99 Comments

Really appreciate this, Diana. Every week, as a UCC minister, I try to preach on the themes of love, forgiveness, justice and mercy. I think I’m deciding that the faith worth keeping and clinging to, is the faith of the Sermon on the Mount and the fruit of the spirit. In communion I stress that in Aramaic, blood is the same word for juice and essence. I hope it makes a difference. I sometimes feel I adhere to the world’s most misunderstood religion. God bless our nation and May peace prevail!!!

Expand full comment

I agree with your article. How can we discuss "atonement" with felow believers. I am so grounded in the idea that Christ came to earth to die for my sins that I don't know how to explain why he came here....

Expand full comment

Trump has been able to manipulate a huge section of the evangelical community. This has been coming for years when the church buys into the lie that we were a Christian nation from the beginning. Thank you Diana for pointing how dark this has become.

Expand full comment
Aug 22, 2022Liked by Diana Butler Bass

Spot on! Appreciation from a faithful reader of your work, former Evangelical and fellow California central coast Bible college grad and GCTS alum from '90.

Expand full comment

Diana, I am glad that you raised this discussion at such a time as this, because themes of theology (especially forms that are distorted and consequently have dangerous implications, then and now).

So, in looking at the 19th Century, the thing that I most hate to read about is the evil of slavery, which was such a impetus for the Civil War, and had at its heart, whether a person would be seen as a person, vice owned by someone else as though they were property. That is human dignity was at the core as I read the war.

I think that those who are talking about a Civil War now, are all to closely linked, with that foul entity that as Jefferson Davis said, 'died of a theory.'

In this regard, the Civil War as the Civil War historian Barbara Fields said at the end of Burns documentary series, "the civil war still is going on."

Expand full comment

I see the dawn of a new day in which we find that we no longer need the conceptual walls that separate us (race, culture, conditioning, political party, etc.). It is coming, and your work is contributing to its arrival. Without these arbitrary walls, we will see we are connected, similar in many more ways than different. This awareness will accompany a peace that surpasses all understanding, and a genuine love for each other, as for ourselves. By God’s grace we will seek this truth in the stillness of the Spirit.

Expand full comment

Diana, I have been nervous since Trump first entered the race for the presidency. That was a rude awakening for me that white Christian nationalism was on the move in our precious democracy. I thank you for your post that clarifies where we are today. I too believe that we must foster peace and genuine caring in our world - because there is no greater power than the power of Love.

Expand full comment

I'm speechless!

My fundamentalist roots were the bloody atonement theology.

Thank you for this incredible post. It had to be said!

Expand full comment
Aug 13, 2022Liked by Diana Butler Bass

You've touched on a subject dear to me because it is central to what the Gospel is about: Reconciliation with God. But virtually all the 'models' for explicating how this works fall short (in my view), thereby leading to utterly unconvincing explanations or, worse, the kind of anti-christian beliefs you describe.

I was moved into a moderately tough neighborhood when I was 4 years old. Already, gangs were formed by kids (boys) about my age. I'd not met any of them, until I was attacked by them. A couple years later I hit and made cry the leader of this group. My father was proud.

But since, I've imagined a different scenario: New kid on the block "clocked" and knocked to the pavement by this ringleader. What in the world's (at least my father's) estimation did he deserve in return? Of course. That's our instinctive human notion of 'justice'.

Suppose, instead, I get up and offer my hand in friendship despite what has been done to me. I think that this is what divine forgiveness does, and what revoltingly (from more than one perspective) is offered. It puts a much different spin on Christ "bearing our Sin".

In the Temptation Story, the actual temptation is to "be like God" (in the context of the author's intent, describing mythically what is wrong between humanity and its Creator, YHWH). In the next chapter, Cain will cry out that his "sin" is more than he can bear. What he means is what we would call "punishment". The Hebrew concept of punishment related to sin is having to bear that sin's consequences. And so, 'punishment' is always rendered using the root of whatever word for sin the writer is employing. This is what Cain found to be unbearable. And what is meant in the OT by someone's sin being "visited upon" them.

Now SIN, THE Sin against God from which all "sins" derive, is the rejection and usurpation of the Rule of God, ourselves in each case vetoing the Will of God with our own wills. The ultimate implication is our wanting God "out of the way" so we can be free to run our show in our own lights. This is endemically evident throughout human history and experience. It amounts to a different take on the "Death of God" concept. In the deepest, darkest corners of our souls we want God dead so we can be our own gods.

In John 8: 31 - 59 we have the evangelist getting at this very idea with the words of Jesus. And it is significant that Jesus alludes to the Temptation Story. But WAIT! Can we really kill God? Rather, is not 'Justice' the forfeiture of our own lives to God the Giver of Life?

Yes, we would kill God if we could lay our hands on God. Because at some point for all of us God's Will pushes us too far. And the unthinkable, outrageous and offensible is that this is what God allows to happen in the Incarnation, in the person of Jesus.

In Leviticus 17 we are told that the "life" of a creature "is in the blood". That belongs to God and is not to be consumed. This goes back to the 'P' version in Genesis 9 following the Flood. In the Levitical sacrificial system, the life (i.e. the blood) of the animal slaughtered makes atonement, rendering the "food offered to God" acceptable. In effect, table fellowship with God is made possible because the price for sin is made in a substutional manner.

This is not what happens in the crucifiction of Jesus. He is God offering up his life, offering forgiveness and reconciliation with God by "bearing" the Sin of humankind. Jesus' death by human hands, represented by Roman law considered to be the epitome for its time, the religious leadership of the "one true religion", and those closest to Jesus who'd sworn that they would die for him, displayed humanity at its supposed "best". Instead of "the wages of Sin" God offers Life with God. All that is needed is the acceptance of this Gift making reconciliation with God possible - on God's (New) terms.

For the sake of time and space, I'll leave the matter here. Much more can be said to fill in the argument. But one thing can be said. The atoning Blood of Jesus is NOT about God getting a pound of flesh out of someone, but God accepting victimhood as the way to true forgiveness and reconciliation for humankind. I believe this addresses all the relevant concerns of Scripture and the inadequate models historically offered to explain what took place with Jesus' crucifixtion and why such a death was necessary. But I would welcome any challenges, taking into account gaps in need of filling to make a more thorough explication, and the questions which thereby arise.

Expand full comment

I don't view Jesus' death as "necessary" to "reconcile" humanity to God. That is just a re-stating of the Substitutionary theory of the Atonement. Metaphorically I view Jesus' life, teachings and in the end his martyrdom at the hands of the Roman Empire as necessary to show us what God is really like. God is not the judgemental law-giver of the Old Testament, but is revealed to us as the loving forgiving "seventy times seven" parent of the Prodigal Son parable. God is the "turn the other cheek" forgiver of enemies who tells Peter (traditionally the disciple who takes out his sword) to put the sword away when Jesus is aprehended in the Garden of Gethsemane. Jesus' torture and judicial murder were not pre-ordained as necessary by God but are what so many times happens to innocent victims in this fallen world of ours. In Jesus God stands with the victims. Why do the innocent so often suffer? That is a whole other sermon on theodicy. But after much reading, meditating and study of quantum physics I have come up with the aphorism "pain is the price we pay for a world of infinite possibility."

Expand full comment

Dear Sharon. I'm not sure which comment you are responding to, since I've written about this at least twice. But allow me to tell a child's story. Age four, new to a neighborhood with organized gangs starting at this age, a lad is walking down the new sidewalk just past his new home. Along comes the block's gang leader, who immediately knocks the fellow down. He gets up to respond. What, in this real world, would this bully deserve? What has he got coming to him? [And give an honest answer, not an ideal one.] Well, the boy gets up and extends his hand. "I want to be your friend," he says.

You don't get to know the bully's response. More important is what the boy is doing who was hit for no good reason, but purely out of malice. He is willing to endure what was done to him without striking back. That constitutes the meaning of forgiveness. At least God's - and Jesus' - version.

I think you've reacted and missed the point. Yes, there is a substitution taking place, an atonement (a word our world has misconstrued). God in place of us. (NOT God getting his pound of flesh out of someone to be satisfied!!!) And it is necessary for a true reconciliation. That is because reconciliation is a two way street. Christ on the cross is how far from God we truly are. It is hubris on our part to assume otherwise. It is God incarnate in a moment of real history, in a moment of our time in our world, allowing what Sin in human nature really wants: God on God's terms gone, out of the way, dead to us. Inventing a god just to suit our terms is nothing but idolatry, a god made in our own image. God reconciling us is not simply "I forgive you," but us responding, "God, forgive me."

There is much you've writen with which I completely agree. Just not to be used to cancel the story of the uncomfortable Truth about us with which God confronts us in Jesus. You easily write about a forgiving God, meaning God let's us off the hook or tells us we're better than we act. No accountability, no repentance. And, let's take a look at this judgemental God of the Old Testament for a moment. The God who says, "Do this and you will live." That's what Jesus said about the Greatest Commandment and the one "like it." If you want to pick and chose what you like about Jesus, that's just like picking a god you like. It's not the whole Truth. I agree that much in the OT is contravened by Jesus, and much is written using God to justify horrible things. But I look for the message, and the message is not always comfortable. It is consistent. We have a problem with God. On God's terms, not ours. There is an incompatibility which must be resolved, and the part we cannot do is done by God in Jesus. No, the torture and judicial murder were not pre-ordained, just predictable and inevitable because that is our nature. Oh, not ME! Just the bad guys. Take that away and what is left?

BTW, I like your aphorism. The universe is not kind. It just makes things possible, including our being here. Theodicy is useless. Just another example of our imagination working too hard to figure out a god we can live with. Some things have to be left to God. But the one comfort Christians have is a God who reveals how much we are cared for in Christ crucified. The resurrection is a nice touch, too. The story isn't ended.

Expand full comment

I followed you as far as "that constitutes the meaning of forgiveness." And I totally agree. And the expression "to err is human, to forgive, Divine" comes to mind. I do see this as the course of action urged and modeled by Jesus, and so seldom attained by us. But I do not believe that in Jesus there is a substitution taking place. You and I will have to agree to disagree on that. Since I believe that Jesus was God, I see him as modeling right behavior, demonstrating God's forgiveness, accepting our repentence and gently telling us to pick ourselves up and try again, try to sin no more. Not because we fear punishment, but because we love God, who is revealed to us in Jesus. And we do not want to grieve the heart of Him whom we love so much. And any time we are unkind to one of the least of these God's children we are unkind to God Himself.

I also agree that the resurrection is a nice touch. In AA I see resurrection frequently, and it is always a miracle.

Expand full comment

Happy to hear from you, again. Upon reflection, I realized that my childhood story needed to reflect what God offers in Jesus, not a forgiveness which let's us off the hook, but the pathway to reconciliation. As much as that kid offered forgiveness, it could only offer reconciliation, not accomplish it on its own. Christ died for all. God desires all to be saved and come to the knowledge of the Truth. But without believing in the need for it, without the desire for a right relationship with God, the benefit is lost on the one who rejects it.

You're hung up on that word, "substitution." It is a presumption that God must forgive no matter what. God is not bound by what we want, but is absolutely free. God's choice is to offer forgiveness, to have compassion, to love the sinner. To bear our Sin. Otherwise, what would be the consequence? Where would be the Grace? Where would that leave us? Are we to presume God cannot help but forgive because it's God's nature, God has no choice? Or that we can demand God take notice of our virtues and pass on our evil? Really? But this is where God substitutes for us in the relationship.

My point - and the Gospel's - is that there is a price for reconciliation. Forgiveness is costly. That price is to bear the wrong done. But not to merely give a pass. Reconciliation is a restored relationship. It is not something static. A change takes place. The change is how we stand before God. As enemies? As God-haters? As usurpers of God's proper place in creation and in our lives? That's human nature left on its own. Denying it is our spiritual death. But God flips the script. God dies at our hands to rescue us from that spiritual death, that utter alienation from God. The Incarnate God stands in the path of human Sin which separates us from God. God bears what our Sin is all about to spare us that consequence. This is not just for show, a demonstration to set an example, God acting out to show us how God wants us to be. It is what God does. It's where God's Grace originates.

Atonement means "to cover". God covers our Sin with the life blood of Jesus. (The Biblical language has meaning and roots all the way back.) That's the substance of God's Love and forgiveness toward us. To receive this love and forgiveness is to no longer be capable of enmity toward God. We cannot live as though we belong to ourselves. We are not our own. We have been "bought with a price." It's a package deal. The Gift is inseparable from the Giver. We have renounced any self-deluded notion that we have a claim on God, that God owes us. Our desire is not to be free from accountability to God, but to surrender ourselves to God.

Expand full comment

Dear Substack members,

I am inviting you to visit my page where I reviewing different topics regarding music, books. Recently I have started a serie of reviewing a certain type of books. Thank you everyone! https://jaroslavnovosyolov.substack.com/p/serie-books-from-anton-la-veys-shelf?utm_source=%2Finbox&utm_medium=reader2

Expand full comment

I have only a few words: " You, go girl!"

Expand full comment

When I read your post, I thought, "We don't need more if this, as we had enough of it under Trump." However, fed up with it as I am, we need as a nation to be aware of what we are becoming.

There is nothing new about any of this; The Republican Party is no longer the Party of Abraham Lincoln nor does it go forth with the ideals that Party once had but no longer has. It is now primarily the Party of those who are members of Mitch McConnell's Grand Ole Party.

I am a follower of Jesus. "Christian" and "Evangelical" are no longer words I care to use to describe myself.

As a registered Independent, I am not particularly fond of any of the political Partys as I think they divide more than they unite. And we DO need as much awareness of what our choices are when we go to cast our votes.

As a follower of Jesus, thank you, Diana, for shining much needed LIGHT in a dark place.

Expand full comment

I was re-reading this today in light of learning of the attack on Salman Rushdie at Chautauqua Institution this morning. When will it ever end?

Expand full comment

Have read many of the posts that spoke to your very good work and especially on this post. Excellent and truth telling piece from my perspective. On a quieter note than all of the stuff going on I have noticed many people are rethinking and moving back "home" area, or moving closer to family. Deconstruction is not a scary term to me any more. We are in the process of going through all our stuff as we prepare to move closer to family. It is Deconstruction is but like cells in our body we are simultaneously reconstructing in every way. It is healing process as we redo things so I suggest deconstruction ie looking at church's theology of atonement and present to the world and our group that is denomination is important to how we present to the world local and beyond.!

Expand full comment

Thanks, Diane!! The key, for me is the use of the phrase, "civil war". This is a naked homage to the truth that their aims, objectives and underlying values are secular and temporal, not eternal and spiritual. They reject the weaponry and strategy of God (see Ephesians 6 and Galatians 5-6) in favor of self-aggrandizement and idolatrous focus on themselves and not on God's priorities and His Word. They ignore the strategy Yeshua clearly employed in His confrontation with Satan himself, as recounted in Matthew 4 and Luke 4. HYPOCRITES, they are!

Expand full comment
Aug 12, 2022Liked by Diana Butler Bass

Your post today gives me hope that there are clear-headed Christians who see Jesus calling us to action ~ not to a civil war, but to recognizing that we all come from the same Source and need to work for the good of each other. Our country is in a terrible state and I think we need to keep the conversation going as to how we can do our part to make positive changes. We all need some hope about now. Your post provides a glimmer of that; thank you.

Expand full comment
Error