Nancy L.

Christman Romans 3:19-31

19

Now we know that whatever the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law, so that

every mouth may be silenced, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 20For no human being will be justified in his sight by deeds prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.
21

But now, apart from law, the righteousness of God has been

disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, 22the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, 23since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; 24they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,
25

whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective

through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; 26it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus. 27Then what becomes of boasting? It is excluded. By what law? By that of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law. 29Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also,
30

since God is one; and he will

justify the circumcised on the ground of faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.

Nancy L. Christman Jesus the Savior June 6, 2010 Did It Work? Sin. Dare I say that word or any form of it sin, sinner, sinful - from the pulpit these days; or would that be considered uh sinful? Any way you slice it sin is not a pretty word. And preaching on sin always comes with a certain level of risk. God only knows what kind of response it will evoke from the pew. In hearing the words of sin, some may go running from the church never to return. They have been beat up enough from the pulpit. Some may slump in defeat the full weight of the sin piling onto the guilt they already know. Others, still, may sit there unaffected, confident I am talking about the other guy you know - those sinners. If we are afraid to preach on sin it is because we I say we because I know preachers can mess this up too - have a distorted understanding of what happened long ago on that Friday afternoon on Golgotha. What was going on? Ask anyone what happened that day and they can tell you Thats easy Jesus was crucified. But follow that up with Why? and if you dont get a blank stare, you will get a boatload of answers ... But most likely but nine times out of ten, the answer is, Jesus died for our sins. Ask any questions beyond that and the conversation just gets ugly or I think the term today is sketchy. What really happened that day defies all human explanation? But we still want to make sense of it? But how do we make sense of the man we have come to know as Savior, Messiah, God incarnate dying the most miserable of deaths? How do we make sense of Jesus cry of desperation in recalling Psalm 22 -My God, my God why have you forsaken me? Did God give him up to die? What was the point? And if there was a point, did it work? The theological term for Jesus work on the Cross is atonement. Maybe you have heard atonement defined as at-one-ment; that is through Christs death and resurrection we are made at one with God.1 That works: Jesus died on the cross to become one with humankind; to restore the broken relationship between a sinful humankind and God. How Jesus does this though is the topic of long-standing debate.
1

Theologians have not settled on one specific

Rolf Jacobson, Crazy Talk A Not So-Stuffy Dictionary of Theological Terms , Augsburg Books, Minneapolis, 2008, p.21.

doctrine to explain the significance of the Atonement, but have managed to narrow it down to several theories my systematic theology professor broke them down by using the threefold office of the Messiah from the Old Testament priest, prophet and ruler. Without getting into too much detail the three might be explained as: The priest as a blood sacrifice, taking on punishment for our sins; the prophet as obedient ambassador, the ruler as the victor in the battle over sin and death. Todays reading from Paul in his letter to the church in Rome, 23since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; 24they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,
25

whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, has

become proof text for the advocates who adhere to the blood sacrifice or substitution theory of the atonement - God gave his son Jesus over to die as a punishment for the sins of humankind. I bring this up because there is an Atonement War of such going on in postmodern theological circles namely in the emergent community. The debates is over, exactly what was God up to what was Gods purpose in the cross and it comes down to Pauls use of hilasterion
(NRSVsacrifice of atonement) in Romans 3:252

Scholars debate whether place of propitiation or means of expiation is the appropriate translation for hilasterion both big words propitiation implies that the sacrifice
effects a change in Gods wrath towards humans Jesus took upon himself, removed sin and averted divine wrath and expiation implies that the sacrifice effects a change in humans Jesus dealt with sin itself3. The answer boils down to basic grammar is hilasterion and adjective or a noun; the difference being, Jesus being understood as an atoning sacrifice (adjective) or a divine revelation (noun). Well after six long pages of trying to make a case one way or the other my commentary boldly proclaimed it is difficult to make a compelling case for either position4 (Heavy sigh and a few expletives) Any attempt to find a compelling argument in other resources left me at a dead end. Frustrated I decided to step back from my analysis and look at the atonement in the context of who I know God to be and who Paul knew God to be.

2 3

Bibleworks Romans 3:25. Charles H. Talbert, Romans: Smyth and Helwys Bible Commentary, Smyth and Helwys Publishing, Macon, Georgia 2002, p. 110 4 Talbert, p.115.

The main argument against substitution atonement is against those who portray in the context of an angry God who resorts to violence and commits divine child abuse the Father punishing the Son. It is hard for me to imagine anyone teaching this theory of atonement but then I have many friends who say it is true. It is how they were raised- fearing God and his wrath. I dont deny the possibility when it comes to the Gospel there is always the potential for distortion and desecration. We cant let people go on believing God was mad at humankind so he took it out on his son.

And that gets me back to preaching on sin why we should not be afraid. Trust me someone is preaching sin to the world and if it is not from the pulpit then most likely our people are hearing about sin outside the context of the Cross. Preaching on sin gives us a chance to frame sin

in the context of the cross and to correct the distortions. We can reframe any notion of For God
was so angry at the world he killed his only Son to the understanding of how God so loved the world even the sinful, especially the sinful (sic) - he gave his only son In the cross and the

passion of Christ faith experience a quite different love of God, which loves what is quite different. It loves what is sinful, bad, foolish, weak and hateful in order to make it beautiful and good and wise and righteous. For sinners are beautiful because they are loved5.

I spent an afternoon recently with a retired Systematic Theology professor and after a long discussion about the Atonement I point blank asked him, So did it work? understanding my question I clarified Did the atonement work? Not

Without hesitation he

responded, Its still working He is right, ya know. It is working, because like Paul we preach what we know to be truth and that is Christ crucified.

Jrgen Moltmann, The Crucified God, Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1994, p. 214.