just condemnation of human sin be maintained through gracious acts of forgiveness and renewal? What ransom or substitute will God provide if animal sacrifice cannot fulfil his purpose?
The Suffering Servant
From a New Testament point of view, Isaiah 53 is the most important passage in the prophetic literature for illuminating and explaining the death of Jesus. Scholars continue to debate whether Jesus was the first to interpret his own ministry as a fulfilment of this passage, even though there appears to be sufficient evidence in the Gospels that he was.(46) More fundamentally, there are those who question the legitimacy of any reading of the text, which sees in Isaiah 53 a pattern of penal substitution.(47)
Some argue that the so-called Servant Songs had a separate existence and meaning before being incorporated into the canonical form of Isaiah, but we are surely bound to explain their significance in the context in which we now find them. The wider setting indicates that God will deliver his people in exile from the punishment due to their sin, restoring them to himself by his own 'hand' or 'arm' (40:10; 48:14; 50:2; 51:5, 9; 52:10). The Servant of the Lord, who is first mentioned in 42:1-4, is mysteriously identified with Israel in 49:1-6, but is paradoxically also the means by which Israel is restored to God and God's salvation is brought to the nations. Suffering first appears to be the Servant's lot in 50:4-9, resulting from his prophetic activity. However, the Servant's sufferings appear to be redemptive in Isaiah 53. The chapter begins with the claim that 'the arm of Lord', by which Israel's relationship with God is restored and her destiny is fulfilled, is revealed in what happens to the Lord's Servant.
The language of the fourth song (52:13 – 53:12) portrays an individual who not only acts for 'the many' in a representative way but also as their substitute. In him, the true Israel has been reduced to one.(48) The framework of the song (52:13-15; 53:10-12) proclaims that the Servant will ultimately be exalted and prosper, but the intervening verses speak of rejection, terrible anguish and an unjust death (53:1-9). All forms of suffering – physical, mental and spiritual – are encompassed by the language of verses 1-3. It is because the Servant suffers so comprehensively that he first appears to be of no significance to the onlookers. Such a person could hardly be the one through whom the Lord's saving arm is revealed! However, verses 4-6 report how the onlookers came to perceive that the Servant was actually 'wounded for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities'. With this confession, the prophet offers a profound solution to the problem of Israel's unfaithfulness and rebellion. P.D. Hanson puts it like this:(49)
What happens when a people is stumbling toward extinction under the burden of its sin-induced infirmities and diseases, and the traditional institutions of sacrifice and atonement have proven ineffectual to relieve them of their sin and guilt? What can be done about these infirmities and diseases? The surprising answer given in 53:4 is that they have already been lifted from the afflicted community by the Servant.
Even those who deny any substitutionary element in Isaiah 53 admit that the Servant suffers undeservedly because of human sin. However, writers such as Orlinsky and Whybray argue that the people of Israel had already suffered the full measure for their sins in the destruction of their land and their captivity (cf. 40:2).(50) The Servant only suffers because they do – as a result of their sin – but not in their place, as a substitute. Oswalt offers two significant responses to this approach. He first observes how the passage in its context points to the Servant as the means of salvation anticipated in chapters 49-52. The people are then invited to participate in the salvation that the Servant achieves in chapters 54-5.(51) Oswalt further points out that the exile was a temporal punishment for sin but that this did not automatically restore the people to fellowship with God. Something more was needed because of the seriousness of their situation under the curse of God. Only the affliction of the Servant could make them 'whole' and only 'by his bruises' could they be healed (53:5).
We should also note that the Servant's treatment is portrayed as unjust from start to finish (53:7-9), whereas the prophets insist that Israel's punishment in the exile was completely just. The Servant cannot simply be identified with Israel or with one of the prophets who were caught up in the consequences of Israel's rebellion against God. Moreover, the injustice that the Servant suffers is not simply the result of a corrupt legal system, since 'he is stricken for the transgression of my people' (53:8). He suffers in the place of those who ought to have suffered, 'although he had done no violence and there was no deceit in his mouth' (53:9).(52) Those who deny the theme of penal substitution in this chapter appear to be guilty of special pleading.
Isaiah 53 speaks about the need for an entirely novel means of atonement, which is nevertheless explained in terms that would have been familiar to the Jews from the sacrificial system. The metaphor of the lamb being led to the slaughter is certainly reminiscent of the sacrificial system. Jeremiah uses the same image to stress his trusting na•vetZ· (Jer. 11:19), but the emphasis in Isaiah 53:7 is much more on willing submission without protest (cf. 42:2-4; 50:5-7). Further sacrificial language is found in the promise that God will heal and restore his people by making his servant 'an offering for sin' (53:10, Heb. asam, Gk. peri hamartias). Whybray thinks it is unwise to press the significance of this statement because nowhere else in the Old Testament is it stated that a person's life can be a guilt offering, 'whether in a literal or metaphorical sense'.(53) However, this is a natural development of the view expressed in the Psalms and the prophets that the sacrifice which really pleases God is the life of the offerer. The novelty of Isaiah 53 is the claim that one person's obedient service may be accepted by God as an atoning sacrifice for others.
Again, it should be noted that the language of 'carrying' and 'bearing' in verses 4, 11, 12, points to the Servant's death as substitutionary, just as the death of animals in the sacrificial system appears to have been substitutionary. This terminology in the context suggests that the Servant bears the sin of others by enduring its consequences for them. He is 'stricken, struck down by God, and afflicted' (53:4), because 'the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all' (53:6). 'The effect in the Servant is the measure of how seriously God takes our rebellion and crookedness.'(54)
The final stanza of the poem in Isaiah 53:10-12 makes it clear why 'it was the will of the Lord to crush him with pain'. Since the Lord was prepared to regard him as 'an offering for sin', extraordinary benefits flow for his 'offspring' and for the Servant himself. His 'offspring' shall be 'made righteous', because the Righteous One, God's Servant, 'shall bear their iniquities'. The benefit for the Servant is that 'he shall see his offspring and shall prolong his days'. He will also be allotted 'a portion with the great' and shall 'divide the spoil with the strong' (53:12; cf. 52:13). Although it is disputed, the most obvious reading of this section is that the Servant will be resurrected from death to see the fruit of his suffering.
In conclusion, although he was 'numbered with the transgressors', it was not because he was a rebel himself. Indeed, by 'bearing the sin of many' he was actually 'interceding' for them, that is, intervening on their behalf to rescue and redeem them (cf. 59:16). Many questions remain about the detail of the passage and scholars will continue to debate how the prophet expected this chapter to be understood by his contemporaries. But Christians recognise the person and work of Christ in every verse, so that 'what had formerly been opaque becomes patently clear',(55) in the light of its fulfilment.
> Click here for next page
© David Peterson 2000. This material is copyright and may not be reproduced or copied without due acknowledgement of its authorship and source. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
