At the core of most Christian theology about the death of Jesus is the concept of the Atonement. The word describes what it means – the death of Jesus was part of a plan to help human beings to be forgiven for Original Sin (Adam and Eve disobeying God when they ate the fruit of the tree of good and evil against God’s explicit order not to). And yes, I have written about Original Sin before, and if you read it, you know that I reject it. The God I love would not do something so extreme in response to disobedience like this. I mean, God forgives Moses for killing someone (yes, he was defending another person, but still) and, as far as we know, keeps King David in good standing in spite of his being a rapist and murderer. Many people add “Substitutionary” to Atonement, pointing to Jesus dying so that all humanity’s sins are forgiven.
I have always felt like Atonement Theology was a lame way to explain why God had to come to earth in the person of Jesus. Never mind that Jesus’ first announcement was “Repent – the Kingdom of God is near” (also John the Baptist’s message). Never mind that Jesus went around forgiving people for what I would consider far worse sins than eating the forbidden fruit (like adultery, for example). The entire drama around the death of Jesus seems false to me; what would God achieve by coming to earth and stirring up all kinds of theological and political dust just so Jesus/God could then be murdered and raised to prove that God loves us and forgives us? Then Jesus promised to return and, at that point, fulfill the promise of bringing the Kingdom of God to fruition? Nope, I’m not buying it. I think what happened was a handful of ignorant, angry religious leaders colluded with Pontius Pilate to murder Jesus the Roman way.
But wait, there’s more: I don’t think Original Sin is real; I think human imperfection leads us to sin. I think, for some reason beyond our comprehension, that Jesus’s plan was to fulfill the Kingdom of God by convincing people to live better and believe in God. That meant that Rome was not in charge – God was. Caesar wasn’t the Son or Incarnation of God, Jesus is. That made Rome – and the protectors of the religious status quo – angry; angry enough to murder Jesus to put an end to all that nonsense. God said, “Nuh uh” and brought Jesus back to life. Jesus’s followers were left to continue the work. Our God is not a bloodthirsty deity who demands a blood atonement for Adam & Eve’s fruit failure. That doesn’t seem at all like the God of love to me.
So, yes – I reject the idea that God’s plan was for Jesus to endure the incredible pain of crucifixion and a horrible death to make up for Adam and Eve’s messing up. I reject the way Jesus is portrayed as a second Adam and a second Isaac. I believe that Substitutionary Atonement is a way to excuse human sin; to proclaim the death of Jesus as part of God’s plan is to let people off the hook for killing God. There is no grace in Atonement, but there is plenty of grace in a God that forgives humanity for butchering Jesus. The resurrection was not part of the plan, but it was the answer to first-degree murder. That makes a whole lot more sense to me because God is not vindictive or cruel or maniacal – God is love. Period.
Prayer – Forgive us, God, for portraying You as a maniac. Show us how much You love all of us and teach us to love one another. Amen.
Today’s art is “The Atonement” by Diane Fairfield.