Substitutionary Atonement

Today is Good Friday, the day that Christians commemorate Jesus’ death on a cross. It is often said that Jesus died for our sins. This is called “substitutionary atonement.” Its background comes from Jewish tradition.

Recall that Jesus was a devout Jew. In the Rabbinic tradition, atonement can only be achieved through repentance, which includes a combination of actions, such as confession, restitution, performing the rituals of Yom Kippur, suffering, and service to others. Catholics atone through the sacrament of confession. Many Protestant denominations have dispensed with repentance altogether, arguing that salvation comes from faith alone (sola fides).

Substitutionary atonement is a complex theological concept, meaning, there is no consensus as to what it means. What’s interesting, though, is that there is no basis for substitutionary atonement in the gospels. The principal passage supporting it comes from Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, where he says “Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures.” (Some translations say “… according to the Scriptures.”) 1 Cor. 15:3

One interesting thing about this passage, is that there is no scriptural basis for substitutionary atonement. The Jewish scriptures are quite clear that atonement can only come from active repentance.

So what did Paul mean when he said “Christ died for our sins”? It has been discussion fodder for millennia, and still there is no consensus.

David Hidalgo and Louie Perez of the band Los Lobos have an interesting take on substitutionary atonement. They relate a mother’s advice, that the lost will find their way through the tears of God.

The son of the maker said

This is my cross to bear

Taking off of our shoulders

Something we should have shared

Why does God cry? Is it for loss of his son? Or is it for the loss of human repentance?