A Cross Examination Part 1: Appeasement vs. Atonement |
| Posted by Mark (mark) on Jun 16 2008 at 9:08 PM |
No one has done more to complicate and muddle the gospel than religious men; theological men; academic men. Jesus scolds the Pharisees for blocking the entrance to the kingdom (Matt 23) and I have no doubt we faithfully carry on that tradition today. But it shouldn’t be this way. Our skepticism of simplicity doesn’t render simplicity impotent or incomplete. On the contrary, in the case of the cross and the kingdom, it is simple enough for any to grasp—if only we would let ourselves believe that. I suppose on some level we desire the esoteric system. We want to believe that someone (Theologian, Pastor, Pope...it doesn’t matter) has the answers; that someone can fix me; that someone has special knowledge the commoners don’t/can’t fully understand. For those behind the curtain, the ones with the special knowledge and understanding, there can be no doubt how the system strokes their ego.
But I am convinced this system will always, inevitably distort the good news to such an extent that it is not recognizable. After all, for this unspoken order to continue the masses cannot fully possess the special knowledge; they can never reach the finish line. So as they learn, the leaders behind the curtain must complicate things all the more (often as an exercise of rout, more than intent) to keep the system running smoothly. It is unavoidable. And so our gospel grows more and more complicated. This continual religious evolution is an epic tragedy in that it’s really a monument to the bondage in our hearts. It is furthered when we realize the cross is supposed to demolish this monument in our lives, yet somehow we have managed to build new monuments with the cross being the central icon.
The kingdom that Jesus announced was to put an end to these religious systems of toil I’ve just described; these systems where we jump through hoops but never arrive, so new hoops are created to jump through. The need to appease God with performance and sacrifices (though sacrifice is clearly not what God was after all along - I desire obedience not sacrifice; I hate your festivals and new moons etc.) is finished with the cross. Yet many of us can’t seem to leave appeasement behind. We are unable to accept God for who he is, because of who we are, and who we think he is; we struggle to live our lives motivated by love for Him, as opposed to fear of Him. George MacDonald sums it up well:
“Sadly, there are those who would have us love Christ for protecting us from God, instead of leading us to God - the one home of safety. They imagine justice and love dwelling in eternal opposition in the bosom of eternal unity.”
Though many of us say the cross was about forgiveness and atonement, very few of us live that. No, we are far more comfortable with appeasement than forgiveness or atonement. This is partially due to the fact that our religious systems unravel without appeasement; and I must add that appeasement is a rather self-centered belief. That’s not surprising though, selfishness is always our condition when we struggle to receive His love. In either case, it is far easier for us to accept that an angry God who desired to punish us, had to be appeased than it is for us to believe a loving Father desired to heal us. It is easier because it is all about us, and how horrible we are and how we deserve death and punishment. How could He not want to punish us? It is narcissistic and affirms our self-hatred and the experience of our own sinful hearts; therefore it naturally fits very well within our beliefs.
The fact that most of us believe appeasement is evident in our lives, thoughts and words. We continue toiling away to earn God’s forgiveness. Do I attend church enough? Have I loved enough? Am I forgiving enough? Have I volunteered enough of my time? Whatever your measurements are, the fact that you measure (even if subconsciously) is only because of your insecurity—you can’t simply love, you must know if you have loved enough; and your insecurity is because part of you finds it much easier to believe in the concept of appeasement, rather than forgiveness. I say the “concept of appeasement” because if we really believed God was totally appeased at the cross, we wouldn’t be driven so much. But it is natural enough, after all if God was willing to punish an innocent, what makes me so sure I’m out of the woods?
And herein lies our problem. I think the kingdom is all about relationship. I don’t believe it can be understood outside of relationship. Yet how can intimacy sprout under the weight of a spiteful God who was only turned away by Jesus? How can we receive the Father’s healing love that transforms our hearts if we don’t trust Him? And how could you trust a father who punishes the innocent (Jesus)?
I suppose some of us mistake our drivenness to serve God as motivated by love. But toiling as we do, is not the freedom that love begets. No, I think we are motivated very differently. Painting God in the image of appeasement is really just painting Him in the image of man. It is men who struggle to forgive. It is men who desire to punish and hurt each other in their anger. Who wouldn’t fear a God like this? I think we are motivated by fear.
Why do we think of God like this? We look upon the Old Testament through the eyes of shame and see a fearful God. We seem unable to understand how twisted our view of Him is. We have a shallow understanding of love. We blindly gloss over the passages where He pokes through the cloud and gives a clearer picture of Himself. Do we not see the Angel of the Lord with Joshua on the road to Jericho, when He says He is for neither side (Joshua 5)? Do we not read of Jonah and how God loved Nineveh? These instances reveal a God the Hebrews didn’t understand. Jonah was downright annoyed that God didn’t see his enemies as enemies. Even Jesus says the Hebrews never understood the Father, in spite of the scriptures they cherished and studied (Jn 5).
Then we have Jesus and the cross. What do they say about the Father? Jesus said that if you’ve seen Him, you’ve seen the Father (Jn 14). Jesus is perhaps the clearest picture we have of who God is, and what He is like. Jesus, the one who wept over Jerusalem; who washed His disciples feet; who called us friends rather than servants; who served rather than dominate; who willing sacrificed Himself for us; this is the Father we should see. The cross should reveal the breathtaking love, mercy, and generosity of the Father—not an angry God out for retribution. Some of us think that the Father abandoned Jesus on the cross. Perhaps we are waiting for Him to do the same to us. Yet Jesus himself said He was not abandoned, He said the Father was with Him (Jn 16). So why do we live with that angry God? Don’t we know that what we believe about God determines how we’ll live? Do we prefer the religious systems because it puts a buffer between us and an angry God?
Ultimately, there is a vast difference between the deep healing of sin, which Jesus & the Father accomplished on the cross (that we often sum up in the word atonement) and the appeasing of an angry spiteful Father who is only turned back by venting his rage and malice on an innocent. And knowing we are not innocent, makes us feel guilty (and certainly grateful); so shame reigns in us all the more, and we cannot accept the Father’s love, because of shame but also because we’re not really sure He loves. Jesus may be easier to accept, but being grateful (feeling indebted) to Him, and loving Him are two different things. It is rather difficult to love Him, when we feel guilty.
Sadly, I think it is obvious we don’t understand the cross, and what it says about God. Let’s simplify the cross and stop convoluting it by trying to explain away the mystery that always shrouds miracles. It was an act of love exercised by a loving God. It was necessary because forgiveness simply wasn’t enough. God forgave sins again and again, yet the people sinned all the more, ever sinking deeper into the morass of depravity and death. The animal sacrifices could not heal the sin problem. The law could not do it either. A better solution was needed. So the cross was not only the forgiveness of sins, but the healing of the sin nature altogether. It is this simple: God loved us so much that He made a way for us to be healed, and enter into His love. Why complicate it beyond this? Perhaps because we don’t understand who God really is.
