| |
 |
| 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 – see below
> Pauline perspectives on the atoning work of Christ
> Conclusions
> Notes
Jesus and his Sacrifice
The redemptive significance of Jesus' ministry
Each of the Gospels presents a broad framework of teaching about the saving significance of Jesus life and ministry. Thus, for example, the opening chapter of Matthew interprets Jesus' name to mean that 'he shall save his people from their sins' (Matt. 1:21), Luke soon makes it plain that the promised messianic salvation involves the forgiveness of sins (Luke 1:77), and John identifies Jesus from the beginning as 'the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.' (Jn. 1:29). However, in the Synoptic Gospels it is not until the narrative of the Last Supper that Jesus' death is explicitly identified as the means of effecting that salvation from sins. Matthew alone includes the words 'for the forgiveness of sins' in Jesus' saying about the cup (Matt. 26:28). But Luke makes it clear that 'the new covenant' is inaugurated by Jesus' death, thereby implying the definitive forgiveness of sins predicted by the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. 31:34; cf. Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25).(56)
Prior to Jesus' teaching at the Last Supper, his most pointed saying in the Synoptic Gospels about the redemptive significance of his death occurs in Matthew 20:28 (=Mark 10:45). There he claims that the Son of Man 'came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.' James and John had sought precedence and rank in the kingdom which they believed Jesus would soon establish. Jesus responded by telling them that they did not know what they were asking. There was a cup which he must drink and a baptism with which he must be baptised before he could enter into his glorious reign as the Christ (Matt. 20:22-3; Mark 10:38-40). The implication of this challenge was that they could not share in the suffering which he alone must endure.
In the Old Testament, the cup of wine is a common metaphor for suffering experienced as a divine judgment for sin (e.g., Ps. 75:8; Isa. 51:17-23; Jer. 25:15-28). Jesus' application of that image to himself here and in his prayer to the Father in Gethsemane (Matt. 26:39,42; Mark 10:35) suggests that he viewed his death in such a way. This is indeed a paradox, since the Gospels present him as one who was consistently faithful and obedient to the Father, not as one deserving his wrath. The image of Jesus' death as a baptism (cf. Luke 12:50) indicates that it was to be an overwhelming disaster for him and should be taken as a parallel to the image of the cup.(57) When he applies the same imagery to James and John, he is prophesying that they too will endure great tribulation and suffering for the sake of the kingdom. However, the idea that there is something unique and unrepeatable about his suffering becomes clear as the narrative draws to a close.
Jesus contrasts the conduct of pagan rulers with the submission to service and sacrifice which is appropriate to his disciples, presenting himself as a model to be followed. He concludes, 'whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave – just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.' The reference to his life being given 'as a ransom for many' (Gk. lytron anti pollon) suggests that he viewed his death as a substitutionary payment for the benefit of others.
Such terminology implies that the 'many' are held in a captivity from which only the death of Christ can release them. The wider context of Jesus' teaching indicates that this captivity is caused by sin. The expression 'to give his life' signifies the voluntary nature of his death and recalls Isaiah 53:10-12, which speaks of the Servant of the Lord offering his life as a compensation or payment for the sins of his people. Another link with that prophecy is provided by the word 'many', a term used to describe the beneficiaries of the Servant's sacrifice (LXX, pollois, pollon).
The word lytron in Matthew 20:28=Mark 10:45, meaning 'payment for loosing' or 'ransom price', does not occur in the Greek translation of Isaiah 53:10, but is a possible rendering of the Hebrew word asam in that text.(58) Jesus could also have had in mind Isaiah 43:3-4, where ransom terminology is used to explain how God will redeem Israel (Heb. kpr, Gk. lytron). God promises to let other nations pay the price, so that Israel may live, rather than die for her sins. If both texts are drawn together by Jesus' saying, we may conclude that he viewed himself as the ultimate 'guilt offering' for the sins of his people and the ransom to redeem Israel and the nations from judgment and death (cf. 1 Tim. 2:6).(59) Jesus' whole life was a ministry to others, designed to serve their needs. But ultimately his service to them meant offering himself in death, in perfect obedience to the will of his Father, as a payment for their sins.
There is no parallel to Matthew 20:28 and Mark 10:45 in the third Gospel. Nevertheless, on the eve of Jesus' death, Luke has him making an explicit identification of himself with the Suffering Servant, providing the only formal quotation from Isaiah 53 by Jesus in any of the Gospels:
I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me, 'And he was counted among the lawless'; and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled. (Luke 22:37; cf. Isa. 53:12)
The wording of this verse makes the strongest possible assertion that the prophecy in question must be fulfilled in him. Indeed, there is no reason to doubt that the whole of Isaiah 53, with its presentation of the redemptive suffering of the Servant is in view, not simply the particular verse quoted. The phrase 'he was counted among the lawless' shows that Jesus was 'preoccupied with the fact that he, who least deserved it, was to be punished as a wrongdoer.'(60)
The Last Supper
The so-called eucharistic words of Jesus occupy 'the central place in Jesus' self-disclosure, and therefore they offer a crucial key to understanding his person and work.'(61) There are differences of emphasis in the various Gospel accounts but each one points to the fact that it was in the context of a traditional Passover meal that Jesus enjoyed his last supper with his disciples.(62) According to Jewish tradition, the blood of the lambs sacrificed at the time of the exodus had redemptive power and made God's covenant with Abraham operative.(63) When families or groups of friends gathered in Jerusalem to eat the Passover meal, they were reminded in a very personal way of the whole basis of their relationship with God and their existence as a people. Additionally, the Passover had become an occasion for Israelites to express their confidence in a future redemption by God, associated with the coming of the Messiah.(64)
Jesus' longing to celebrate this last Passover with his disciples is especially emphasized in Luke's account:
He said to them, 'I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer, for I tell you, I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.' (Luke 22:15-16; cf. 22:18)
Yet his hope of celebrating it anew, when it would be fulfilled 'in the kingdom of God', is expressed in each of the Gospels (cf. Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25). The notion of fulfilment indicates that for Jesus the Passover had a typological significance. In other words, he was endorsing the Jewish tradition that this rite pointed forward to an eschatological deliverance of God's people and the subsequent possibility of enjoying the messianic banquet together in the End time (e.g., Isa. 25:6-7; Luke 14:15; 22:30). The context makes it clear that his approaching death would be the event to accomplish that deliverance.
We do not know whether Jesus identified himself explicitly with the Passover lamb, but that link was soon made by early Christian writers (1 Cor. 5:7-8; cf. 1 Pet. 1:18-19). Jesus himself took the unusual step of accompanying the distribution of the bread and at least one of the Passover cups with his own words of interpretation. In this way, the food was presented to the disciples as a symbol of his approaching death and of the salvation he would accomplish. Their eating and drinking appears to be an anticipation and symbolic reception of the benefits to be obtained by his death: 'Jesus uses the grace before and after eating to give his disciples one after another the additional personal assurance that they share in the kingdom because they belong to the many for whom he is about to die.'(65)
Some commentators interpret the bread-word and the cup-word differently, since they were separated by the main course of the meal and each saying was meant to be complete in itself. Thus, 'this is my body' is taken to refer to Jesus' person – the bread broken and distributed is to be a pledge of his continuing presence with them(66) – and 'this is my blood' is taken to refer to his sacrificial death. However, even though the two sayings were originally separate, 'we must surely grant that Jesus intended the two sayings to be in some way complementary to each other. If, then, the second saying speaks of Jesus' sacrificial death, we should expect something similar to be present in the former saying.'(67) With mention of the fact that his blood is to be 'poured out' as a sacrificial offering 'for many' (Matt. 26:28=Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20 has 'for you'), there are allusions again to the role of the suffering Servant of Isaiah 53, who 'poured out his life unto death and . . . bore the sin of many.' (Isa. 53:12; cf. Matt. 20:28=Mark. 10:45; Luke 22:37).
The cup-word speaks of the inauguration of a new covenant by Jesus' blood. In the version of the saying in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, the strange expression 'my blood of the covenant' occurs. This recalls Exodus 24:8, where the covenant established by God at Mt Sinai is said to have been sealed by means of animal sacrifice. Only the version of the saying in Luke 22:20 and 1 Corinthians 11:25 mentions explicitly that Jesus had in view the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-4. Jeremiah said nothing about sacrifice or blood but pointed to a definitive and permanent solution to the problem of Israel's sin as a basis for the renewal of God's relationship with his people. Yet, it is obvious even from the words 'my blood of the covenant' that Jesus envisaged some renewal of the covenant with Israel, effected by his death. Since Matthew 26:28 indicates that Jesus' death was specifically 'for the forgiveness of sins', the link with Jeremiah 31:34 is clear. Thus, the various forms of the cup-word in each of the Gospel narratives express materially the same meaning.
Jesus implies that his death would re-establish the underlying covenant with Israel on a new basis. A new or renewed covenant was effected by his shed blood, fulfilling the typology of Exodus 24:8 and the prediction of Jeremiah 31:31-4. Jesus' allusion to Isaiah 53:12 implies also that his blood shed as the Servant of the Lord was the means of atonement 'for many'. Indeed, the idea of a covenant established through the death of a human being, rather than through the shedding of animal blood, probably stems from the Servant passages in Isaiah. The Servant is made by God 'a covenant to the people, a light to the nations' (Isa. 42:6; 49:8). These passages indicate that the restoration of a right relationship between Israel and the Lord will also mean the ultimate fulfilment of that ancient promise to Abraham to bring blessing to all peoples on earth (cf. Gen. 12:2-3). Through the death of Jesus, Jews and Gentiles together will experience atonement and consecration to God as his people.
> 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. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
