Scott Freeman

On Atonement: A Quote

I wanted to delve into the biblical passages regarding the death of Christ today but I am home sick along with an ailing wife and child. It hasn’t been pretty.

In the meantime here is a quote that provides much food for thought:

Many contemporary biblical scholars and theologians argue that doctrines of atonement endorsing penal substitution or satisfaction theories are not true to the biblical text. the heart of the New Testament witness seems to indicate reconciliation rather than retribution. In other words, they see reconciliation as justice and mercy, rather than as punishment or as satisfying an offended deity. Instead, we should interpret the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus as a revelatory event, expressing a theology of divine protest against violence and a divine movement toward restoration and reconciliation. Because ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself,’ would not an atonement metaphor that focuses on reconciliation and the restoration of a broken relationship, rather than on forms of retribution, harmonize more effectively with divine love?
In an analogous way, God in Christ interrupted the cycle of violence with divine love. God in Christ worked to tear down structures of violence and to redeem the world with love and forgiveness. The life, death and resurrection of Jesus reveal to us that God does not prefer violence. Christ reveals to us that God’s justice is mercy in the form of restoration, reconciliation, and redemption, from the strong powers of the world. Where reconciliation is the focus, violence is cut short. Where restoration of fellowship is foremost in theories of atonement, violence is precluded from the divine character. Where violence is seen as a human act free from any connection with God’s way of acting or redeeming humanity, ‘legitimate’ use of coercive power no longer holds sway over society or state.
Sharon Baker