Recovering the Scandal of the Cross

Well, regardless of what the authors have attempted to accomplish in this book, I will still abide with the “penal substitution” theology. This is what the Bible speaks to me when I read from the Old Testament to the New Testament, so I am not prepared to change my perspective. Although one can derive other significant meanings from the cross, Jesus’ crucifixion impacted my life the most, and it is because of His sacrificial love on the cross that I truly feel forgiven by God.

The major concern of the authors is that they found the meaning and function of atonement have been narrowly defined in the last two centuries. Atonement, in their view, so far has been articulated in the doctrine of “penal substitution” or “satisfaction”. This doctrine albeit is biblically based and it speaks about the central theme of atonement that “Christ died for our sin”, its message may not be easily or universally understood by people who live in different society system or of different cultural background.

Green and Baker were afraid these two doctrines, based on the same theology that Christ Jesus died in our place for our sins to satisfy the judgment of a righteous God, may convey too much of a negative picture or message rather than a Gospel with love to the contemporary audiences or soon-to-be believers. They wanted the contemporary Christians, theologians, and especially preachers to take note that these two doctrines were formulated during the time of feudalism. While the cultural concepts and practices were appropriate during then, we cannot possibly articulate them in the same way in today cultural setting. They argued that even this atonement theory still serving well in a society driven by guilt-base in which offences or wrongful acts naturally resulted in consequences with punishment or justice, it can appear difficult to comprehend when it is being translated to a shame-base society like Japan.

Green and Baker presented a good case for contemporary believers to re-look at the full meaning of the cross or more precisely the significance of Jesus’ death on the cross as salvific act. The book opens a good opportunity for more conversation and thought and more research on the topic than ever before, however, the attack on the theological model of “Satisfaction” by Anselm and “Penal Substitution” model does not seem fair.

Anselm spoke of the issued related to his own contemporary and drew the meaning of the cross to appeal to his context should be understandable and nothing is inappropriate. Most historical models are time sensitive and appealed to its specific groups of people or culture. This by their nature is of timeliness and contextualization. The constraint and relevancy of the models should be properly recognized and fairly treated instead of being heavily criticized and attacked. The person who adopts the models lied with the responsibility to interpret the models in their proper context and original intention.

Overall the book offers a good survey on all the essential meaning of the cross in both the Old and New Testament, especially in Gospels, Apostle Paul’s and Peter’s epistles. It gives a sound biblical insight into Christ’s work that involves intercultural potential such as liberation from sin and guilt to the significance of Jesus’ life, his obedience (recapitulation) and resurrection as the final victory besides the atonement.