The Doctrine of the Atonement
To Christians, the Doctrine of the Atonement refers to the reconciliation of God and humans that is said to have occurred as a result of the redemptive life and death of Jesus. Jesus' death is said to have "removed the sins of the world."
The Atonement story raises a question about whether or not Jesus and his followers expected, planned, or intended for Jesus to die when he did. It appears as though his followers had to quickly put a spin on his death, trying to make it look like he was supposed to die all along. What's the reason for saying this? The gospels record Jesus as being able to forgive men their sins before he died on the cross (Matthew 9:5,6 "...Son of man hath authority on earth to forgive sins..."), which means that the death of Jesus on the cross was not needed for sins to be forgiven by God. John (20:23) extends this power to the disciples. But if certain men can forgive sins, there was no need for Jesus to have died and no reason for blood to have been shed or sacrifice to be made. God obviously must have intended all sin to be forgivable, just as Catholic priests can declare sins forgiven (and as was once the practice of Jewish priests).
Reading theological history, it appears that the doctrines of Original Sin and the Atonement can be traced to Paul (see book of Romans) rather than to Genesis or Jesus, though there are ambiguous references in the gospels of Mark and John. The Doctrine of the Atonement has gone through a few incarnations. For the first thousand years of Christianity, the accepted classical doctrine was the one introduced by Origen around the year 200 CE. The teaching was that after the fall of Adam and Eve, Satan acquired the rights to man's souls and Jesus was paid as a ransom by God to acquire back the souls. An elaboration of this doctrine by Sts. Athanasius, Ambrose, and Augustine was added: though Satan had gained control of the souls of all men and women due to the sin, God struck a bargain with Satan - the soul of Jesus for the souls of all humankind. Satan agreed, not knowing that Jesus was the Son of God. When Jesus' soul was handed over to Satan, he could not hold onto it because it was divine. So Satan ended up empty-handed. Thus, God is a trickster, who played a "sting" on Satan. Why would God even need to do this?
Since God being a trickster was not a comfortable image for Christians, two new interpretations were put forward in the 11th century. The one that held sway was that of St. Anselm: man owed complete obedience to God; hence, all the good that man can do is already owed to God. However, beginning with Adam, man transgressed God's laws and thus dishonored him. Anselm asked, if man already owes to God all the good man can ever generate, how can God be satisfied for their transgressions? God can't simply forgive men their sins, for then his honor and prestige would be suspect; so the debt must be repaid. The only way it can be repaid is through the atonement of a sinless man, who does not owe God anything from the beginning. Thus, God sent his Son, incarnate as a human, to offer himself as a sacrifice for what is owed. Only then could the sins of men be forgiven and the honor and prestige of God kept intact.
Anselm's portrayal of the whole doctrine seems inane; God, as creator and supreme being, loses no prestige or honor by forgiving sins. Forgiving would instead show compassion and strength. This doctrine is an invention by man (Jesus never talked about original sin), and appears to depict God as suffering from the sin of pride.
The Doctrine of the Atonement does not make sense for the following reasons:
<NEXT>
