Theological interpretations of the salvific work of God in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ has taken on several diverse emphases: Christ as victor over sin and death, vicarious sacrifice as substitutionary atonement, and exemplar of love revealing in each a claim to the benevolent grace of God. Being the creator of the world and all that is in it, God did not abandon the work of creation to it’s own naturalist evolution or destruction. Rather, God created all that was and declared it good, thus God is interested in creation and human beings whose fellowship is desired by God. Investing humans with free will God allowed choice however irresistible pure love is.
Jesus saves appears on bumper stickers and movie billboards. The Passion by Mel Gibson exaggerated the meritorious suffering and power of the blood of the horrific death of Jesus on the cross without much emphasis on the empty tomb and the risen Christ. If we separate the passion and death from the resurrection we are left with only part of the revelation of God made in and through Jesus. The death on a cross is not something the Father imposes on a submissive son, as if Jesus were a new sacrificial lamb offered in the season of Passover. The synoptic Gospels all refer to Jesus death on the cross as a sacrifice for sin, place the event at Passover, and understand that a new covenant or relationship between God and humanity was thereby achieved. What is less evident in the often quoted scriptures is how the Christian church is first and foremost informed by the resurrection and holds that Jesus is the full revelation of God, because Jesus is both divine and human, the second person of the Trinity. Without an intentional thought process that keeps Christology fully in view and the doctrine of the Trinity in which we assert that the three persons, while displaying discrete attributes nevertheless are of one substance. Therefore, any act of any one member of the Trinity is an act of all members of the Trinity. An act by the Son is an act of the Father and the Spirit. The act of the divine nature of Jesus cannot be separated from the actions of the human nature. Christian theology has only two dogmas: Christology and Trinity. Through these two hermeneutics, salvation history can be more clearly comprehended.
Atonement refers to the activity of God the Father in the Son through the Holy Spirit that overcomes the bondage or desire or pride or dislocation or estrangement or alienation or evil or limitation that separates humanity from God. Salvation means to rescue or protect. Redemption means to buy back or regain possession of something through making a payment. Reconciliation refers to reuniting, returning a relationship to harmony. (p15) Taking the three predominant models of salvation: Christus victor, substitutionary sacrifice and moral exemplar Sherman links the accomplishments (each theory) with the various roles of Christ as king, priest, and prophet. These roles are embedded in the Old Testament canon and have been traditionally ascribed to Jesus in New Testament writings. Since Trinitarian theology posits one God in three persons, wherein the “external works of the Trinity are undivided”. Therefore, Sherman argues it would be wrong to argue one model of the atonement over or in exclusion of the other two, if the role of Jesus as king can be seen as victor, Jesus as sacrifice as his priestly office, and moral exemplar expressed as a prophet. We can clearly identify the threefold nature of God’s work in this passage from Hebrews 10:12-16.
“But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, ‘he sat down at the right hand of God’ and since then has been waiting ‘until his enemies would be made a footstool for his feet,’ for by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us, for after saying ‘This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord; I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds…”
Hebrews is a favored source text for the “priestly” and “sacrificial” understanding of Christ’s atoning work. The text not only points to the three persons and their interrelated work in reconciling a separated humanity, but it links that work with the three offices, priest, king, and prophet.
Person Father Son Spirit
Messianic Office King Priest Prophet
NT titles Lord, King High Priest prophet
Shepherd Lamb of God Teacher
Atonement theory Christus victor Vicarious sacrifice Empowering
exemplar
NT view Captive to sin Not honoring God Ignorance
Principalities corrupting creation Weakness
Power of Satan Human sin Being Lost
As Christians we understand God in Trinitarian terms. When we pray in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, we are identifying a very precise and particular way the Being whom we worship and proclaim. This is the way we are incorporated into the Christian community in baptism: in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
Karl Rahner a Roman Catholic theologian refers to the ‘economic trinity’ and the ‘immanent trinity’ by which he means the physical, historical death and resurrection of Jesus as the economy of God’s three person action in salvation and the immanent trinity as the way the Godhead exists as three persons, intertwined as a Celtic knot. Another way to articulate the economic trinity is to understand that God the Father was active in the history of Israel as a covenanted people, that the Christ event opened a new covenant and the Spirit moved the first believers to witness their belief, write the gospels, and begin the church as we have received it. It is also true for us that God is Trinitarian because that is how we have experienced God. We speak of the immanent Trinity only because of what we understand God to have accomplished in the life and resurrection of Jesus. I must however hasten to add that orthodox belief insists that the economic and immanent Trinities are not separable, but are distinct. Sherman offers this approach: “the economic reveals the immanent, while the immanent is the basis for the economic.” (p61) It is wrong to think of a time of the father, a separate season of the son and another for the spirit. That would be the heresy of Modalism. Rather, the Father, Son, and Spirit are always involved in all actions of any one member, as the three are always a unity, never separate. We speak of creation as an act of the Father, redemption primarily by the Son, and sanctification by the Holy Spirit. Each person of the Triune God appropriates the act we identify as that of the Father or Son, so that we do not think each of the three are interchangeable.
We speak of Jesus as the Christ, the anointed of God. The gospels tell us that at the baptism of Jesus a voice from heaven declared, this is my son, the beloved, listen to him. As the voice spoke a dove descended and alighted on Jesus. Christian interpretation of this scene is that the voice is that of the Father and the dove represents the Spirit. Jesus is the son, so we have all three involved. The Old Testament suggests that anointing served as the inaugural sign for three “offices”, that of prophet, priest, and king (1 Kgs 19:16; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 15:1). As early as the writings of Eusebius in 324-325, the “threefold office” of Jesus included these same titles in order to assert that the former priests, prophets and kings were only a foreshadowing of the “only true Christ of God”. Thomas Aquinas mentioned the threefold office in his Summa Theologica: “one is a lawgiver, another is a priest, another is a king; but all these concur in Christ as the fount of all grace.”
Martin Bucer (1491-1551) portrayed Christ in terms of this threefold office. “Just as they used to anoint kings, priests and prophets to institute them in their offices, so now Christ is king of kings, highest priest, and chief of the prophets. He does not rule in the manner of an external empire, he does not sacrifice with brute beasts; he does not teach and admonish only with an external voice. Rather by the Holy Spirit he directs minds and wills in the way of eternal salvation; by the Spirit he offered himself as an expiatory sacrifice for us, so that we too might become an acceptable offering to God; and by the same Spirit he teaches and admonishes, in order that hose destined for his kingdom may be made righteous, holy, and blessed in all things.” (p65)
Reformed theologians have understood the threefold office as mediatorial. The king mediated the sovereignty of God, the priest mediated the holiness and forgiveness of God, and the prophet mediated the truth and commands of God. As Christians we understand that Jesus is a unique mediator of God’s will and work, and the primary authority of the church. It is also worth noting that each of these offices as depicted in the Old Testament is transformed in the way Jesus enacts the same office.
This is not a lecture on the trinity, but should you wish to look at a few verses of Scripture you will notice that there is a proto-trinitarian understanding of God although you will not find the term “trinity” in the New Testament canon of scripture. Matt 28:19 the great commission; 2 Cor 13:14; Eph 4:4-6; opening salutation of 1 and 2 Peter, 1 John 1:1-3, 13-15; Heb 3:3b-4; 9:14; 10:11-18; Rom 15:30; 2 Cor 1:21-22, 1 Thess 5:16-19; Eph 5:18b-20; Rom 8:14-17 and 8:9-11; Acts 2; Luke 24:44-49; John 14:25-26, but enlarged by the farewell address in John 13-15).
Given that the gospel reading for the first Sunday in Lent was matt 4:1ff in which Jesus is driven into the wilderness and tempted to abuse his divine power, we can see the messianic role of Jesus as the son in this exchange. Indeed one interpretation is to see the three temptations as opposing the three offices, king, priest, and prophet (even though this is a minority opinion among commentators). The temptation to turn stones into bread, reflects the manna in the wilderness (Exod 16) the food Elijah gave the widow and her son (1 Kg 17) and the Deut 8:3 quotation: man shall not live by bread alone. Elijah and Moses are prophets! Next the devil takes Jesus to the pinnacle of the temple – you know where the priests’ work. Levites and the priests of the order of Aaron were to perform the sacrifice at the altar, to intercede for the people, and to be an intermediary with God. The role Jesus as priest takes on is to be himself the sacrifice, and the intercessor for us. The third temptation is of sovereignty in earthly realms. Jesus is inaugurating the kingdom of God to humanity. Paul’s notion is reflected as a condition in which the world is in bondage to oppressive powers and principalities and Christ as the victor over sin and death. In the exchange with Pilate, Jesus testifies, his kingdom is not of this world, but his cross will bear the title, “king of the Jews”.
Christ the King:
In the “Christological hymn” of Phil 2: “God also highly exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, in heaven and on earth and under the earth and every tongue should confess that Jeus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” In Hebrews 1:3, “the son is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being, who sustains all things by his powerful word, and who sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.” 1 Cor. 15:23-28 reads, “Christ, the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, after he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death…..so that God may be all in all.” The Son is king, but his royal office and work are exercised on behalf of the One in three. All four Gospels portray Jesus entry into Jerusalem on our Palm Sunday as having royal implications. All four associate the title, “King of the Jews” with Jesus trial before Pilate. What we see, post-resurrection transcends our previous impressions of the role of king. The New Testament ascribe to Jesus not just the title but also sovereign and triumphant activity. He signals his rank by what he does. He is able to exorcise demons, command nature e.g. walking on water, calming the storm, healing illness, and raise the dead.
According to Old Testament accounts, kings were chosen of God, anointed by a prophet, for the work of order within the community: for peace, security and well-being. Few were faithful to the task. Prophets consistently spoke truth to power, calling the kings of Israel to reform their corrupt ways and return to righteousness practices. All the kings of Israel were to be obedient to Yahweh (1 Kg 2:3). The king was to be a guardian of justice, a defender of widows and orphans (2 Sam 14:4-11) and the corrector of injustice (2 Sam 12:1-6). The prophets reproach each king in turn when they fail in these duties (Isa 3:13-15; Jer 23:1-4, 33:14-17; Ezek 34:1-16, 23-31.) Finally, the kings lineage from David forward would in time yield the promised one of God, the Messiah. With time, the expectations took on an eschatological vision, the Davidic messiah would restore the nation of Israel, the paradise on earth, where the people of God were liberated from the oppressors and restored to their chosen status (in physical earthly terms).
Christ’s actions redefined the notions of kingship and victory. Through parables and teachings, Jesus described the kingdom of God, and consistently it is an inversion of the Hebrew understanding. The reign that Christ announces belongs not to the powerful but to the poor (Matt 5:3), the poor in spirit (Luke 6:20) and those persecuted for righteousness sake (Matt 5:10). Those who enter this kingdom do so as a little child, and are ‘born again’ from above (Luke18:17, John 3:3). The kingdom of heaven that is preached by Jesus undermines the power structures of this world. It does not arrive by force of arms, or military might, or political power or financial exploitation. Indeed, the kingdom Christ inaugurates “is not of this world” (John 18:36). Paul summarizes the kingdom of God as known in the new order of Jesus Christ thus: “for I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom 8:37-39).
Christ’s victory gives us identity and meaning. We are all sinners and experience a sense of separation from God. We do not do all that we can to love God and our neighbors: some of our actions are hurtful and harmful, some are done on our behalf, some are things we could have done and have failed to do, as the general confession shapes our condition. We repent and turn to God who is willing to forgive and restore us in relationship with God. We receive absolution, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit – while the priest makes the sign of the cross above us – and according to our personal piety, we make the sign of the cross in response. It is important that we see the work of Christ not as an opportunity for an individual to be “saved” but to establish a new people, to open a new era in history and a new creation. Christ’s victory reveals and inaugurates this reign.
It does not mean that war with evil is over. As members of the living body of Christ in our time, we are intended, called to be active participants in the work Christ began in his life and ministry. We are set free from the bondage of sin and freed to serve Christ in this world. The death and resurrection reveal and effect the freedom that being reconciled with God conveys. We are given the gift by grace to be used in service to others and to glorify God. We are to live in the same humility, compassion, benevolence and service toward humanity that Jesus demonstrated in his earthly ministry. We are not called as individuals to a special status with God in order to escape the world. We are called into a new community, to embody God’s reign in our lives, in our communities, in our world.
In North American culture we are inclined to privilege autonomous individualism, as a free moral agent, able to choose our own destiny. This mindset is at odds with the teaching and posture of Jesus. We think that the more freedom and opportunity we have the more blessed we are. What have we done with our freedom to buy more things while millions starve? In our competitive and image-driven culture, many individuals suffer isolation, fear of not measuring up to the “norms” of not being good enough. God has the final word about our self-worth.
Christ as king is a person, not an abstract concept or impersonal source/force. Knowing whose you are, knowing you belong to Jesus Christ makes a difference. In the despotic and tyrannical reign of Hitler, Dietrich Bonhoeffer stood against the forces of evil for what he believed being of Christ meant for a human being in those days. His faith was strong enough to see that comfort, safety, and personal pleasure is not the end of the story in human existence. He knew that even though he might lose his life, there was more life on the other side of the grave, because of the resurrection of Jesus. Being in Christ liberates us from the fear of death and helps us place our priorities in line with the teachings of Jesus. Another example is Archbishop Romero of San Salvador and members of the grassroots communities persecuted by the dictator. Speaking the truth to power got Romero shot while he was celebrating mass at the altar.
We as Christians are members of a body with allegiance to the lordship of Christ. This is not an individual or abstract idea. We are part of a body of believers, a group of persons called the body of Christ (the church). We are called by Christ to mutual support, to support one another, and to work together in service to Christ. Every Sunday we remember whose we are as we gather and participate in a foretaste of the eschatological banquet with our risen Lord, with brothers and sisters in Christ.
Christ the Priest:
Scripture offers many affirmations of the role of Jesus as priest. Hebrews is full of the imagery e.g. Heb 7:26-37), Rom 3:24-25, matt 26:27-28, Eph 5;2, John 2:19, 21, 1 John 4:10. The narrative of the New Testament points to the priestly role of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. John refers to the Passover lamb sacrified as in the tradition of the Exodus (Exod 12:1ff). Covenants were ratified with a sacrificial ritual (Gen 15:7-21, Exod 24:3-8). The power of blood was associated with life. But we should not stop with this image because the New Testament interprets Christ’s sacrifice in multiple ways that I think are intended to be complementary and not exclusive. The temple and its cult of atoning sacrifices no doubt influenced the imagery in the New Testament’s understanding. Human sinfulness and estrangement from God are common human experiences, but God does not leave us to this alienation. Christ’s work is reconciliation. The sacrifice is not that of a bully God extracting a patricidal price, rather, it is a divine gift enabling what humans cannot do on their own. The New Testament calls this redemption, reconciliation, forgiveness of sins, restoration with God, establishing peace. God action is motivated by love, righteousness and grace. The initiative is God’s the response is ours. Peter and paul speak about Christians presenting themselves as living sacrifice for the work of the Spirit of God, as being open as instruments of God’s work of reconciliation.
In Matt 26:28, mark 14:24, and Luke 22:20 the new covenant between humanity and God is described in terms of the blood of Jesus Christ (“this is my blood of the new covenant”). The synoptic Gospels portray the Last supper as a Passover meal. Again this understanding underscores the sacrifice image in which, Christ is the paschal lamb. John’s gospel is more explicit, timing the death of Jesus as the “day of preparation” when the lambs would have been slaughtered in the temple. Remember also that in John’s Gospel in chapter one, Jesus is called the “Lamb of God” (Jn 1:29). Paul also refers to the paschal lamb as Christ (1 Cor 5:6-8). Other images are present in scripture: that of the cultic community sacrifice of sending an animal bearing the sins of the people away from the town into the wilderness, as a substitutionary atonement. This was the practice on the Day of Atonement and was performed by the priest, for the people.
In our baptismal liturgy we read from I Cor 15 where Paul says we are buried with Christ and raised with Christ to new life…we are dead to sin and alive to God in Christ. The operative word here is “in Christ” a phrase that has lost much of its significance since the time of Paul. The sacraments remind us that we are members of Christ’s body, that we have the benefits of his death and resurrection, and that we live according to the Spirit. We are beneficiaries of his vicarious sacrifice, made “in our place”, not only as a sin offering but as a new paschal lamb.
In the Old Testament the priest was the mediator with God for the covenant people. The priest was to help those who committed offenses, be restored with the community. They were to facilitate reconciliation and restoration in the community. Sacrifices in Old Testament theology and practice was threefold: offerings of gifts or tributes to God (firstfruits), as a communal meal e.g. forging or affirming a new covenant, and for expiation, e.g. the scapegoat ritual of the Day of Atonement.
The New Testament retains some of the concepts (see Heb 9:23-26), Jesus takes human flesh upon himself, offers his lifeblood for our expiation, and makes reconciliation of humanity with God a new creation. Taking our guilt upon himself it is carried away and we can begin anew. These concepts are best understood when we see our lives in community.
Christ’s role as priest transformed the Old Testament expectations. Remember that the Hebrews understood sacrifice in three ways: as first offering/tribute, as satisfaction for sin (atonement), and as communal meal. Jesus according to Luke 2:22 is dedicated in the temple as the first born (analogous to first fruits). The idea that life is a gift is honored and further that the only begotten Son of God offers a self-sacrifice means God offers the sacrifice. The one who received the sacrifice now offers it. As the first born beloved Son, Christ expands access to God by his sacrifice on the cross (Rom 8:29; Heb 12:23) and as the firstborn from the dead he offers new life to others (1 Cor 15:20-22, 2 Thess. 2:13-14; Acts 26:22-23). Paul compares Adam and Christ in Rom 5 and 1 Cor 15. Paul’s point is that in Christ we find a new way of being human; free of the guilt and debt of sin we are free to serve Christ in this world, working to advance the kingdom of God. “Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we will also bear the image of the man of heaven” (1 Cor 15:49).
Christ as priest also fulfills and transforms the sacrifice understood as communal meal shared with God for the purpose of ratifying a contract. In Lev 21:6 it is the worshipper who supplies the meal for God by way of animal sacrifice. In the context of Christ, the meal offered to all is his body and blood; the priest role of Jesus offers himself as the food (1 Cor 11:23-26, Mark 14:22-24; Matt 26:26-28, Luke 22:14-20). The focus shifts from the action of the worshipper to the graciousness of the divine act. In Christ we have a new relationship to God and to one another. The liturgical meal is a sign and symbol of a new community in Christ. Christ offers his body, that we may dwell in him and he in us.
Christ as priest also transforms how we understand sacrifice for expiation. The consequences of sin is separation from God. Due to our sinful condition we fall short of the purposes and will of God. Our sin is also an assault against all of God’s creation. We believe that God has mercy and compassion for our situation and intervenes to do for us what we cannot do for ourselves. God is compassionate in acting for us. We might say that sin dishonors God and he is offended but that view would fall far short of the divinity we worship. We do not have a god made in our image, rather we are made in the image of God.
In the vicarious suffering or substitutionary atonement model of Anselm, God is not free to ignore or simply excuse a sin against the creation, which would be like denying the scope of evil, thus more than simple forgiveness is needed. One way to get around the dilemma is to avoid thinking of God in merely legal terms of justice and think instead of a dynamic narrative. God does not have to rescue us but out of divine love chooses to do so.
In Christ’s priestly sacrifice, God remedies humanities’ situation, supplying himself as the scapegoat as it were in the atonement praxis. The sacrifice of Christ’s body and blood achieves more than reinstatement. We are made members of a new creation, a new community, a new order of being. The biblical understanding of Christ’s sacrifice is not only a vicarious expiation or punishment for sin, but a positive intervention of God as man for humanity’s transformation.
Feminist scholars have taken grave exception to the vicarious sacrifice model because of the psychological impact the “virtue of suffering” has on women and children in cases of mistreatment and abuse. One corrective possible answer to their criticism is to say, Christ is THE sacrifice which means no other such sacrifice is needed or appropriate. It is not appropriate for Christians to pretend that any sacrifice they make is adding in any way to what God has already done on our behalf. The sacrifice Christ made was not something a human being does to placate an angry God, but, it is something a gracious and forgiving God does to subvert human manipulation and self-righteous violence. Mary Daly argues that imitation of this savior is exactly what men in power desire for women: “The qualities that Christianity idealizes, especially for women, are also those of a victim: sacrificial love, passive acceptance of suffering, humility, meekness, etc. Since these are the qualities idealized in Jesus, ‘who died for our sins,’ his functioning as a model reinforces the scapegoat syndrome for women.” Clearly some people have understood that the image of Christ on the cross communicates a message that suffering is redemptive. The error is that we do not by suffering save the world. We may suffer by giving away part of what we have so that others have enough, but we do not often do so to the point of not having what we need. We can work in Christ for the ongoing work of God’s kingdom, which is a very different thing than to say we can save the world by suffering. The second mistake is to see the cross as something the Father imposed on the Son, rather than the biblical testimony that the Son willingly accepted this role. The concept of the Trinity is again helpful. The sacrifice is made by the whole Triune God, through the person of Jesus, the second person of the Trinity.
Finally, remembering that all persons of the Trinity act in unity, we know that the Son’s sacrifice is an offering of the whole Godhead, for the benefit of humanity collectively, expressed metaphorically to evoke an awareness on our part of God’s grace. It is more correct to say that God the Father through his loving and righteous will allows God the Son to freely take on flesh by means of God the Spirit to become Christ the priest and sacrifice, to atone for human sin and restore creation to right relation with God. One then sees it is the Son “who though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found inhuman form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death – even death on a cross” (Phil. 2:6-8).
The “once and for all” character of Christ’s sacrifice negates any need of further human sacrifice. Christians may follow the example of Christ into hostile situations as Archbishop Romero did and die while standing for justice, but faithful discipleship does not require intentional sacrifice. The story of Christ’s sacrifice should elicit from us a response but it does not require repeated sacrifice. Christ as priest continues in the work of intercessor within the Godhead. The lesson we might draw from this model of Christ the priest making the sacrifice for humanity is to see in his atoning death on the cross a new way to respond to sin and injustice. Rather than responding by “settling accounts” we have a model of forgiveness. Think about the Truth and Reconciliation Commission led by Desmond Tutu in South Africa in dealing with the injustices of the apartheid era.
Christ’s priestly sacrifice is reflected in our liturgy. Christ’s sacrifice undergirds baptism “for the forgiveness of sins”; it enables prayers of confession and ministerial words of assuring God’s forgiving grace; it makes passing the peace possible, and it’s once and for all character invites us and reaffirms us in the Holy Eucharist (p218).
Christ the Prophet:
At Jesus conception the Spirit is the agent of the event. The Spirit descends on Jesus in his baptism and on the cross, Jesus yields his Spirit. The reason seeing the Spirit active in the mission and ministry of Jesus is important is in relationship to how the prophets were anointed by the Spirit. Consider the reading from the Prophet Isaiah when Jesus began his public ministry (Luke 4: 1-4): “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor…”.
The New testament sketches Jesus’ prophetic office in many ways. He is called, rabbi or teacher, he teaches with authority, he holds people accountable to God’s will as expressed in the Law, he proclaims the gospel, he announcing the coming of the kingdom of heaven. He brings sight to the blind, and reveals divine truth. As prophet, Jesus is God’s living and life-giving Word, the teacher of truth, and he exemplifies the prophetic profile within Israel’s history and tradition (Matt 21;10-11, 45-46, Mk 6:14-16, Luke 7:12-16a, 24:18-19, John 4:19, 6;14). The gospels show also that Christ exceeds the prophetic office e.g. in the transfiguration narrative. From the cloud the voice declares, “This is my beloved son; listen to him.” Like Moses, Jesus ascends the holy mountain, the sense of God’s presence is there, with dazzling white clothing, the cloud, the voice. He is joined by the greatest of prophets, Moses and Elijah.
In answer to Jesus’ question, “Who do people say that I am?” Peter answered, “You are the Messiah” (Matt 16:13-16, Mk 8:27-30, Luke 9:18-20). One way to understand how the prophetic role and Messianic role merge is in Jesus’ teaching function. The crowds recognized the authority of his teaching, and so did the Pharisees. Jesus’ call for repentance and clarification of the true meaning of the law and prophets is a prophet’s role. Whenever the chosen people betrayed its obligations to God, the prophets summoned them back to faithfulness. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says, “not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished” (Matt 5;18). Jesus departed from the tradition by associating with sinners, outcasts and the unclean. He broke the law in healing on the Sabbath. He taught that the law was a guideline and right relation with God required a deeper understanding and enactment. Jesus is not just delivering a message, he is the message. The kingdom is not merely proclaimed but is inaugurated!
Jesus tells the parables of the wicked tenants, the Laborers in the Vineyard and the Prodigal Son in order to point to a new reality and establish a new norm. Paul is transformed from a zealous Jew to a disciple and apostle. Paul declares that Christ crucified reveals the power and wisdom of God, even as it turns on its head all the wisdom, experience, and common sense of the world (1 Cor 1:26-31, 2:1-16, 3:18-19).
In the Old Testament, the office of prophet served as a messenger of God to the people. Through Moses the law was given to shape community norms and relations between God and mankind. Through Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos and Hosea God reinforces the covenant relationship with the people. Some of the prophets were charismatic figures who were very persuasive. Some were court officials, others served in the religious cult, and in various ways served an intermediary role. As messengers of God, prophets were teachers, counselors, and advocates. They instructed, rebuked, encouraged, by divine authority. Amos: “thus says the Lord: for three transgressions of Israel and for four, I will not revoke the punishment; because they sell the righteous for silver, and the needy for a pair of sandals – they who trample the head of the poor into the dust …(Amos 2:6-8). They have a global scope as well, consider Isa and Micah’s vision of a reign of peace and justice (Isaiah 2:3-4; Mic 4:1-4). Joel declares “the Spirit will be poured out on all flesh” (Joel 2:28-29). The dead will have new life (Ezek. 37:11-14).
Christ’s redefinition of a prophet. In the gospels the disciples call Jesus Lord. Some call him teacher or rabbi. The Letter to the Hebrews: “Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son.” This verse suggests a continuity in God’s consistent messages over time even as it gives a special role and character to the Son. In the scene of Jesus reading from the scroll of Isaiah in the temple in Nazareth, when he has finished reading, Jesus said, today this prophecy has been fulfilled within your hearing. Jesus is referring to himself not only as prophet but as the prophecy. This means that what Jesus does reflects who Jesus is. It is not just a message of words, but of deeds and revelation. Jesus is the one conceived by the Spirit, commissioned by the Spirit, and is present in time and space as the living truth, the living Word, of God.
Pentecost is anticipated in the Gospel narratives by the way Jesus sent out the disciples to preach, heal, and teach. The disciples have insight, even when it is partial, it is often profound, e.g. Peter’s acknowledgment that Jesus is the Messiah. In John’s Gospel we have a direct assertion in line with this perspective; “I have said these things to you while I am still with you. But the Advocate, the Holy spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said to you” (John 14:25-26).
Paul teaches in his letter to the Romans (7) we have died to the law, but live in Christ through our dying and rising with him in Baptism. We are able to believe and live in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. We should be careful here, and understand that Paul means that we are not excused from the law per se but that we live in Christ, according to his example and remember Jesus did not ignore the value of the law but disagreed with the legalistic interpretations in practice. Jesus reinforced the necessity to love God with heart, soul, and mind and to love our neighbor as ourselves. In Christ we are given the Spirit to have the “law written on our hearts.”
Peter Abelard (1079-1142) posted the moral exemplar model of the atonement, as an alternative to Anselm’s “substitutionary atonement” view. The change in focus was intended to avoid seeing the death of the Son as somehow causing a change in God. The intent of the exemplar model was to evoke a reaction from humanity in response to the sacrifice of the Son: a transformation of human hearts. Abelard wants to shift our reaction from fear to gratitude. The model seeks to have human beings see the salvific event as Christ’s self-sacrificial love that awakens love in our hearts and inspires faith.
So the threefold office of king, priest, and prophet each has a part in the ongoing revelation of God in Christ. Christ the king’s work reclaimed creation from sin’s effect; Christ’s Priestly work served to establish a free and open present, by reclaiming the relationship between humanity and God; while God the Prophet’s work proclaims and gives the power of the Spirit to the faithful to continue the work for all humanity and all creation (p250-1). Christ the Prophet proclaimed and revealed the truth. Christ the Prophet continues a life-changing proclamation of the truth through the testimony of the Holy Spirit, calling us by name.
The revelation of Christ allows us to see things in a new way. Like the Copernican Revolution, or Darwin’s theory of evolution or Einstein’s theory of relativity, these universe claims about nature were not invented de novo, nor were they not in operation throughout human history, but with scientific articulation of these truths change our understanding of the natural world. In similar fashion, Christ shifts our understanding of God. In Christian tradition, it is the work of the Holy Spirit to guide our transformation in faith, to live “in Christ”.
Living in Christ will not protect us from the challenges and tragedies of life, but it will give us a sense of something larger than ourselves. It will enlarge the framework of meaning and give us a vision of the distant horizon in God. The image of Christ the prophet makes it clear that god cares for each of us in our particularity. We are not just members of the body, we are adopted sons and daughters. God’s love and care for each of us in a personal and particular way is demonstrated in the human-divine person of the Son. The loving Father, full of grace, forgiving, merciful invites us home. The Spirit urges us to accept the gift. The Son presents it to us!
Conclusion: The divine work of making “at-one-ment” takes diverse forms because human beings are separated from God is different ways. Each aspect of the salvific work of God is part of the Gospel narrative. The unity of Christ is part of the Triune nature of God. The “Trinitarian Theology of Atonement” connects the God whom the church worships, invokes, and petitions with what it is that this God actually accomplishes for the reconciliation and restoration of the world. Without such a recognition of who God truly is and what he has done and continues to do, the church’s sacraments will remain only human ceremonies, her prayer sonly human pleadings, her preaching only human opinion and exhortation, her consolation only wishful thinking, and her service only human moralism and social work. But with the recognition of God’s saving work in Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit, the church learns the world’s God-given origin and end, and her own true purpose in fulfilling God’s commission.” (279)
King, Priest and Prophet: A Trinitarian Theology of Atonement
Robert Sherman, T & T Clark International, NY, 2004.