Last night, I had the pleasure of going to hear Scot McKnight speak at the Irish Bible Institute (http://www.irishbibleinstitute.org/index.php). Scot is the Karl A. Olsson Professor in Religious Studies at North Park University (Chicago, Illinois) and is the author of more than thirty books, include Embracing Grace: A Gospel for All of Us, The Story of the Christ, Praying with the Church, The Real Mary: Why Evangelical Christians Can Embrace the Mother of Jesus and perhaps most famously, The Jesus Creed: Loving God & Loving Others.
You can view his blog here: http://blog.beliefnet.com/jesuscreed/bio-scot-mcknight.html
Scot's lecture was a spin-off from his most recent book entitled A Community Called Atonement. The main gist of his talk involved an exploration of atonement theory and the predominant interpretation of the atonement event that has shaped Western Evangelicalism; Penal Substitution. Simply stated, this atonement theory argues that Christ, by his own sacrificial choice, was punished (penalised) in the place of sinners (substitution), thus satisfying the demands of justice so God can justly forgive the sins. It is, in a sense, the default theory underlining most gospel presentations evangelical Christians put forth. Certainly, it is the one we know best. It is the interpretation of the atonement which undergirds so much of our evangelistic material and personally, it is the interpretation of the atonement event which springs most rapidly to my mind whenever anyone asks me why Jesus died.
Scot argued that although Penal Substitution is a central image of atonement as it is presented in the New Testament, it is not the only image. Rather, it is one amongst a rich variety of others. Ultimately, we do the gospel a disservice if we major solely on penal substitution at the expense of drawing on the wealth of alternative images presented in Scripture and elucidated over the course of church history. As Scot observed, the event of the atonement is grounded in a mystery the human intellect cannot control. We do well to remember that each theory (or image) of the atonement touches on the glory of what God has done in Christ but no image can offer us an exhaustive understanding of what the death (and indeed, resurrection) of Christ has achieved for us.
Taking us into the recent history of atonement theory, Scot set the scene for the contemporary debate that has reemerged within evangelicalism over the recent decades. Leon Morris' Apostolic Preaching of the Cross (in response to Dodd), Packer's The Logic of Penal Substitution and Stott's The Cross of Christ have all proved massively influential in solidifying the evangelical emphasis on penal substitution. Taking us further into church history and the thinking of theologians east and west, Scot mapped out three of the major forms of atonement theory through the ages: 1. The Ransom Theory or Recapitulation Theory set forth by major Patristic theologians; 2. The Satisfaction Theory set forth by Anselm (which emphasised the need for a mediator who would be both God and human, thus being able to redeem humanity and satisfy God's nature and glory) and finally; 3. Penal Substitution Theory (propounded by Luther and Calvin). All three (and they are but three of of many) are encountered in the New Testament, but arguably the theories propounded by Calvin and Luther, and before them, Anselm, have become normative for evangelicalism's understanding of the atonement event.
Because Penal Substitution is the thorough-going interpretation of the atonement current in contemporary evangelicalism, it is rare to hear it preached any other way. For example, rarely do we hear the atonement preached as liberation. Option 3 (Penal Substitution as understood by Luther/Calvin) is not the only option. Granted it is one image of the atonement - and perhaps the singularly major one at that. However, it is not the only one. A game of golf is played best with a sack-full of clubs, rather than just the one. Varied kinds of clubs are needed to pitch the ball from all kinds of locations on the green. The same applies to atonement theory: when we rely on only one, we are at an immediate disadvantage - we lose out on the variety and richness of alternative theories that may apply in contexts ill-fitted to the proclaimation of Penal Substitution (for example, as we seek to minister to someone recovering from abuse or someone who is despairing of their personal drug addiction). Because the New Testament doesn't force the atonement through the lens of one theory, we shouldn't do it either.
This, in short compass, was what Scot argued for last night. His lecture was punctuated with conversational chat, wit and some arresting illustrations (like the golf one above). All in all, it was a cracking evening of illuminating discussion. I'll write up another brief post later covering some other interesting things he said.
Yours,
The Scribbling Apprentice.
No comments:
Post a Comment