Edgework

When building a house, in the end the structure will reflect the kind and quality of the building material used in the process of construction. Throughout Christian history Christians have used a widely differing array of construction materials to formulate their various doctrines of atonement, some of better quality and usefulness than others. All agree that Jesus Christ was somehow involved in the process of reconciling the world to God but their understandings of how that was accomplished varies considerably, largely because of the use of differing building material.

After wrestling intensely with the topic of atonement for a number of years, I came to the conclusion that I needed to articulate openly the position I am finding myself being drawn to. At the same time, it dawned on me that in order to be credible such a formulation would need to clearly identify the assumptions, or the building material, I would be using. This is especially true with reference to how I read the Bible and what images I have developed of the God it points to.

Much of my writing over the past years has in fact focused on these foundational questions. So I think it appropriate to recap my understandings along these lines, especially in the way they will impact our deliberations about the topic of atonement. This constellation of concepts will then form the grid through which I will look at the doctrine of atonement. I am aware that not all of my readers will agree with every point presented, but this summary will at least help them understand how I come to the conclusions I do.

I want to remind my readers that I consider this series of essays an “interim report” of my findings. As I venture forth on this project I am overwhelmed with the magnitude of the task before me. Many books have been written on this subject by persons much more qualified than me. Yet I feel compelled to verbalize for myself, and for the many persons who do not normally read contemporary writers, where the current conversation around atonement is taking us. I am aware that some of my readers feel threatened by the present dialogue that is taking place on this topic. For myself, I have been animated by this discussion and it has deepened my appreciation for the work of Christ on our behalf and given me a renewed vision for what it means to be a modern-day disciple of Christ.

So let’s begin identifying some of the building material we will use to think about the atonement. For fuller treatment of these points refer to my earlier writings and the books I reference in them related to the points made.

1. The Bible is a Library, not a Constitution: That is to say the Bible was written over a long period of time by various writers with varying opinions. While we accept that the Holy Spirit was involved in the formation of these 66 separate documents, we also can see evidence of human agency in their writing. Reading the Bible as “constitution” means that we expect total consistency in the text, sometimes based on the notion that the Bible is infallible and inerrant in every respect. Careful Bible readers know this is simply not the case. Different writers, writing in different centuries to different audiences present varying perspectives on any given topic.

In some cases we can detect movement of ideas over time, with later writers building on the ideas presented by earlier writers. At others times it seems various viewpoints are presented side-by-side, forming a kind of dialogue: two valid perspectives but not in full agreement with each other. That is to say that the Bible does not always speak with one voice; it is in fact multi-vocal. This is evidenced by the fact that well-intentioned and intelligent Bible readers come to different conclusion on a wide array of theological issues presented in the Bible. Always there is an invitation for us to enter into that dialogue in order for us to understand who God is and what God requires of us.

With respect to our reflections on the atonement, we will do well to listen carefully to all these voices, determine how varying historical contexts have influenced each perspective and participate in the dialogue in a spirit of gentleness and sincerity. To take one set of biblical texts, especially out of context, might undoubtedly lead to wrong conclusions.

2. Metaphors Help Us Understand Truth: Much has often been made of the need to read the Bible as literally as possible, as if to say that once we get the facts of history right we will understand the message of the Bible. But this is a fallacy. When the Psalmist refers to God as a Rock or a Fortress or having a mighty arm, he is not asking us to think of these descriptions in a literal way; they are metaphors that point us to a much deeper meaning than a literal description is capable of delivering. In fact to read the statement that God is a Rock literally does not make any sense at all. But when read metaphorically it points to something important about God. Metaphorical meaning in language points to the more-than-literal, more than factual meaning toward a surplus of meaning that language can carry.

When it comes to discussing the atonement, the New Testament uses at least five constellations of images or metaphors borrowed from the realm of public life in the Mediterranean world: the court of law, the world of commerce, personal relationships, worship and the battleground. To take any one of these metaphors as representing the singular, literal truth about atonement would short-change our efforts at understanding the meaning of atonement. Beyond expounding on biblical metaphors, the modern Christian community will do well to continue searching for contemporary metaphors that connect with our experience in order to make the atonement understandable and relevant for our day.