nativity mosaic

The Cross in the Manger

There has been a strand within the Western theological tradition—one that is especially prevalent in contemporary American Evangelicalism—that construes the significance of the cross in strictly soteriological terms. The cross is central, in this view, but only in the sense that the reason Jesus came to earth was to pay the price for our sin by dying, thereby allowing God the Father to vent his wrath on him in our place. This myopic focus, combined with this “penal substitutionary” understanding of the atonement, tends to relegate everything else Jesus said and did leading up to his passion to a secondary status. Hence, far from providing the thematic center of Jesus’ identity and mission, this perspective tends to divorce the cross from every other aspect of Jesus’ identity and mission.

The union of God and man in Jesus is “one dynamic event from the incarnation to ascension,” as T. F. Torrance wrote. God did not unite himself to a man and then, as a secondary thing, act. Instead, in Jesus, his personhood, his words and his acts are inseparable.

If this is true, then we can never separate who Jesus is as the God-man from what he did. We can also no more separate Jesus’ atoning work on the cross from the Incarnation and/or any other aspect of his life and ministry. Torrance writes, “we must think of [Christ’s] incarnate life and his redeeming activity as completely interwoven from his conception and birth to his crucifixion and resurrection.” And again, “Incarnation and atonement intrinsically locked into one another constitute the one continuous movement of God’s saving love for the world.”

Moltmann makes a similar point, when he asserts:

The incarnation of the Logos is completed on the cross. Jesus is born to face his passion. His mission is fulfilled once he has been abandoned on the cross. So it is impossible to speak of an incarnation of God without keeping this conclusion in view. There can be no theology of the incarnation which does not become a theology of the cross. As soon as you say “incarnation,” you say “cross.”

We cannot separate his death out from his life. The cross is the quintessential expression of who Jesus was and everything he was about. The indivisible and perfectly integrated wholeness of the one in whom God became human is oriented, from manger to ascension, around the cross. We could say the same thing by claiming that Jesus’ mission centered on sacrificially reconciling humanity to God, or by claiming that Jesus’ mission centered on revealing God’s true, self-sacrificial, loving nature to humanity. The atonement and revelation are two sides of the same coin. God reconciles humanity to himself by revealing his true loving character, and God reveals his true loving character by reconciling humanity to himself. And this revelation-that-is-reconciliation and reconciliation-that-is-revelation takes place in the Word made flesh, understood as “one dynamic event from incarnation to ascension”.

If it is the whole unity of the person and work of Jesus that reveals God to us, then this unity must be centered on the love of God that was supremely revealed on the cross. Hence, while the common, myopic, Evangelical understanding of the cross tends to isolate the cross from other aspects of Jesus’ identity and mission, this view centralizes the cross as the thread that weaves together every aspect of Jesus’ life, from the incarnation first displayed in the manger to his ascension.

Photo Credit: jimforest via Flickr

Related Reading

The Extremity of God’s Love

In response to questions he has received about whether Jesus was actually separated from the Father on the cross, Greg fleshes out his perspective on this. The love that unites the Trinity is the very same love that resulted in the separation of the Father from the Son. This separation actually expresses the great love…

Pretty Little Vampires: Osheta Moore

We’re thrilled today to introduce you to Osheta Moore, blogger extraordinaire over at Shalom in the City. Osheta is in the middle of a wonderful series of blog posts on finding her “tribe”. We love this woman. Listen to a section from her “about me”: I’m an African-American, suburbanite Texan from the Bible Belt living in…

Are You Guilty of Marcionism?

Greg responds to the question of whether or not his cruciform hermeneutic is anything like the heresy of Marcion, who basically advocated throwing out the Old Testament. (Spoiler: it’s not.)

Don’t all religions believe in the same God?

Bruxy Cavey takes a swing at this question and scores a home run.  

Q&A: Condemning Sin

Q: I have a question about how you answer the rare occasions when Jesus apparently felt it necessary to publicly condemn sin: like the cleansing of the temple and his very strong judgments on Pharisees and rulers in Matthew 23. Also John the Baptist who not only preached strongly regarding public sins but was imprisoned…

Topics:

Penal Substitution View of Atonement: Did God the Father Just Need to Vent?

In this video blog, Greg outlines the penal substitution view of atonement which says that the Father poured out his wrath on Jesus instead of us so that we could be forgiven. This view is very common and you might even be nodding your head in agreement with that description. However, this view creates some…