We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded by your direct support for ReKnew and our vision. Please consider supporting this project.
On the cross, God became our sin, as Paul wrote: “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us” (2 Cor 5:21). However, God didn’t begin to be a sin-bearing God when Jesus walked the earth and hung on the cross. Rather he became Incarnate and bore our sins on the cross because this is the kind of God he has always been. The Father is most “glorified” when the Son is crucified because the cross is the ultimate expression of the Father’s true character.
The OT actually foreshadows this cross-like love revealed by Christ—his other-oriented, self-emptying, and self-sacrificial sin-bearing nature—when the OT reveals how Yahweh often set aside his ideals to accommodate the sin and weakness of his people. For instance, in the case of the law, the OT theologian John Goldingay argues that Israelite law “starts where people are as sinners, and starts where they are in their cultural context.” The same may be said about the fact that Yahweh’s covenantal commitment to his people throughout the OT was such that he was, to some extent, willing to leverage his own reputation on their behavior and welfare, for better or for worse. As Sheldon Blank notes regarding Isaiah 52:5, “God is disgraced because of the disgraceful condition of his people.”
Daniel Block has made a solid case that this was the focus of the commandment to not “take the name of the LORD your God in vain” (Ex. 20:7, KJV). It was an injunction for God’s people to not live in a way that brought dishonor to Yahweh.
This relational connectedness between Yahweh and his people which caused him to take on the sin of those people at the expense of his own reputation is also reflected in the way various authors frequently appeal to him to intervene or alter a plan for the sake of his reputation (e.g. Ex. 32:12; Num. 14:15-16). Moreover, throughout the OT narrative we find Yahweh allowing himself to experience profound pain at the hands of, and for the sake of, his rebellious people. And even when Yahweh felt he had no choice but to chastise his people, he did so reluctantly and often while expressing a grieving heart.
The cross constitutes the ultimate display of Yahweh’s “sin-bearing” character. It is the culmination of all prior, pen-ultimate expressions found in the OT. In Christ, Yahweh not only entered into, and was profoundly affected by, the limitations and sinfulness of humanity: in Christ, Yahweh became a limited human being, became our sin and became our judgment (Jn 1:14; 2 Cor 5:20). And in doing this, Jesus demonstrated that God didn’t begin to be the kind of God revealed on the cross, for if Jesus reveals who God truly is, he reveals who God has always been.
 E.g. J. Goldingay, Theological Diversity and the Authority of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 154.
 S. Blank, “Isaiah 52.5 and the Profanation of the Name,” HUCA 25 (1954), 1-8 (6).
 D. I. Block, “No Other Gods: Bearing the Name of YHWH in a Polytheistic World,” in The Gospel according to Moses: Theological and Ethical Reflections on the Book of Deuteronomy (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2012), 237-71.
Photo credit: Endre Majoros via Visualhunt / CC BY
Tags: Cross, Cruciform Theology, Divine Accommodation
Topics: Attributes and Character
Jesus is the Center of the Story
The previous post addressed how the revelation of Christ is the surprising twist that reframes how we must read all that precedes it. Today we’ll look briefly at five supports to this claim. Jesus said, “I have a testimony greater than that of John” (John 5:36). Jesus elsewhere claims that “among those born of women…
Love and Violence
What does it mean to confess that “God is love” and that we are called to “live in love” (Eph. 5:2)? One of the more common ways of understanding God’s love has its roots in the teachings of Augustine. He adamantly affirmed that the revelation that “God is love” lies at heart of the Gospel…
How Revelation Uses Violent Images in an Anti-Violent Way
All the violent scenes in Revelation are symbols for the battle of truth and deception. They never involve literal violence. In fact, they symbolize ANTI-VIOLENCE. The ingenious way John helps us get free of deception of trust in violent power is by taking a standard violent symbol and juxtaposing it with a symbol that undermines…
Eye for Eye: That Time Jesus Refuted An Old Testament Teaching
One of the most surprising aspects of Jesus’ teaching is that, while he clearly shared his contemporaries’ view of the Old Testament as inspired by God, he was nevertheless not afraid of repudiating it when he felt led by his Father to do so (Jn. 8:28; 12:49-50; 14:31). For example, while the OT commands people…
Confronting the Divine Montage
The superiority of Jesus’ revelation over a montage view of God (see previous post) is captured when Paul and the author of Hebrews utilize an analogy of a shadow verses reality. Paul instructs his disciples not to “let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a…
The Problem with Christocentrism
As we’ve discussed in the previous posts, there has been a growing move toward a Christocentric orientation in theology since Barth, and especially over the last fifty years. I enthusiastically applaud this trend, for I’m persuaded it reflects the orientation of the NT itself, so far as it goes. The trouble is, it seems to…