The Atonement
For countless centuries, the concept of atonement has been associated with the religious dogmatic view of sin as a violation against the honor of God, particularly; the association has been centered on forgiveness and pardoning of transgressions. As the rise of secular, non-religious thought came to existence, the doctrines of atonement became one of the most challenged religious concepts.
Michael Winter’s Problems in Theology: The Atonement, in this sense sheds light on the confusion surrounding the religious premise of atonement. The author dedicates relevant chapters on how and why religious sects have provided misleading doctrines on atonement. Likewise, Winter carefully elaborates on atonement steering clear of the usual myths and clichés encompassing the concept of appeasing God.
In Preliminary Considerations, the book’s first chapter, Winter presents an extensive, yet clear, explanation of the concept of atonement, particularly on how the inhumane punishment endured by Christ caused conflicting beliefs on the concept of atonement. Winter, likewise, provided extensive discussions of religious and non-religious beliefs on the concept of atonement while addressing how the crucifixion and death of Christ has become the central component of the mainstream Christian faith.
Winter also implies in the first chapter that the lack of knowledge on the actual events during Christ’s suffering and death of Christ atone for sins committed by humans; however, Winter also claims that such ordeal was altogether unnecessary. In doing so, Winter also clarified why the term atonement is a more suitable term for the intention of Christ’s ultimate sacrifice.
The book’s first chapter also chronicles the manner of how Winter engages readers with varying human attempts to redeem or atone themselves from the inevitable act of sin. While prevalent religious doctrines hold that sin is an utter rejection of God’s love, sin remains to be a part of the natural human condition (Winter 4). Similarly, the author also provides relevant details on the ideal life based on the moral code decreed by God.
The second chapter, The Execution of Jesus, delineates all popular notions and misleading ideas about sacrifice and atonement in the context of Christ’s ultimate sacrifice on the cross. Winter, in the chapter, implicates that because the key concept of Christ’s suffering and death effect common perceptions on atonement, general human comprehension tends to operate in a sphere that is detached from experience, which, often lead to assumptions of actual events during the final hours of Jesus’ earthly life.
Furthermore, Winter also challenged the sanctity and the importance of Christ’s brutal punishment and execution by questioning the very act that served as ransom for humanity’s atonement (Nessan 30). Winter expressed the aforementioned questioning by indicating that:
there is a consensus among [modern writers] . . . they all agree that the New Testament does not tell us how the atonement was effected, yet they [the modern writers] offer no explanation of it themselves to compensate for that omission. Ironically it is precisely this explanation which is badly needed by modern readers, who discovers the ferocious death of Jesus so repugnant (30-7)
Winter also puts forward in the second chapter the idea that Christ, despite his altruistic act of saving humanity from the corruption of sin, simply serves as an intermediary, pleading for humanity’s forgiveness (Finlan 97). To expound his explanation of the essence sacrifice’s relation to atonement, Winter alludes and interprets the narratives of the New Testament’s canonical gospels as well as several passages from the Pauline and Johannine epistles.
Winter ends the chapter by examining how the varying views on the suffering and death of Christ contributes to the lack of plausible or acceptable explanations on how sacrifice serves as the path for atonement. Through analysis of both secular and conservative beliefs on Christ’s altruism, Winter conclusively suggests that there is no clarity on the prevalent notion that sacrifice, of any kind, is the only means to achieve atonement (Winter 30-8).
In chapter three, First Attempts at Synthesis: The Fathers, Winter examines antiquated doctrines and beliefs on the concept of atonement. Using documented doctrines of the early Christian Church after the death of Christ, Winter firmly implies that a thorough understanding and comprehension of early tenets of atonement and the relevance of Christ in achieving it may be useful in understanding the doctrine’s elusive context and definition. In addition, Winter also suggested in the chapter that an understanding of the earliest works that decree atonement also offers an understanding subsequent doctrines that lead to the emergence of conflicting views regarding the concept.
Similarly, by entailing how law alludes to humanity’s relationship with God, the third chapter also shares legal perspectives on atonement. In a context based on the law, Winter used the gospels to represent the law, in this sense, the Christians’ system of rules. Winter (66) furthers that committing sin is a violation of what is written in the gospels, and thus is offensive to God.
In Chapter 4, Medieval Solutions to the problems, Winter attributes the variations in understanding atonement and the relevance of Christ in the concept to the changing cultures over the centuries (Winter 61). Focusing on the medieval era and the theological revolutions that expanded the Christian faith, Winter explained what drastic changes in the doctrine of atonement occurred during the period. Winter also used both theological as well as secular theories that became prevalent during the period to mirror the drastic changes in terms of doctrines and beliefs regarding atonement (Winter 62-7).
Like previous chapters, Winter also related the relevance of the merciless punishment and death that Christ endured in achieving atonement. Winter strengthened his arguments with the use of early medieval literature from the likes of St. Anselm as well as later critical literature such as Martin Hengel’s to explain the medieval period’s attempts to put an end to the chronic problem the doctrine of atonement has spawned. Moreover, through his inclusion of several contexts from which atonement can be defined (as transaction, as conflict, as enlightenment, and as solidarity), Winter further gave clarification to the mystery surrounding the concept of going back to God’s grace, at least to the understanding of modern Christian adherents and theological scholars.
The fifth chapter, meanwhile, indicts a call for a solution, a solution to the disagreement on the causal function of atonement. Winter (87-89), calls for the abolishment of the arguments and claims created by theorists and theologians underneath the surface of the dogma of atonement, which, he believes is a doctrine that has garnered substantial attention. This is because the varying arguments tend to have similar analyses, analogies, and results. As such, Winter provides a directive toward a solution to the problems caused by the doctrine of atonement through respect in belief between religious adherents and modern secular skeptics.
Prevalent notions on atonement concerns human reconciliation to God’s grace. In the sixth chapter, The Request for Our Reconciliation, Winter tackles the premise enclosed in the doctrine of atonement, which is, humanity’s reconciliation to God. Winter elaborates that In both religious and non-religious contexts; people have the tendency violating morality and thus still commit immoral acts. As such people become distant from morality.
Winter alludes the human tendency of committing morally unacceptable behavior to how sin and atonement works; in such a way that the manner of how immoral acts alienate people from morality itself, and to a certain extent, to society. Winter then conclusively suggests that human reconciliation with God is equivalent to an non-religious immoral person’s reconciliation with morality and society.
While Winter calls for elimination of sources of conflict and reconciliation to God and morality in chapters 5 and 6, he explains the inevitability of Christ’s crucifixion and death on chapter 7, The Inevitable Crucifixion. Even if Christ’s death is not directed toward its atoning purpose, Winters suggests that the divergence of Christ’s teaching constitutes interest among Jewish authorities to call for his death. Winters justifies this through the strict nature of the Jewish in nurturing their centuries old traditions and beliefs.
In Sacrament of Intercession, the book’s final chapter, Winter expresses that Christ’s intercession on God’s relationship with His greatest creation is a phenomenon in which God himself is active. In doing so, Winter implied that Jesus’ intermediary role is part of His divinity because the act itself expresses divine grace through its purpose of atonement. Furthermore, Winter clarified that God’s active participation in Christ’s selfless intercession reveals the teaching of an affectionate God implying that the very premise of the term faith requires no material explanation.
Works Cited
Finlan, Stephen. “Rationalizing the Doctrine of Atonement.” in Problems with Atonement: The Origins Of, and Controversy About, the Atonement Doctrine. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2005, 96-97.
Nessan, Craig, L. “Violence and Atonement.” Dialog 35 (1996): 18-30.
Winter, Michael, M. Problems in Theology: The Atonement. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1995.
