The Cross of Christ: A New Perspective

The Cross of Christ: A New Perspective

If the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus  demythologizes traditional sacrificial religion in fulfillment of the law and prophets, then the secularization of western culture is the direct work of the gospel through the power of the Spirit.  The church is faced with a challenge, which has evangelically led to an insistence on the sacrificial nature of religion in which Jesus' death forms the basis of a new religion.  One which is archaic in the dogma that God requires a sacrificial substitute for the sin of humanity in order to avoid the judgment of eternal condemnation.  The structure is completely transparent, which differs from the archaic and there is a moral reason for the dogma.  Others seek to cast it in terms of new relationship based on faith, but the foundation continues to be sacrificial violence required by the divine in order to satisfy God's wrath. The secular person rejects this, if not directly, then by way of rejecting sacrificial religion.  Could we not conclude that the secular person is more influenced by the gospel than the traditional Christian?

This also explains why theologians who attempt to explain the atonement conclude that we don't know how it works, but we experience the power of the cross in our lives.

Michael Horton's review of NT Wright,'s book, The Day the Revolution Began: "Wright repeats his frequent wariness of “imputation,” but it’s difficult to understand how he can affirm an idolater can be freed from the curse by the forgiveness of sins through Christ’s blood and declared righteous without concluding this is something like a crediting or imputation. Somehow Christ’s death is the basis for the ungodly idolaters having their sins forgiven and being declared in the right."

How is the death of Christ the basis for ungodly idolaters having their sins forgiven and being declared in the right?  Well, first of all we should ask: what is forgiveness?  Forgiveness is the release of one's desire or right to bring punishment or vengeance.  It is canceling the debt or releasing the guilty and the offended one from the burden of carrying the debt.  Forgiveness does not put the offender in the right; it focuses on the desire for retribution and wrath.  It is yet another matter to be in the right or to have restored relationship with the offended or one to whom one is indebted.

Jesus forgives sin in his ministry and is accused of assuming God's authority.  Sins are forgiven in the the Old Testament scriptures as well.  "I will confess my transgressions to the Lord and you forgave the guilt of my sin." (Ps. 32)  In the Old Testament, they are forgiven through confession and sacrificial act on the day of Atonement.  Sins are forgiven by covering or atoning for them in the sacrificial act, so let us ask, how are sins covered in the life of humanity outside of religion?

In the OT sacrificial system, the sin is not transferred to the sacrifice, the blood spilled is a violent means of confession, repentance, and forgiveness to cover the sin.  It is only on the day of Atonement when the scapegoat is offered by the high priest, transferring the sins of the people to the beast that the sacrifice becomes sin.  The violence is required by God, not to turn away his wrath, but to turn away our wrath.  In the midst of our conflicts, misdeeds, and wicked thoughts, sacrifice provides a visceral means to cover sin through the violent shedding of blood which is consumed by fire.  

Of course, the community believes the violence is required by God to turn away his wrath and to cover our sin.  This is the way of keeping the violence in the sacred space of the Divine who resides in the temple.

What does the sacrificial system reveal?  It reveals what the very first sacrificial story reveals, the story of Cain and Abel.  Sin begins within the human heart and leads to jealousy, conflict, and murder if we do not find a sacrificial means to expel the violence from within.  Others do not cause us to be violent, rather it resides in us and is provoked by others whom we perceive as obstacles to our life.

How are sins forgiven otherwise?  After all, it wasn’t only the nation of Israel that needed to experience forgiveness and atonement.  It is a universal need of all humanity. How then are they covered?  They are covered by denial, displacement, violence and good deeds.  I can cover my sin through denial and rationalization.  I can cover my sin by blaming others in displacement.  I can cover my sins by transferring them to a designated sacrificial object, an animal or a human.  I can cover my sin by using violence against others to silence the voice of opposition.  I can try to "make up" for my sins by acts of reconciliation or restitution.

  

The prophets accuse the nation of reducing the faith to ritual obedience, while their hearts are far from God as they use and abuse one another.    

Those who clamored for the death of Christ sought to cover their sin by fulfilling God’s condemnation of the guilty victim.  They did not comprehend the sin of rejecting and condemning an innocent man. He is guilty and they are innocent.  Jesus is guilty of breaking the law, claiming the authority to forgive sin, and ultimately by blasphemy - claiming the authority of the divine.  The unanimous cry, “Crucify”, along with the Roman support of violence that establishes peace, would be expected to provide social accord that would re-establish peace and promote the retention of the social order.

It was Caiaphas who declared that one man must die to save the Jews from Roman destruction.  Despite prior discord, Pilate and Herod became friends as emblematic of this social accord.  The crowd even loudly proclaims to Pilate, who wishing to disavow responsibility declares himself innocent, “Let his blood be upon us and our children.”  That is, they take responsibility for the life of Jesus because he is guilty and they are innocent.  Their appeal overcomes Pilate’s misgivings.  Pilate claims innocence, symbolically washing his hands, conceding to the cries of the crowd as the mob proclaims its innocence through the blood shed.

However, the death and resurrection of Christ reveals the innocence of the victim and the guilt of the crowd.  This is demonstrated in the earliest preaching of the disciples in Acts where the charge is made that the leaders and people killed an innocent man.  The followers of Jesus proclaim him as the one whom God sent to perform signs and wonders and to proclaim the kingdom of God.  He was unjustly sentenced to death as an innocent man and proof of this is the resurrection of Christ.  They proclaim that Jesus is Lord and Savior and offer the forgiveness of sins for all who believe in him.  The outward sign of faith is baptism and the inward sign is the gift of the Holy Spirit.

In doing so, the foundation of the violent origins of culture is unveiled by the power of the Holy Spirit.  God reveals the innocence of the victim, the guilt of the crowd, and inspires empathy for the victim.  For those to whom this is revealed, it exposes one’s guilt and shame at taking the life of an innocent man - whether it is Peter in denial of Jesus or the Roman soldier at the cross or Paul on the Damascus road.  Jesus' death exposes and triumphs over the dark powers that enthrall humanity in envy, rivalry, conflict, hatred, violence, scapegoating and murder.

More than that, God reveals his love and forgiveness through the sacrifice of Christ for all who believe.  By his life, death, and resurrection from the dead, God declares us right before him by faith in Jesus and offers a new purpose in re-presenting the good news.  What troubles us is that this seems to come without a requirement for blood sacrifice by God or by any kind of retributive justice upon Jesus as the servant of God.  Because we have been raised in cultures founded on violence, we project this violence upon God.  Therefore, the writers of the New Testament and the history of the church which follows, struggle to explain the death of Christ without resorting to God's requirement for justice and need for blood to atone for sin.

One needs to contrast righteousness through the law and righteousness through faith.  Evangelical teaching is that the former is the requirement of God for perfection in holy obedience to the law.  Jesus achieves this through his life and therefore is able to represent humanity as the lamb without sin who dies for the people.  I would say, rather, that the New Testament, especially Romans, teaches that righteousness has always been by faith, not only by the example of Abraham, but the acknowledgement that righteousness through the law has never been possible for sinful humanity.  The reason is not that we fail in moral perfection, but that the law is used by us to establish our righteousness in comparison to others (for example, Jesus' parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector).

When Jesus critiques the Pharisees and teachers of the law in Matthew 23 and Luke 11, he does not accuse them of a lack of faith or not trusting in God’s grace, rather he accuses them of hypocrisy by which they set themselves apart from others and seek the glory offered by their status, instead of the glory of God. Jesus accuses them of following the murderous ways of their fathers by accusing their fathers of murdering the prophets and then, as children, setting themselves apart by building their tombs.  This perpetuates  violence against the innocent and the culture of death.

Likewise, when Paul confronts those who wish to place the burden of the law upon the Gentiles, he does not accuse them of lacking faith or denying grace, but rather seeking to establish themselves as superior to non-Jews and making their own disciples.  When confronting those who claim privileged experiences or insights regarding Christ, Paul challenges them for seeking to gain a superior position and authority over others in the fellowship.