John 20:30-31; Life in his name through believing
30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book. 31 But these are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name.
If Jesus’ Death Was Not an Atonement: Why Did He Die?? Post by Bart Ehrman. Extracts listed below.
To make the matter as succinct as possible, for Luke, Jesus’ death drives people to repentance. It is an occasion for forgiveness.
Here is my key point: there is a difference between an atonement for sins and the free forgiveness of sins. Mark thinks Jesus’ death is the first (as does the apostle Paul, for example); Luke thinks it is the occasion for the second.
You get the clearest view of Luke’s understanding of Jesus’ death from the speeches delivered by the apostles in the book of Acts. … You will find such speeches, for example, in chapters: Luke 2, Luke 13, and Luke 17.
Mark, and Paul, have a doctrine of atonement. Jesus’ death is a death “for the sake of others.” He dies in the place of others. His death is a sacrifice that pays the debt that is owed by others. Luke does not have a doctrine of the atonement. For him, Jesus’ death makes you realize how you have sinned against God and you turn to God and beg his forgiveness, and he forgives you. No one pays your debt; God simply forgives it.
Extracts from the Transcript of Episode 88
My Preface – The text below was edited to remove repeated phrases, “uh”s, and other words he said during this lecture that were transcribed by https://turboscribe.ai/. Dr. Ehrman has not reviewed or approved this rendering, which was prepared only for my use.
I think it’s pretty clear when you study the sayings of Jesus and see what he really taught that his main emphasis was on the need to return to God so that he will forgive you. For example even in the Lord’s Prayer where Jesus says forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors. Well, how do you forgive a debt so if somebody owes you money and you forgive them the loan they don’t have to pay the loan you just forgive the loan and it doesn’t mean that somebody else pays for them. It doesn’t mean that you know you get your money back somehow or other or you restructure the loan or you delay the loan. Jesus thinks of God as somebody who forgives our moral debt to him so it was all about forgiveness. Paul does not talk about forgiveness. People don’t notice this but the idea of “repent and you will be forgiven” is not in Paul.
Paul’s view is that Jesus’ death brought about an atonement for sin. That people had sinned and they incurred a penalty; the penalty is death; for the wages of sin is death says Paul; and the penalty has to be paid because God is just—but Jesus paid the penalty for others. Jesus died in the place of others. His death is a substitute for the death of others and so it’s a substitutionary atonement, a sacrificial act that makes somebody right with God. Paul did not think that God forgave people. He thought that God accepted the atonement of Jesus. And so it’s a different conception of how salvation comes about.
[Paul] didn’t invent the idea [of atonement] but this is why the early 20th-century scholars were saying the religion of Jesus is forgiveness and the religion about Jesus is atonement. I don’t know if the exact episode happened but how Jesus reacts is very very close to what we know about Jesus otherwise. So, I think something like this is absolutely what he thought.
So, there’s a man who comes up to Jesus—this is in Matthew, Mark, and Luke—he says to Jesus ‘what do I have to do to have eternal life’, and Jesus has an immediate response. He says keep the Commandments and in one of the gospels he lists them; don’t commit murder, don’t commit adultery, don’t bear false witness, honor your father and mother. He goes through this list of Commandments in another gospel. The man says, well which ones. And Jesus lists them; he’s listing 10 commandments he’s telling them obey what God tells you to do in the scriptures and that’s how you have eternal life. So the man’s feeling a little guilty about it apparently, or something, and he says; “well you know I’ve done all those things” So Jesus tells the man that the way to get into eternal life, to be saved, is by keeping the Commandments. But, if he really wants the five-star hotel experience you know he needs to sell everything and give to the poor and then he’ll have Treasures in Heaven.
The whole idea is that for Jesus—like most Jews of the time—God wants you to obey him. Obedience is what God wants and God will forgive people if they return to him in Repentance. In some ways that doesn’t sound very radical. But in another way, it is kind of radical in ancient Judaism because Jesus doesn’t say anything about having to perform sacrifices. He doesn’t say about the temple cult. There are other reasons for thinking that Jesus was not a big fan of what was happening at the temple or the Jewish leaders who were emphasizing the sacrificial system. And so, in that way, it was a radical teaching but it’s also radical because it’s like your child does something wrong you forgive them. You punish them. But, you don’t need to punish them and God isn’t somebody who wants to punish you. He wants to forgive you; he’s that kind of parent. He is willing to forgive you and so that was Jesus teaching.
If the same question was asked of Paul would he have given the same answer or would he have said something different? Oh my God would he say something different. You know I like this exercise I give I used to give my students. But, about half of them just didn’t get it. So my exercise was this I would say okay now the same person who came up to Jesus walks away. He can’t do it he can’t sell everything. He’s rich. He’s got a lot of money. There’s no way he’s gonna sell everything. So, he walks away and he’s kind of upset.
Now to my students, I say; so suppose 20 years later Jesus has died and this person comes up to Paul and and he says, “teacher what what must I do to have eternal life”. Does Paul say keep the Commandments? No, Paul’s whole point is that following the Jewish law is not going to make you right with God. You can’t be right with God by following the law. Of course, you should keep the Commandments; but it’s not going to give you salvation; and so Paul says believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus. Jesus died for your sins; accept him, and believe in the resurrection, and be baptized, and you’ll be saved. Nothing about keeping Commandments or selling all your goods. So, it’s not just a different answer; it is a contrary answer.
And so this is the problem that Scholars have talked about Paul and Jesus is because it looks like they in fact are preaching different messages if they are preaching different messages which based on your answers it definitely seems that they are why is it that people struggle to see these two things as different and distinct because people want Jesus and Paul to be on the same page. These are the two most important figures in Christianity they’re both in the New Testament they both are teaching about God and so you know they I think it’s beyond people’s conception they could possibly be saying something else they don’t notice that Paul doesn’t say things like you know repent and God will forgive you your sins. He says believe in Christ. He doesn’t say keep the Commandments. He says the Commandments won’t save you I mean you should keep them but they’re not going to save you and so people just don’t notice this because people tend to think of the Bible as being a solitary thing right there’s this there’s this book and it’s between two covers and it’s got one author and so what’s set in one place is the same.
In the gospels Jesus says that he has to go to Jerusalem and be rejected and be crucified and that he says things like the son of man came not to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many and so they notice that in fact Jesus does talk about an atonement and um in the gospels that’s right at least in Matthew Mark and John, Jesus does talk about giving his life for others um but the problem is that when Scholars talk about the difference between Jesus and Paul they’re not talking about the differences between the Gospels and Paul the gospel writers who are Christians who believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus who are writing 40, 50, 60 years later of course understood that Jesus would have said the same thing that they believe. And so critical Scholars typically doubt that Jesus was talking about him giving himself as an atonement.
But, if you think that the gospels are historically accurate in everything they say then there’s not a problem there. Other people who are a little bit more critical about it would say look yes Jesus didn’t talk about atonement. Paul did but Jesus is living before his death and Paul’s living after his death and so it’s natural that they’re got be saying the same thing because the whole point is his death and Jesus can’t be preaching the Salvation brought by his death because he hasn’t died yet and so during his life he’s telling people to keep the Commandments and so that’s an interesting way to reconcile it. I had Seminary professors who reconciled it that way but it does create a problem because if Jesus was right that God would forgive you if you repented then why did he have to die. God could just forgive you and when you think about it logically there’s no reason God couldn’t just forgive you if he wanted to and so if Jesus was right, then there’s no reason for him to have died.
Paul’s theology is rooted in something that happened but it’s not the same theology; would Paul have viewed himself as changing Jesus message. Oh, now that’s a good one because you know we had one of our earlier episodes was kind of about that. I guess we had this episode about what did Paul know about the teachings of Jesus and that’s a very interesting topic because Paul hardly says anything about what Jesus taught and you know when he quotes the sayings of Jesus he actually quotes only three sayings of Jesus where he actually says this is something Jesus said uh all three are in the book of First Corinthians it’s chapter 7 chapter 9 and chapter 11 as it turns out so chapter so the three sayings are one is that you should not get a divorce that’s chapter seven the other is you should pay your preacher that’s chapter nine okay so that’s not really kind of getting to the Heart of Jesus teachings but it’s two of the three things that he quotes and then in chapter 11 he does quote the say the words at the Last Supper as he knows them where Jesus um takes the Passover meal and he says this is my body that’s given for you and this is the cup of the New Covenant in my blood those are atonement words um and so Paul is quoting you know writing 25 years after the event he’s saying what Jesus said at his last meal there are very good reasons for thinking this is not something Paul would have known Jesus actually said at the last meal that this is the tradition in Christianity that this is what the last meal was all about that it developed after Jesus day.
Paul doesn’t say anything about Jesus teachings of forgiveness or repentance or to keep the Commandments. He doesn’t teach about or ever quote Jesus for the things that look like were the central elements of Jesus’ teachings. Do you see any commonalities between what Paul teaches and what we think Jesus said? It’s our next segment. If you had to pick a side in the great battle between Jesus and Paul which one would you be going with?
The big difference for me is the difference between forgiveness and atonement. I think the doctrine of the atonement that Paul inherited and then developed made a lot of sense given that Jesus was thought to be a messiah. He didn’t do what the Messiah was supposed to do. Instead, he got arrested, put on trial, and publicly executed.
The followers of Jesus had to figure out why he got crucified because he was obviously the favorite of God because God raised him from the dead. So, they came up with this idea that his death must have been planned by God as atonement for sins. That’s what Paul then accepted and so it makes sense to me for what happened within Christianity. But, given the difference between a doctrine of atonement that you need a human sacrifice for the sins of others or you cannot be reconciled with God unless somebody is tortured to death.
I find that distasteful and I don’t like the doctrine of atonement at all in any of its various ways of being explained. There are lots of ways people have tried to explain it away and I don’t find any of them acceptable. For me the idea that God is a loving father who will forgive you if you ask for forgiveness you generally are sorry for what you did and you meant to do it you know you intentionally did it and but you did it anyway but now you regret doing it you’re sorry and you promised to change your ways and God forgives you that’s a much more patal understanding. I think of the Divinity and I think that it’s a much better way to understand religion. It’s a religion of love and caring for others and forgiveness. It’s not a religion of blood Vengeance.
I’m more a Jesus guy than a Paul guy.
Paul’s foundational verse for what he calls “my gospel,” is taken directly from a quotation of the Hebrew Prophet Habakkuk–seldom read by hardly anyone. However, he completely reverses its meaning!
