Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon Gathercole
Reviewing, again, will offer you something brand-new. Something that you have no idea after that exposed to be well known with guide Defending Substitution: An Essay On Atonement In Paul (Acadia Studies In Bible And Theology), By Simon Gathercole notification. Some understanding or session that re got from reviewing e-books is vast. Much more books Defending Substitution: An Essay On Atonement In Paul (Acadia Studies In Bible And Theology), By Simon Gathercole you review, more understanding you get, and much more possibilities to constantly love reviewing publications. As a result of this reason, reviewing publication must be begun from earlier. It is as just what you could acquire from guide Defending Substitution: An Essay On Atonement In Paul (Acadia Studies In Bible And Theology), By Simon Gathercole
Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon Gathercole
Read Online and Download Ebook Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon Gathercole
In recent decades, the church and academy have witnessed intense debates concerning the concept of penal substitution to describe Christ's atoning sacrifice. Some claim it promotes violence, glorifies suffering and death, and amounts to divine child abuse. Others argue it plays a pivotal role in classical Christian doctrine. Here world-renowned New Testament scholar Simon Gathercole offers an exegetical and historical defense of the traditional substitutionary view of the atonement. He provides critical analyses of various interpretations of the atonement and places New Testament teaching in its Old Testament and Greco-Roman contexts, demonstrating that the interpretation of atonement in the Pauline corpus must include substitution.
Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon Gathercole- Amazon Sales Rank: #734424 in Books
- Brand: Gathercole, Simon/ Evans, Craig (EDT)/ McDonald, Lee (EDT)
- Published on: 2015-05-19
- Released on: 2015-05-19
- Original language: English
- Number of items: 1
- Dimensions: 8.50" h x .32" w x 5.50" l, .0 pounds
- Binding: Paperback
- 128 pages
From the Back Cover Defending Substitution is part of the Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology series. Series editors are Craig A. Evans and Lee Martin McDonald."The meaning of Jesus's death remains controversial. In this short exploratory study Simon Gathercole draws on a range of classical as well as biblical sources to argue that for Paul, at least, the notion of substitution remained central. Many questions remain, but this book will give new energy to the ongoing discussion."--N. T. Wright, University of St. Andrews"Why is Good Friday good? According to one classic answer to this question, Jesus's shameful and violent death belongs to the good news of the gospel because he died in our place. By careful and lucid analysis of key passages, Simon Gathercole shows that this view has deep roots both in Paul's texts and in his Jewish and Greco-Roman cultural heritage. Often criticized and caricatured, the concept of substitution is integral to the New Testament's conviction that Christ died 'for us' and 'for our sins.'"--Francis Watson, Durham University"In this little book, Simon Gathercole carefully and convincingly dismisses false dichotomies. The death of Christ is presented in the Bible as both representative and substitutionary. These learned and lucid lectures use the prism of modern disputes to take us to the heart of Pauline teaching on the cross. I highly commend it."--Mark Dever, pastor, Capitol Hill Baptist Church, Washington, DC"Can Christ's work of atonement be substitutionary in nature? Though Reformation Protestantism has replied in the affirmative, much recent scholarship has tended to have a negative view of this atonement motif. Simon Gathercole is to be congratulated for intervening in this debate with a short, clear, and lively book that argues the case for a substitutionary motif from a biblical perspective, and with an eye to both the Christian tradition and recent debates in the literature. This is a work all those interested in the atonement will want to read and engage. It is certainly a book I shall be recommending to my students."--Oliver D. Crisp, Fuller Theological Seminary
About the Author Simon Gathercole (PhD, University of Durham) is senior lecturer in New Testament studies in the Faculty of Divinity of the University of Cambridge and Fellow and director of studies in theology at Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, England. A leading British New Testament scholar, he has written several groundbreaking books.
Where to Download Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon Gathercole
Most helpful customer reviews
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful. Accept No Substitutes? By James R. V. Matichuk In recent years the idea of substitutionary atonement is often attacked. Substitution is the hallmark of classic Protestant thinking about the way Christ's cross saves us from our sins; however many are questioning whether the language of substitution does adequate justice to Christ's cross and biblical theology. In Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul, Simon Gathercole surveys the contemporary discussion on substitution and its merits, the strongest exegetical challenges to the doctrine, and examines two key texts from the Pauline literature that explore the nature of substitution in Paul's thought (1 Corinthians 15:3 and Romans 5:6-8). Gathercole is not attempting to eradicate the insights of substitution's critics. He merely seeks to demonstrate that the language of identifying, representation and apocalyptic views of Christ's atonement do not do full justice to the totality of the atonement or Paul’s theology of the cross. Gathercole is bringing the notion of substitution back to the table so we can see a richer picture of Chris't work.This book originated as an SBL paper in 2006 which underwent revision as Gathercole presented the material as a academic lecture series at three different institutions (Concorida, Biola and Acadia). Published here as part of the Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology series (ed by Craig Evans and Lee Martin McDonald), it still maintains the accessibility necessary for a public lecture format (10). Gathercole, here, is as brief as he is suggestive of the ways substitution rounds out our contemporary understanding of the atonement.After an introduction, Gathercole's argument unfolds in three chapters, a brief excursus and a conclusion. In his introduction, Gathercole describes the importance of substitution for both Christian doctrine and pastoral care (14). He defines substitutionary atonement as 'Christ's death in our place, instead of us' (15). While substitution is associated with penal models, Gathercole untangles this, claiming, "Substitution is logically distinguishable from related concepts such as penalty, representation, expiation and propitiation" (18). He t sharpens the idea of substitution by profiling the distinctions between substitution and penalty (18-20), representation (20), propitiation (21-2) and satisfaction (22-3). This helps set limits on what Gathercole’s claims in this essay. It is conceptually possible to speak of punishment, representation, divine appeasement and satisfaction apart from the idea of substitution. Substitution does not necessarily entail all (or any) of these other ideas. Gathercole closes his introduction with a survey of various contemporary criticisms of subsititutionary atonement (i.e. that it is a legal fiction, an immoral doctrine, its rejection on philosophical and logical grounds).In chapter one, Gathercole turns to what he feels are three strongest antisubstitutionary exegetical cases for the atonement. He profiles the Tübingen understanding of representative 'place-taking,' Morna Hooker's Interchange, and apocalyptic deliverance. The Tübingen school (building on the work of Gese and Hofius) describes Christ's death through the lens of the Day of Atonement rituals (Lev. 4-5, 16). In the sacrifice of the bull and the goat, the priest and the people were invited to identify in the sacrifice through the laying on of hands. In a similar way we are set free by identifying with Christ in his sacrifice (36-7). Hooker's interchange emphasizes our union to and participation with Christ in his death (41). The apocalyptic view focuses on how Christ's death sets us free from the powers (46). Gathercole praises each of these approaches for the way they handle some biblical texts and describe aspects of the atonement; however, he also observes where each fails to do justice to everything that Paul says on the atonement. One area that he critiques all of these approaches is in their failure to grapple with how Christ saves from our 'sins' (individual infractions) and not just our 'Sin' (our condition).Chapter two and three provide the exegetical case for where Gathercole sees the language of substitution in Paul. Chapter two focuses on 1 Corinthians 15:3, "Christ died for our Sins according to the Scriptures." Chapter three explores the vicarious death of Christ as described in Romans 5:6-8, "For although we were weak, yet at the right time, Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might dare to die. But God demonstrates his love for us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." Between these chapters is a brief excursus on why if Jesus died in our stead, we still die. Gathercole argues convincingly that 1 Cor 15:3 builds on the notion of substitution with Isaiah 53 in the background whereas Romans 5 describes vicarious atonement with Roman and Greek parallels in the background.Gathercole isn't out to debunk contemporary discussions of how we participate in Christ's death and his atoning sacrifice. He has no bone to pick with idenitfication, representation or Christus Victor undderstandings of the atonement. What this essay highlights is the way these, in various ways, fail to describe all that happens in the atonement (and even all that Paul has to say about it). Nor is Gathercole foisting on us an either/or understanding where we ought to see the atonement as substitutionary only. Rather he helps us see a fuller picture of the atonement where in a very real way, Christ died so we don't have to. This book helps illustrate the richness of God's work in Christ. Personally I found it helpful because while I appreciate some of the developments in atonement theology, I've found the blanket criticisms of all things substitutionary puzzling. Another insight I gained from the way Gathercole profiles the alternative views, is he shows how a totalizing vision of the atonement determined what a passage is allowed to say. When our conceptual framework is too rigid we fail to see the full richness of what is described in Paul’s theology (or other writers). Gathercole has a fuller atonement theology because he allows for the diversity in the meaning of Paul’s material. I give this book four stars.Notice of material connection: I received this book from the publisher in exchange for my honest review.
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. A Brief Defense of An Important Doctrine By Nate Claiborne I don’t read many of Simon Gathercole’s books, but when I do, they are short. Around this time last year I read Justification Reconsidered. There, he was rethinking a Pauline theme, and in some ways, that’s also what he is doing in his recent book Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul. In both books, he is defending a classical understanding of Paul’s soteriology in light of recent objections and/or recalibrations. Though the titles frame it differently, these books work well in tandem and demonstrate fine Pauline scholarship in relatively bite size form.This book has four chapters, though the first is simply an introduction framing the discussion. Once framed, Gathercole highlights three recent challenges to the traditional understanding of substitutionary atonement and their underlying connection. Then, he defends the classical view in light of these objections. First, he focuses on 1 Corinthians 15:3Open in Logos Bible Software (if available) and Paul’s claim that Christ’s dead for us was “according to the Scriptures.” Second, he focuses on Romans 5:6-8Open in Logos Bible Software (if available) and Paul’s use of vicarious death traditions widely known in his first century context. A conclusion recapitulates this all briefly and next thing you know, you’ve just read a book.Readers who are interested in either Paul’s theology or soteriology (or ideally both) will want to check this book out. Gathercole is interacting with the frontlines so to speak of critical scholarship. In doing so, he models a careful reading of an opposing position and then a gracious response that digs deeply into the Scriptures as well as background historical context in order to defend the traditional understanding of Christ’s death being for us in a substitutionary sense. Because of that, one can learn not only from the content of Gathercole’s argument, but it’s character as well.[I was provided a review copy of this book by the publisher]
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. Concise, convincing exegesis: The defence wins! By Dwight Gingrich "There is a strong tendency in current scholarship on Paul to resist seeing Christ’s death as in our place, instead of us. Rather, scholars prefer a view of Christ’s death with us—where he identifies with us rather than dying a unique death alone for us. Indeed, the point that Christ’s death is representative and therefore not substitutionary can often be made briefly in passing, as if it were understood to be an uncontroversial thought." (Gathercole, 29)It is this “uncontroversial thought” that Gathercole aims to challenge in this brief (128 pp.) book. I think he does so well.It is important to recognize what this book is not: It is not a systematic discussion of the doctrine of substitutionary atonement. It is not a survey of all the texts that may support this doctrine. Nor is it a defense of any particular version of substitutionary atonement, such as penal substitutionary atonement. It is certainly not an attempt to assert substitutionary atonement as the only or even the chief theory of the atonement.What Gathercole does aim to do is to provide evidence, based primarily on two Pauline passages, that substitution is one biblical and valid way of understanding Christ’s cross-work.Defending Substitution is based on several lectures given by Gathercole, but it reads very well as a book. Here is the table of contents:Introduction The Importance of Substitution Defining Substitution: Christ in Our Place Criticisms of Substitution1. Exegetical Challenges to Substitution The Tübingen Understanding of Representative “Place-Taking” Interchange in Christ Apocalyptic Deliverance The Omission or Downplaying of “Sins” Conclusion2. “Christ Died for Our Sins according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3) The Importance of 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 “According to the Scriptures” Substitution in 1 Corinthians 15:3 ConclusionExcursus: An Objection—Why, Then, Do Christians Still Die?3. The Vicarious Death of Christ and Classical Parallels (Rom. 5:6-8) The Translation of Romans 5:6-8 A Sketch of the Exegesis Vicarious Deaths in Classical Tradition The Comparison in Romans 5:6-8 ConclusionConclusionBibliographyIndex of SubjectsIndex of AuthorsIndex of Scripture and Other Ancient SourcesIn the Introduction, Gathercole defines substitution as “Christ’s death in our place, instead of us… He did something, underwent something, so we did not—and never will—have to” (pp. 15-16). He carefully emphasizes scope and aims of his study: "The matter of what precisely it was that Christ bore in our stead will not be treated here… Substitution is logically distinguishable from related concepts such as penalty, representation, expiation, and propitiation… The investigation here is to be focused not on these other themes but quite narrowly and specifically on substitution… To repeat…, the aim here is not to say that Scripture teaches substitution rather than representation but to say that both are important parts of biblical teaching." (pp. 18-23)Despite not focusing on penal substitution, Gathercole does provide three helpful responses to those who say that this doctrine makes Jesus the victim of “cosmic child abuse”: “First, such theological criticisms neglect the obvious fact that the death of Christ is not that of a third party but is the ‘self-substitution of God’… Second, …Jesus offers himself as a sacrifice in line with his own will… Third, …a response can also be offered that is more subjective but… certainly no more subjective” than the caricatures of “certain atonement theories as cruel, violent, unjust, and the like”: “this is not how millions of Christians over the centuries have experienced such teaching.” Indeed, criticism of penal substitution seem to come more from academia than from “the world’s lay Christians” (pp. 24-25).In Chapter One, Gathercole responds to three atonement theories which aim to leave no room for substitution. The “Tübingen understanding of representative ‘place-taking’” (popular in parts of Germany) draws on a particular interpretation of Levitical sacrifices to assert that “when Christ dies, all die with him” (p. 36). A second theory, promoted by Morna Hooker, “considers substitution to be not only un-Pauline but actually something criticized by Paul” (p. 38). “Paul’s understanding of the process is therefore one of participation, not substitution; it is a sharing of experience, not an exchange. Christ is identified with us in order that—in him—we might share in what he is” (Hooker as quoted by Gathercole, pp. 40-41). A third theory, popular particularly in North America, is “apocalyptic deliverance.” This view, associated with scholars such as J. Louis Martyn, asserts that it was Paul’s opponents who emphasized that Christ died to provide forgiveness. For Paul, in contrast, “the human plight consists fundamentally of enslavement to supra-human powers; and God’s redemptive act is his deed of liberation” (Martyn as quoted by Gathercole, p. 44).Graciously, Gathercole finds much of value in all three theories. (So did I.) But he faults each on several points, and all for downplaying the problem of sins (individual acts of evil), as opposed to Sin (singular, evil personified). He presents abundant evidence to show that sins were a frequent and important focus of Paul’s writings.Chapter Two takes a refreshingly positive turn, with its constructive exegesis of 1 Corinthians 15:3. “Dying for sins,” Gathercole notes, is not the same thing as “dying for us” (p. 55). “The aim of this chapter, then, is to examine Paul’s theology of the atonement through the lens of the words ‘Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures’” (pp. 56-57). After demonstrating the importance of his chosen text, Gathercole assembles impressive linguistic evidence that Paul is alluding to Isaiah 53 in 1 Corinthians 15:3. This is important because “vicariousness—in the sense of exclusive substitution—is clearly present in the Hebrew text” and Greek versions of Isaiah 53 (p. 68). Multiple OT texts present a norm that forbids substitution (Num. 27:3; Deut. 24:16; Josh. 22:20; 1Kings 16:18-19; Jer. 31:30). “In this sense,” Gathercole observes, “Christ’s death is not according to the Scriptures” (p. 71). But Isaiah 53 turns the OT norm on its head, describing salvation being achieved through an innocent individual bearing the sins of others. “The default Old Testament position would be ‘he died for his sins’ or ‘we died for our sins.’ The miracle of the gospel, however, is that he died for our sins” (p. 73). Paul’s allusion to Isaiah 53 suggests that he understands Christ’s work as being, like the Servant’s, substitutionary.In a brief excursus Gathercole explains why, if Christ died for us, believers still die. He suggests that Paul writes about death in four ways: (1) the physical death of believers, which he often “undermines” by language like “falling asleep”; (2) “the death to sin and burial in baptism that occurs in Christian initiation”; (3) the death of unbelievers, the penalty for sin and living according to the flesh, which Paul describes without softening, using language like “perish”; (4) the death of Jesus, which Paul never softens with terms like “falling asleep,” nor finalizes with terms like “perishing.” “The main point to conclude is that believers do still go on to die death #1 above but will not ‘perish’ (#3 above)… Christ has undergone a death like death #3 above to save us from death #3; therefore death #1 is not nearly so serious—it is a mere falling asleep” (pp. 80-83).In Chapter Three, Gathercole asks what examples Paul might have had in mind when he writes that “for a good person someone might perhaps even dare to die” (Rom. 5:6-8). He concludes that “the most natural link in Romans 5 is with examples of vicarious death in classical texts (broadly understood). There are a number of such classical works… where this same substitutionary language is used” (p. 90). The most prominent of such classical examples is Alcestis, who was referenced by writers spanning a time from Euripides (c. 438 B.C.) to the second century A.D. and beyond. The story of Alcestis was part of common culture in Paul’s day: “An exact contemporary of Paul, the philosopher Musonius Rufus, uses Alcestis” as a positive example (p. 96). There are interesting parallels between accounts of Alcestis and Paul’s language in Romans 5 and elsewhere: classical writers said that Alcestis “dared” to die “on behalf of,” “in place of,” or “instead of” her husband, who is described as a “good” man. Other substitutionary deaths are described by classical philosopher and writers, but they are understood to be rare (cf. Paul’s “one will scarcely die… perhaps… one would even dare to die”), occurring only in the contexts of conjugal love, the institution of friendship, and family ties. “Paul sees that there is common ground between these pagan instances and the death of Christ”but “for Paul the differences are more striking than the similarities,” for Jesus dies for “the ungodly… sinners… enemies” (p. 104). Yet the core similarity remains: in these classical examples, “the death ‘for’ another is not merely a death ‘for the benefit of’ another—‘for their sake’ in a general sense. Nor is it death with them. Rather, it is… a death that averts death” (pp. 106-107). Thus Paul’s apparent allusion to these classical examples supports the conclusion that he sees Christ’s death as being substitutionary.I find little to fault in Gathercole’s book. A few times I wondered if there was a bit of slippage in his logic, with him (a) proving that Paul was interested in our need for forgiveness for individual sins and then (b) using that evidence as proof that Paul believed in a specifically substitutionary atonement. But might not representation also be—at least theoretically—a solution for the problem of sins, with us dying with Christ for our sins (rather than he dying for our sins)? But this tentative critique is peripheral to Gathercole’s main arguments.This book left me hungry for more. Other texts should be tested for substitutionary theology (Rom. 4:25; Gal. 1:4; 2:20; Heb. 2:9; etc.), and I would like to read an equally careful defense of a specifically penal substitutionary atonement. But what I liked best about this book—besides the excellent exegesis of its two main texts—was Gathercole’s repeated insistence that we allow for the NT’s multiple images of the atonement.Let me end as Gathercole himself ends: "The choice between salvation as dealing with both ‘trespasses’ or ‘debts’ (plural) and with liberation from the power of (the) evil (one) was a choice apparently not faced by Jesus in his formulations of the Lord’s Prayer. Similarly, we need not be forced to opt either for Jesus’s substitutionary death, in which he deals with sins, or for a representative or liberative death, in which he deals with the power of evil. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder!" (pp. 112-13)Gathercole achieves his goals well in this book. I give it 4.5 out of 5 stars.-------Disclosure: I received this book free from Baker Academic through the Baker Academic Bloggers program. The opinions I have expressed are my own, and I was not required to write a positive review. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_03/16cfr255_03.html.
See all 8 customer reviews... Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon GathercoleDefending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon Gathercole PDF
Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon Gathercole iBooks
Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon Gathercole ePub
Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon Gathercole rtf
Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon Gathercole AZW
Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology), by Simon Gathercole Kindle
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar