Evil pt. 2

Most of the quotes in this post from N.T. Wright's book on evil center around what Wright argues is God's ultimate solution to evil, the crucified savior. Wright's own view of understanding the atonement, is the Christus Victor view, that has strong historical roots in such people as Martin Luther and into the modern era of biblical scholarship as Gustaf Aulen.

But when we ask the question, Why did Jesus die? with an eye to the deeper issue of why, in the purposes of God, Jesus might have had to die, we move from historical analysis of events and motivations to a theological account of what God decided to do about evil. That, ultimately, is what theories of "the atonement" are all about. p. 75

The Gospels tell the story of how the evil in the world--political, social, personal, moral, emotional--reached its height, and how God's long-term plan for Israel (and for himself!) finally came to its climax. They tell both of these stories in--and as--the story of how Jesus of Nazareth announced God's kingdom and went to his violent death.  p. 79

We realize with a start that he has been obedient to the Israel-vocation which he had himself announced in the bracing and so often misunderstood Sermon on the Mount. He had turned the other cheek. He had picked up the Roman cross and gone the second mile. He was set up on the hill, unable to be hidden. He was acting as Israel, the light of the world, on behalf of the Israel that had embraced the pagan darkness. p. 85-86

This (the last supper with his disciples) was Jesus' own chosen way of expressing and explaining to his followers, then and ever since, what his death was all about. It wasn't a theory, we note, but an action (a warning to all atonement theorists ever since, and perhaps and indication of why the church has never incorporated a specific defining clause about the atonement in its great creeds). Perhaps, after all, atonement is at its deepest level something that happens, so that to reduce it to a proposition to which one can give mental assent is a mistake at a deep level. p.91

This, the Evangelists are saying to us, is what "the kingdom of God" means: neither "going to heaven when you die" nor "a new way of ordering earthly political reality" but something which includes both but goes way beyond them. p.93

No, all theories of atonement adequate to the task must include both a backward look (seeing the guilt, sin and shame of all previous generations heaped up on the cross) and a forward dimension, the promise that what God accomplished on Calvary will be fully and finally implemented. p. 96