Cell Notes 15^th January 2012

Ice Breaker

What sacrifice have you made for a friend or family member?

Theme

Why did Jesus Die?

Reading: John 12:20-50

Sermon Outline

At different times in Church history, and in different cultures, the reason why Jesus had to die has been seen in different ways.

A. The classic view “Christus Victor” (predominant view for first 1000 years of the church): Jesus’ death was to defeat the devil & overcome evil with love, to redeem humanity.

B. Anselm’s satisfaction theory (Middle Ages – feudal influence): Christ suffered as a substitute for mankind, satisfying the demands of God’s honour.  Jesus’ death, the ultimate act of obedience, brings God great honour; Christ’s surplus repays our deficit.

C. Moral Influence Theory (Augustine, and later): Christ’s passion was an exemplary act of obedience which, with his teaching, inspires us towards moral change.

D. The Governmental View (Wesley): Jesus died for the church to demonstrate the seriousness of sin, enabling God to extend forgiveness while maintaining divine order and justice.

E. Shame-based view: God’s love (demonstrated in Jesus’ life, humiliating death & resurrection) casts out fear and shame, restoring our relationship with God and our true humanity.

F. Penal Substitutionary Atonement (Luther): Jesus took our punishment on the cross, satisfying justice so that we could be forgiven.

1) Penal substitution is the approach most commonly used by evangelicals to communicate the gospel, and for many it is the gospel.

2) The bible uses a number of metaphors to help us understand the cross.

3) Many reformers through history and in different cultures emphasise different metaphors – all equally seeking to draw out what the bible teaches.

4) The focus on penal subsitutionary atonement started at the reformation and was really established at the turn of the 20^th century when modern enlightenment thinking was at its height.

5) As modernity is emerging into an increasingly post-modern context, for many the focus is shifting from certainty of fact or doctrine, to authenticity of life and faith.

6) Penal substitution uses legal style thinking to describe a transaction in which Jesus pays the price required by the wrath of God for our sins, and we go free, receiving in its place Jesus’ righteousness.

7) Particularly in today’s emerging post-modern culture, a sole focus on this understanding can have some consequences that we would not wish or intend.

a. A black and white focus on the status of individuals before God – which can lead to us even subconsciously making judgements about the status of other people.

b. A strong focus on and absolute confidence in the exact criteria or correct doctrine we need to believe to change from one status to the other – which can appear superior or even arrogant, particularly to those (inside or outside the church) who hold slightly different views to ourselves, which can lead to disagreement, division and worse.

c. A primary focus on the wrath of God – which can put people off, particularly given the amount of conflict and hatred in the world.

8) Story from Steve Chalke about how we sometime communicate the gospel – focusing on making people feel guilty rather than helping them understand God’s love.

9) Other metaphors or ways of understanding the cross can help to round things out – it’s helpful to feel free to question and explore, and we shouldn’t feel threatened by this.

10) We have genuinely good news and need to be sensitive to the culture in which we live to find relevant ways to communicate the saving significance of the cross and the eternal hope of the resurrection.

Questions of Application

Review the different metaphors or views (but try not to get bogged down in complexities!).

1) Which metaphors do you find most helpful to understand what Jesus did for you on the cross?

2) Do you feel there’s anything that you’re not allowed to question?

3) Have you ever experienced any of the potential consequences that Chris outlined of focusing strongly on the penal substitution approach to atonement?

4) Can we entertain metaphors other than penal subsitutionary atonement without compromising the gospel?