‘Jesus died for our sins’what do we mean?

A comprehensive look at the death of Jesus and what it means for us.

ByFr. Bosco Gali

Two great celebrations for us?

• There are two great celebrations for us Christians:

• 1. Christmas• 2. Easter• Our whole liturgical years revolves around

them• But in between these two, just before Easter is

the good Friday. The day of his death.

On Good Friday:

• We venerate the cross• We meditate on his passion and suffering and

death• We do make a collection for the Holy Land

where Jesus suffered,• But……………….• We seldom take time to reflect on the death

of Jesus.

Death of the Messiah!

• We often take it for granted• That Jesus died for our sins• He ransomed us from death• He atoned for our sins• We are purchased by the blood the of the lamb and

so on and so forth• But if I ask you, • To whom did he pay the ransom?• From who did he purchase us?

• We got no answers

• People down the ages struggled to understand the death of the Messiah

• It has been my struggle too…….

• How to understand the death of Christ?

• What do we mean when we say Jesus died for our sins? How does the death of Christ forgive my sins?

Outline of the talk• First we will see what the Scriptures say about

the death of Christ– The old testament prophecies about the death of

the Messiah– Jesus’ own predictions about his death and its

purpose– Apostles interpretation of death of Christ, in their

initial kerygma– Death of Christ as understood by Paul and Letter

to Hebrews

• Based on the scripture, different interpretations and theories of the purpose of the death of Christ

• Starting from first century to present day

• We also examine the veracity of each theory

• And come to our own conclusion of how to understand and interpret the death of Christ.

Death of the Messiah in Old Testament

• Even though there are many quotations used from Old testament

• By the evangelists when they were describing about the passion of Christ, especially from psalms, Jeremiah, Micah and Zachariah etc.

• One prophet who clearly prophesies about the suffering and death of the messiah is prophet Isaiah

The Suffering and Death of the Messiah in Is 50-53

• Isaiah chapters 50 through 53 refer to Jesus Christ as what has been called– “the Suffering Messiah”– or “the Suffering Servant.”

• Indeed those four chapters are filled with references to the mistreatment and horrible death of Jesus Christ on a cross of wood.

• What is most amazing about this portion of Isaiah's book is

• the details concerning the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ —

• details we can easily read of in the Gospels, • all four of which give glimpses into the death

of the Lord.

• From a purely human and physical standpoint, it is a brutal picture.

• Isaiah 50:6 tells the account of a Messiah who would be brutally — yet willingly — beaten about the face and back, mocked and humiliated, have his beard pulled out, and spit upon:

• “I offered my back to those who beat me and my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard. I did not hide my face from mockery and spitting.”

• Later, in chapter 52, Isaiah records that the physical abuse and beating of the Messiah would be so severe that,“many were amazed when they saw him.

• His face was so disfigured he seemed hardly human, and from his appearance, one would scarcely know he was a man” (52:14).

• Isaiah tells us that all these things would happen to the Messiah despite the fact that he was innocent of any crime (Isaiah 53:9),

• despite the fact that he said nothing to his accusers (53:7).

• He would suffer great sorrow and grief (53:3),

• would be oppressed and afflicted (53:7),

• and would be thought of as cursed by God (53:4).

• But all of these things didn't happen to the Messiah Jesus Christ for nothing.

• Isaiah explains that these things happened – so that each and every one of us who put our faith

in him can be healed, saved, and forgiven:

• “it was the Lord's good plan to crush him and cause him grief. Yet when his life is made an offering for sin, he will have many descendants” (Isaiah 53:10).

Jesus on his death• Jesus was well aware that he was going to die• And he often predicted about his suffering and

death and of course his rising on the third day• But with regard to the purpose of his death

• He says, "The son of man did not come to be served, but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mark 10:45 = Matt 20:28)

• This saying in Mark 10:45b intertextually evokes the Hebrew text of Isa 52:13-53:12, by which Jesus is interpreting his death as the death of the Isaian servant.

• By citing a Servant text as predictive of his execution, doubtless, Jesus intends that his hearers draw further parallels between himself and the Servant, especially in Isa 53:10-12; in particular, they are to understand that Jesus' death as an asham for the many

• Secondly, At his last Passover meal, Jesus pronounces the blessing over the bread, breaks it, distributes it and unexpectedly interprets it with reference to his own body: "This is my body (given) for you."

• To interpret foods eaten at Passover was not unusual; Jesus would have done something similar during the recitation of the Passover haggadah.

• But after the blessing of the bread and its distribution, normally nothing would be said of an interpretive nature.

• Jesus’ departure from procedure would have made an impression on those present.

• The term to sôma mou (‘my body’) is probably the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew/Aramaic gwpy ("my body") meaning "myself."’

• Jesus’ statement could be paraphrased as follows: "This bread represents the giving of myself in death for your benefit

• ." Jesus takes advantage of a place in the meal when he, as the paterfamilias, would have the attention of all those present for the meal, during the blessing said in common over the bread.

• Moreover, Jesus chooses the broken bread with which to compare himself, because it offers an appropriate metaphor for what is about to happen to him.

• The tertium comparationis is the fact that the bread is broken, i.e. destroyed, as his physical self is about to be.

• Jesus' word over the bread situated at the beginning of the main course and his word over the cup situated at the completion of the main course are a climactic parallelism.

• The word over the bread establishes that Jesus, as the eschatological paschal sacrifice, will die a expiatory death for the benefit of his disciples.

• The word over the cup builds upon this proposition, adding that this expiatory death will be the means by which the Jeremian new covenant will be realized (see New Covenant).

• Each member of the parallelism is understandable in itself, but the second member furthers the meaning of the first.

Death of Christ in Acts• After the Ascension and Pentecost, when the

disciples went out to preach• They did refer to the death of Christ as

sacrifice or expiation,• But their main proclamation was that he was

risen• Death cannot hold him• Those who were responsible for his death are

called for repentance

St. Paul on death of Christ.

• It was St. Paul who began to reflect on the death of Christ and its purpose in his epistles

• For Paul, Christ’s death was many things – – an example to be followed,– a ransom price, – a sin offering, – a pass-over sacrifice, – and an atoning sacrifice

• Death of Christ is securing the deliverance of trangressors from deadlier bondage of sin (Cf. 1 cor 6:20; 7:23; Eph 1:7; 2:13; Rom 3:24-25

Hebrews• 2:9 But we do see Jesus, who was made lower

than the angels for a little while, now crowned with glory and honour because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

• In bringing many sons and daughters to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through what he suffered.

• Hebrews 10: 11 Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.

• 12 But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God,

• 13 and since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool.

• 14 For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

Questions that arose from these?• Why couldn’t God just forgive us without the

cross? • Why did Jesus have to die, could there be

another way? • What effect does the crucifixion have on

us/God? • Why did there have to be so much

suffering/brutality? • Why is there no forgiveness without the

shedding of blood?

• Hebrews 9:22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

• Was atonement necessary because God was angry?

• Did God redirect this anger to Jesus?

• Are our sins paid for?

• Are our sins forgiven?

• Was God willing to forgive before the Atonement?

• What exactly about the blood is so “precious”?

Atonement theories

• To answer these different atonement theories were proposed by theologians

• And we are going to see few of those

The Ransom Theory

• In Mark 10:45 Jesus says that he came to give his life "as a ransom for many."

• The idea that he died in order to pay a ransom is the basis for the Ransom Theory.

• This is one of the oldest atonement theories, and during the first thousand years of Christianity,

• it was the most common explanation for why Jesus had to suffer and die.

• The early Christian scholar Origen gave one of the first detailed descriptions of this theory.

• He said that the disobedience of Adam and Eve

caused God to abandon humankind to the Devil, who then exerted his power over us.

• Later, when God decided to reconcile with us,

• he agreed to pay Satan a ransom for our release.

• The agreed-upon payment was Jesus' death on the cross.

• After the crucifixion, Satan kept his part of the bargain by releasing us from his power.

• But then God pulled a trick on him by resurrecting Jesus.

• Some later writers argued that God's trickery was justified

• because the Devil himself is so dishonest.

• Others said that Satan should have known not to ask for Jesus' death in the first place,

• and therefore got just what he deserved.

• The Ransom Theory is also called the Bargain Theory and the Classical Theory.

• It was the primary atonement theory for more than a thousand years,

• from the first century to the eleventh century, and is still accepted by some Christians.

The Satisfaction Theory• The eleventh-century scholar Saint Anselm

didn't like the Ransom Theory.

• He believed that an outlaw like the Devil had no right to exert power over humankind,

• and therefore God didn't need to pay him anything for our release.

• To replace the Ransom Theory,

• Anselm put forward another explanation known as the Satisfaction Theory (or Debt Theory).

• According to this theory,

• humankind owes a debt to God

• because we dishonoured him through our disobedience and sin.

• But his pride ( means status), as well as the need for universal justice, prevents him from simply forgiving us.

• To resolve the matter,

• Jesus volunteered to pay our debt for us by suffering and dying on the cross.

• God accepted this act of love as a full atonement,

• and thus satisfied, he then forgave us and offered us salvation.

Criticism• Some people still wonder why God didn't just

forgive us outright.

• Another criticism of this theory is that it puts Jesus in the role of a sacrificial lamb.

• In ancient times lambs and other animals were often sacrificed to pagan gods as a way to appease them.

• It was thought that the death of an animal could serve as a substitute payment for a person's sins.

• Similarly, in the Satisfaction Theory, the suffering and death of Jesus serves as a substitute payment for humankind's sins.

The Moral Exemplar Theory

• According to this theory,

• Jesus tried to help us obtain salvation by giving us a perfect moral example of how to live.

• He hoped that his teachings and his example would inspire us to lift ourselves out of sin and enter into true communion with God.

• This theory, which is also called the Moral Influence Theory,

• it is usually attributed to the medieval scholar Peter Abelard.

• (Peter Abelard (1079–21 April 1142) [‘Abailard’ or ‘Abaelard’ or ‘Habalaarz’ and so on] was the pre-eminent philosopher and theologian of the twelfth century.)

• Many Christians have found it attractive and helpful.

• But some people wonder how it explains the crucifixion,

• since Jesus could have given us his teachings,

• and also provided a perfect moral example, without dying on the cross.

• One possible answer is that his death, though not strictly necessary, helped to draw attention to his life and therefore made his mission more effective.

• Critics say:• Unfortunately, many people continue to ignore the

example that Jesus set, and still commit immoral acts.

• Thus, if the purpose of his mission was to inspire everyone to live without sin, so far it hasn't been fully successful.

The Penal-Substitution Theory• The basic idea of this theory is that Jesus suffered

and died to take upon himself the punishment that we ourselves deserve.

• Although God wasn't willing to forgive us outright, he was willing to accept the punishment of Jesus as a substitute for our own punishment.

• Thus, in this theory Jesus takes the role of an innocent scapegoat who is punished for the sins of others.

• On one occasion God punished humankind by sending a flood that killed everyone on the earth except a few people on Noah's boat.

• But according to the Penal-Substitution theory, when humankind later needed to be punished again,

• God allowed Jesus to take the punishment for us.

• Some of the underlying assumptions of this theory can be found in the letters of Saint Paul.

• The Protestant Reformers of the sixteenth century took those assumptions and developed them into the modern form of the theory.

• In some ways it resembles the Satisfaction Theory, • since Jesus' act of taking our punishment for us is

basically equivalent • to paying our debt for us.

• The Penal-Substitution Theory is accepted by many modern Protestants.

• Most of them also believe that Jesus' sacrifice brought the possibility of forgiveness to everyone,

• including people who have lived since the crucifixion and people who will be born in the future.

• This is known as universal atonement.

• But some Christians believe that Jesus died only for the "elect",

• a small minority who are predestined to be saved.

• This is called definite (or limited) atonement.

The Governmental Theory• According to this theory, • God acts as a governor (or overseer) of all life

on the earth. • But he became very displeased with the way

people were behaving, • and he wanted to show us that we deserve

severe punishment. • To demonstrate just how severe, he sent Jesus

to suffer and die.

• Thus, the crucifixion was meant to be a demonstration of the punishment that we all deserve.

• By giving us this demonstration, God hoped that we would realize the seriousness of our sins and reform ourselves.

• He could have actually punished us,

• and would have been justified in doing so,

• but decided to merely give us a warning,

• and let us have another chance.

• One problem with this theory is

• the fact that many people have lived and died without ever hearing about Jesus or the crucifixion,

• and therefore were never aware of God's warning.

• And even now, many people who are aware of it appear to disregard it.

The Christus Victor Theory• In 1931 Gustaf Aulen

(Church of Sweden bishop) published the book Christus Victor,

• in which he argued that Jesus came to earth

• to defeat the evil forces that had gained control over us.

• To win our salvation, Jesus needed to overcome both Satan and death.

• The name Christus Victor, which means "Christ the Victor",

• refers to his successful accomplishment of this task.

• In some ways this theory is similar to the Ransom Theory,

• for it assumes that humankind had come under the control of the Devil after the sins of Adam and Eve caused God to abandon us.

• But in this theory, instead of God paying Satan a ransom for our release,

• Jesus freed us by directly defeating the Evil One.

• And his resurrection proved that death can also be conquered.

What is our catholic view? • Catechism of the catholic Church 613-618

• Christ's death is the unique and definitive sacrifice

• 613 Christ's death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the definitive redemption of men, through "the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world",439

• and the sacrifice of the New Covenant,

• which restores man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the "blood of the covenant,

• which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins".

Jesus substitutes his obedience for our disobedience

• 615 "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous."443

• By his obedience unto death, Jesus accomplished the substitution of the suffering Servant, who "makes himself an offering for sin", when "he bore the sin of many", and who "shall make many to be accounted righteous", for "he shall bear their iniquities".444

• Jesus atoned for our faults and made satisfaction for our sins to the Father

• 616 It is love "to the end“ that confers on Christ's sacrifice its value as redemption and reparation, as atonement and satisfaction.

We accept• Ransom, atonement and substitution theories• But to the questions• To whom did he pay the ransom?• To whom did pay his blood?• What effect does blood have?• Our present pope Benedict XVI• Gives us answers in his latest book

Jesus of Nazareth Vol. II

• In the New Testament literature there are various attempts to explain Christ’s Cross as the new worship, the true atonement and the true purification of this corrupted world.

• We have spoken a number of times already of the fundamental text in Romans 3:25, where Paul, evidently drawing upon a tradition of the earliest Jewish Christian community in Jerusalem, refers to the crucified Jesus as “hilasterion”.

• This, as we have seen, was the name given to the covering of the Ark of the Covenant,

• on which the expiatory blood was sprinkled on the great Day of Atonement during the expiatory sacrifice.

• Let us explain straightaway how the Christians now interpreted this archaic ritual:

• it is not through the blood of animals touching a holy object that God and man are reconciled.

• In Jesus’ Passion, all the filth of the world • touches the infinitely pure one, the soul of

Jesus Christ and, hence, the Son of God himself.

• While it is usually the case that anything unclean touching something clean renders it unclean, here it is the other way around:

• when the world, with all the injustice and cruelty that make it unclean, comes into contact with the infinitely pure one—then he, the pure one, is the stronger.

• Through this contact, the filth of the world

• is truly absorbed, wiped out, and transformed in the pain of infinite love.

• Because infinite good is now at hand in the man Jesus,

• the counter-weight to all wickedness is present and active within world history and the good is always infinitely greater than the vast mass of evil, however terrible it may be.

• If we reflect more deeply on this insight,

• we find the answer to an objection that is often raised against the idea of atonement.

• Again and again people say: It must be a cruel God who demands infinite atonement.

• Is this not a notion unworthy of God?

• Must we not give up the idea of atonement in order to maintain the purity of our image of God?

• In the use of the term “hiIastérion” with reference to Jesus,

• it becomes evident that the real forgiveness accomplished on the Cross functions in exactly the opposite direction.

• The reality of evil and injustice that disfigures the world and at the same time distorts the image of God—this reality exists, through our sin.

• It cannot simply be ignored; it must be addressed. But here it is not a case of a cruel God demanding the infinite.

• It is exactly the opposite: God himself becomes the locus of reconciliation,

• and in the person of his Son takes the suffering upon himself

• God himself grants his infinite purity to the world.

• God himself “drinks the cup" of every horror to the dregs and

• thereby restores justice through the greatness of his love, which, through suffering, transforms the darkness.

Final Prayer

From the Chaplet of Divine Mercy You expired Jesus but the source of life gushed forth for the whole world and the ocean of mercy opened up for the whole world.

O, fount of life, unfathomable Divine Mercy, envelop the whole world and empty yourself out upon us.

Amen.