Atonement vicarious humanity

THE DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENTLECTURE FIVE:

VICARIOUS (REPRESENTATIVE) HUMANITY +

GIRARDIAN SCAPEGOAT THEORY.

Discussion:

Green, Kaleidoscopic View

Boersma, Chapters 1-3

From Substitution to Representation

Kevin Vanhoozer describing this transition:

- “A [modern] development in atonement theology

objects to the idea of substitution, and its

concomitant focus exclusively on Jesus’ death,

preferring instead the more inclusive concept of

representation and a focus on Jesus’ life…it is not

that Jesus suffers so much as acts in our place: he

is our representative, not our substitute” (in

Mapping Modern Theology).

- Key Text: Hebrews 2.14-18

Hebrews 2

14 Since the children have flesh and blood, he too

shared in their humanity so that by his death he might

break the power of him who holds the power of death—

that is, the devil— 15 and free those who all their lives

were held in slavery by their fear of death.

16 For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s

descendants. 17 For this reason he had to be made

like them, fully human in every way…

From Substitution to Representation

Kevin Vanhoozer describing this transition:

- “A [modern] development in atonement theology

objects to the idea of substitution, and its

concomitant focus exclusively on Jesus’ death,

preferring instead the more inclusive concept of

representation and a focus on Jesus’ life…it is not

that Jesus suffers so much as acts in our place: he

is our representative, not our substitute” (in

Mapping Modern Theology).

- Key Text: Hebrews 2.14-18

Representation | Incarnation as Atonement

A Combination / Reconfiguration of…

- Recapitulation (Irenaeus):

‣As the True Adam (Man), Christ relives the

human story on our behalf.

- Substitution (Less emphasis on wrath / penalty):

‣Christ acts on our behalf, but the emphasis is on

his whole life and not merely his death.

The result is a kind of ontic-healing as we participate “in Christ”


Examples:

- Edward Irving (Representative Flesh):

EDWARD IRVING(1792-1834)

SCOTTISH CLERGYMAN

::

FORERUNNER TO

CHARISMATIC

MOVEMENT.


Examples:

- Edward Irving (Representative Flesh):

‣Christ’s atoning work began with conception,

because he assumed our “fallen flesh.”

๏Nazianzus: "The Unassumed is the unhealed”

‣Christ’s obedience to Spirit transformed fallen

human flesh, and he gave that same Spirit to us.

‣Convicted of heresy for speaking even of Christ’s

“sinful” flesh.

Representation | Christ’s Vicarious Humanity

Examples:

- J. McLeod Campbell (Representative Repentance):

J. MCLEOD CAMPBELL(1800-1872)

SCOTTISH

THEOLOGIAN


Examples:

- J. McLeod Campbell (Representative Repentance):

‣Christ overs perfect repentance (penitence) on

behalf of humanity (non-Penal Substitution).

‣Baptism an example of this…

‣Stems from notion appropriate penitence can bring

forgiveness apart from penalty (examples).

‣Problem: Not clear why Christ must die (Is the

cross unnecessary?).


Examples:

- T.F. Torrance (Representative Mediation):

THOMAS F. TORRANCE(1913-2007)

SCOTTISH

THEOLOGIAN ::

STUDIED UNDER

BARTH


Examples:


‣Combats what he calls the “Latin Heresy”—the

notion that Christ’s work is separate from his

person.

‣The Son really does assume human nature.

‣Thus the hypostatic union really is a reconciling

union (because of Christ is homoousios with the

Father).

T.F. Torrance (Atonement, 127.)

In the incarnation of the Word, Christ became the

‘proper man’ as Luther called him, the true man…[and]

because all mankind consist in him, he is the only one

who can really represent all men and women from the

innermost centre and depth of human being. He came

then, not only as the creator of our race, but as the

head of our race, for in him the whole race consists

(Col. 1.15-20).

It was thus that Christ, true God took upon himself our

flesh and became true man, and as such made

atonement.


Examples:


‣Combats what he calls the “Latin Heresy”—the

notion that Christ’s work is separate from his

person.

‣The Son really does assume fallen human

nature, in order to heal / redeem it.

‣The hypostatic union really is a reconciling union

(because Christ is homoousios with the Father).


Examples:


‣Torrance maintains a form of penal substitution,

but his emphasis is much broader than Christ’s

death absorbing wrath - the incarnation in toto is

an act of Atonement.


Had Christ succumbed to the death of the cross, its

substitutionary sacrifice would have been the most

immoral deed in all the universe, and the only doctrine

that could be got out of it would be the pagan idea of

humanity placating an angry god by human sacrifice.

That is partly why Paul lays such stress upon the

resurrection as the ground of justification. He speaks of

Jesus being ‘put to death for our trespasses and raised

for our justification’ (Rom. 4.25).


Examples:






‣Torrance also emphasizes that—as the Second

Adam—Christ’s atoning work is universal in

scope and corporate in character.


It must be point out that…justification is essentially a

corporate act. ‘In that Christ died, all died’ (2 Cor.

5.14). ‘He is the propitiation not for our sins only, but

for the sins of the whole world’ (1 Jn. 2.2). As the

creator and head of the reach in whom all mankind

consist, Christ died for all men and women, and the

justification involved is total, for all. […]

The modern world with its renaissance [individualistic]

view of man completely misunderstands the biblical

teaching…when it shuts its eyes to the essentially

corporate nature of the deed of atonement.


It must be point out that…justification is essentially a

corporate act. ‘In that Christ died, all died’ (2 Cor.

5.14). ‘He is the propitiation not for our sins only, but

for the sins of the whole world’ (1 Jn. 2.2). As the

creator and head of the reach in whom all mankind

consist, Christ died for all men and women, and the

justification involved is total, for all. […]

Despite appearances, Torrance is not a universalist;

Yet he fervently rejects the

Calvinist doctrine of ‘Limited Atonement’

(We’ll return to this discussion later).


This . . . reconciliation encounters me telling me that I am already reconciled to God in Christ, already died for, redeemed and forgiven. It tells me that already the great positive decision of God’s reconciling love in my favourhas been taken, and it can no more be undone than Jesus Christ can be undone, than the incarnation can be reversed or obliterated, or the cross made as if it had never taken place. . . . I am already included in the finished work and already part of Christ, for it was my nature, my humanity, my flesh of sin, that he assumed and made one with himself in his one person.


Examples:






‣Torrance also emphasizes that—as the Second

Adam—Christ’s atoning work is universal in

scope and corporate in character.


Examples:


‣The Virtues of Torrance’s Approach:

๏ Atonement is not limited to Christ’s death.

๏ Returns to the Patristics (i.e. Recapitulation).

๏ Embraces the “for all” of Biblical atonement.

๏ The insights of Barth without the universalism.

T.F. Torrance (Atonement, 156 [on Hell])

If a sinner goes to hell, it is not because God rejected

them, for God has only chosen to love them, and has

only accepted them in Christ…If anyone goes to hell, [it

is] only because, inconceivably, they refuse the

positive act of the divine acceptance of them, and

refuse to acknowledge that god has taken their

rejection of him upon himself.


Examples:


‣The Virtues of Torrance’s Approach:

๏ Atonement is not limited to Christ’s death.

๏ Returns to the Patristics (i.e. Recapitulation).

๏ Embraces the “for all” of Biblical atonement.

๏ The insights of Barth without the universalism.


Questions for “Incarnation as Atonement” Models:

1.Is the cross un-necessary?

‣Not for Torrance; the others are less clear.

2.What must I do to ‘participate’ in Christ?

‣ If the Incarnation accomplishes atonement, then

the role of faith seems to be undermined.

3.How does ‘Vicarious humanity’ work? How is

Christ the Second Adam…?

‣ If the Incarnation accomplishes ato


Questions for “Incarnation as Atonement” Models:

3.How does ‘Vicarious humanity’ work? How is

Christ the Second Adam…? (possibilities)

‣From imago Dei to imago Christi.

‣ “Human” as a family tree, not individuals.

‣The Deeper Magic.


Merging models:

- There is great similarity between this approach and

other ways of speaking about Atonement:

‣ “Healing”

‣Deification / Theosis (Eastern Orthodoxy)

Deification | Incarnation as Atonement

What it is / What it’s not:

- Not becoming a God, or being “absorbed” into God

- Participation in the divine nature

‣Texts: 2 Peter 1.4; Jn. 10.34

2 Peter 1.4…He has given us his very great and precious

promises, so that through them you may participate in

the divine nature…

John 10

34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law,

‘I have said you are “gods”’[Ps. 82]?



- Not becoming a God, or being absorbed into God.

- Participation in the divine nature.

‣Key Texts: 2 Peter 1.4; Jn. 10.34

- Proponents:

‣Eastern Orthodoxy (broadly)

‣ Athanasius (4th c.); Irenaeus (2nd c.) specifically.

IRENAEUS(C. 180)

"[T]HE WORD OF

GOD…BECOME WHAT

WE ARE, THAT HE MIGHT

BRING US TO BE EVEN

WHAT HE IS HIMSELF."

ATHANASIUS(296-373 AD)

THE WORD ``WAS

MADE MAN SO THAT

WE MIGHT BE MADE

GOD’' (ON THE

INCARNATION)



- Not becoming a God, or being absorbed into God.

- Participation in the divine nature.

‣Key Texts: 2 Peter 1.4; Jn. 10.34

- Proponents:

‣Eastern Orthodoxy (broadly)

‣ Athanasius (4th c.); Irenaeus (2nd c.) specifically.


Should we use this concept?

- Perhaps incorporation, participation, or even

Christification are better ways of phrasing this.

- The Biblical notion is union with Christ, which is more

particular (and less prone to confusion) than

“deification” or “theosis.”

Questions?

Break

The Last Scapegoat:

A Non-violent Atonement?

- A key concern of late has been to dissociate God

from the notion of redemptive violence.

The notion that violence fixes things (in a final way).

“The myth of redemptive violence”

(Violence breeds more violence).

Often, these models protest Penal Substitution / Satisfaction

The Last Scapegoat:

Rene Girard

RENE GIRARD(B. 1923)

FRENCH HISTORIAN /

LITERARY CRITIC

The Last Scapegoat:

Rene Girard: Jesus as the last “Scapegoat”

- All human interaction involves “mimetic rivalry”

‣ “We want what we see others having.”

‣Violence results (and the feedback loop begins).

Michael Hardin (Describing Mimesis)

Picture two children in a room full of toys. As soon as

one of them reaches out for a toy, and not before that,

that one toy becomes the object of desire. The first

child becomes a model. The second child imitates the

first. As the two children focus their attention on the

toy, a rivalry ensues. […] The rivalry, as most parents

can attest, inevitably turns to violence.

The Last Scapegoat:


- All human interaction involves “mimetic rivalry”

‣ “We want what we see others having.”

‣Violence results (and the feedback loop begins).

- The problem of culture (humans living together) is

how to stop violence from escalating ad infinitum.

‣Answer: The Scapegoat Mechanism

The Last Scapegoat:


- The Scapegoat Mechanism:

‣Hostility is transferred to a third party (on the

margins) - this party is punished as a scapegoat -

restoring peace.

‣Girard: “The purpose of the sacrifice is to restore

harmony to the community, to reinforce the social

fabric.”

‣Examples in human history???

The Last Scapegoat:


- The Scapegoat Mechanism:

‣By transferring their violence to the victim, social

order is maintained (the mechanism works!).

‣A second transference occurs when (in thanks)

the crowd attributes divinity to the victim.

‣ In time, the cycle repeats.

‣The power behind the mechanism is demonic.

The Last Scapegoat:


- Jesus, the last Scapegoat:

‣Christ’s death reveals the scapegoat mechanism

for what it is - senseless.

‣While Girard was an atheist, he has since

embraced a form of Christianity.

‣The theory becomes a form of Moral Influence.

‣We too must reject/unmask the cycle of violence.

The Last Scapegoat:


- Reactions / Critiques:

‣Neo-Marcionism. The OT God is seen as demonic.

‣Neo-Gnosticism. Salvation is knowledge of the

senseless cycle of violence.

‣Not all desire is mimetic. Sometimes we desire

things because they are…desirable.

‣The cross does not objectively accomplish anything.

Atonement vicarious humanity

Education

Transcript of Atonement vicarious humanity