On Atonement: God’s Wrath
February 14th, 2008 | by Scott |Previous entries can be found under the “Atonement” category.
Simply put, the early Christians did not equate the crucifixion with the wrath of God. The blame was not put upon God but upon those who were complicit in the act.
God’s purposes were achieved, yes, but not in order to satisfy His need for retribution or revenge. To Jesus, it was not God that was crucifying Him, it was man.
That does not mean that God did not give Him up for the purpose of exposing the fraud of redemptive and retributive violence.
Jesus endures our cross and our shame in order to exhibit God’s Divine Love, despite our willingness to perpetuate violence. Even to the point of murdering His Own.
Jesus’ mission was on of reconciliation, of announcing the Kingdom Come. He profoundly illustrated the overwhelming capacity of God to heal, forgive and restore.
What He received in return was the hatred, scorn and rejection of man. The cross was wholly ours, not God’s. Andre Harden writes “I don’t sense any affinity with the Father when I look at Good Friday. I see myself holding a smoking gun. I see the Father holding a weeping virgin.”
In the cross, Christ defeats the powers of this world, overcoming the idea that violence is the preferred method.
—————-
Now playing: Survivor - Poor Man’s Son
via FoxyTunes
2 Responses to “On Atonement: God’s Wrath”
By len on Feb 14, 2008 | Reply
In Acts 8, Philip, a fairly well-known person of the early church explains the story of Jesus beginning in Isaiah 53.
“And Yahweh has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” 53:6
“Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief.” 53:10
“He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied. By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, for He shall bear their iniquities.” 53:11
I assume you have an answer to Isaiah 53 so I will patiently wait to hear it.
Scott wrote: “the purpose of exposing the fraud of redemptive and retributive violence.” Are you saying that those of us who accept and embrace the substitutionary death of Jesus are believing in a fraud?
By Scott on Feb 14, 2008 | Reply
Yeah, I have a lot to say about Isaiah 53 and much of it has to do with the greater context of what is being said.
Ultimately the passage says that WE rejected Him, We despised Him, WE failed to esteem Him.
It is OUR griefs and OUR sorrows that he bore.
WE considered Him stricken by God.
The perpetrator of this atrocity is us not God.
Verse 10 must be read with verses 11 and 12. I’ll quote Jersak here:
“We know that God finds no pleasure in the punishment of the wicked (Ez. 33:11), much less his suffering servant. What is going on here? The answer is that there is a bigger picture. Penal substitution is one attempt to paint it. But it overstates things when it makes God the wrathful punisher and his appeasement the purpose. We need to flip perspectives. God’s pleasure is found in the suffering servant’s heart of humility, his willingness to identify with the exiles, the joy of the foreknown outcome and good fruit of Christ’s suffering.”