Back to the basics: the savior

“I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died and was buried;
he descended into hell;
on the third day he rose again from the dead;
he ascended into heaven,
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty;
from there he will come to judge the living and the dead.”
~The Apostles’ Creed


Jesus is the manifestation of God’s desire to be close to God’s creation. This Word made flesh, light in the darkness, was with the Creator in the beginning, bringing life to creation at its Genesis and bringing eternal life to creation in His incarnation (John 1:1-13). Christianity, as distinct from other Abrahamic faiths, hinges on our Christology, which is not without controversy. Arguments abound regarding His divine and human nature as well as the mechanics of humanity’s atonement and redemption through Him. At this time in my faith, I believe that Jesus does not make sense unless He is fully human and divine, enacting an atonement that arises from love, not vindication. 

What does it mean for Jesus to be fully human and fully divine? In his book, Tokens of Trust: An Introduction to Christian Belief, Rowan Williams uses a metaphor for Jesus that I find quite helpful and striking. Rowan avers that Jesus is “the performance of the Word of God,” whose “power and will are the performance of who God is and what God wants.” This allows for Jesus, the human born of Mary, to perform the Word of God as His divine nature, conceived by the Holy Spirit. As any performer knows, performance is an act of transcendence, a moment of channeling or reflecting the Divine into the world, which is why I believe that art is a prophetic act, exhibited in the music of Solomon, the human sculptures of Ezekiel, and the dance of Miriam. If we are but a shadow of the true nature of God in the world, then our artistic act of prophetic transcendence is merely a shadow of the profound reality of the Incarnation, manifesting in perfect transcendence as Jesus, fully human and fully divine.

It is this perfect union of human and divine that allows for an atonement theory based in love. Every aspect of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection is imbued with the love God has for all of creation, and each is important in redemption. As such, I find it difficult to ascribe to atonement theories that lean exclusively on the cross and retributive justice that seeks punishment through suffering as a means toward redemption. The most popular theories of atonement are Ransom Theory and Penal Substitutionary Atonement, the former resulting from the work of the early church fathers and the latter by medieval theologians. Ransom Theory, most notably generated by Origen of Alexandria, posits that Jesus’ death paid a ransom to Satan to free humanity. Penal Substitutionary Atonement originated from Satisfaction Theory, developed in Anselm of Canterbury’s great work, Cur Deus Homo (Why God Became Man). Satisfaction Theory claims that Jesus’ death was necessary to restore God’s honor, which was marred by humanity’s sin. As this theory was passed from a feudal, honor society to a democratic society with a justice system built on retribution, Satisfaction Theory evolved into Penal Substitutionary Atonement, whereby Jesus’ death satisfied God’s justice against sin by paying a legal penalty. 

As the more popular atonement theories, these may sound familiar to you, and may be the only atonement theories you’ve ever been taught. However, there are other atonement theories that have resulted from some of the issues arising from these ancient theories. For example, ransom theory hinges on a belief in a being as powerful as God that he can demand a ransom. Theologians who argue against ransom theory state that God is powerful enough that He could easily reclaim humanity from Satan without paying him anything. Satisfaction Theory and Penal Substitutionary Atonement are problematic because they are rather androcentric—the belief that God’s justice works like our notably flawed human systems. In addition, feminist theologians find the idea of a Father sacrificing His Son rather repugnant, so they lean towards more reparative and redemptive theories of atonement.  

In her book Dancing With God: The Trinity from a Womanist Perspective, Baker-Fletcher asserts “suffering is not redemptive, because it easily leads to bitterness and internalizing one's experience of hatred in the world.” Retributive justice is rarely satisfactory because no victim is fully healed simply by watching their perpetrator suffer. Healing and redemption are more complicated than that. They require more than punishing evil; they require overcoming evil, and I believe that God has been and continues to overcome evil throughout the arc of existence, not just at the moment of the cross. Jesus’ incarnation, however, marked a time of more intense presence and therefore a more concentrated time of victory over evil. 

Jesus was victorious over evil through the humility in His choice to become human and walk among us. Jesus was victorious over evil when He healed people’s brokenness—physical, emotional, and spiritual. Jesus was victorious over evil in holding a mirror up to our brokenness through His own pure goodness. Jesus was victorious over evil in willingly undergoing physical and mental suffering on the cross in order to be in solidarity with all those who suffer. Jesus was victorious over evil when He literally conquered death, rising from the dead and providing a foretaste of our own resurrection. This victory is not the end. The victory of God extends past this moment in history, which has birthed a future that is actively ushering in the fulfillment of God’s plan—the resurrection of all of creation into shalom, into perfect peace and wholeness. Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection are together the embodiment of God’s power to redeem creation’s brokenness, not just fixing it back to its Genesis but creating it gloriously anew.