We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.

cross fireworks

The Revelation of God in the Cross

The cross cannot be understood apart from the resurrection, just as the resurrection can never be understood apart from the cross. They are two sides of the same coin.

If you consider the cross apart from the resurrection, then the crucified Christ becomes nothing more than one of the many thousands of people who were tortured and executed by the Romans.

If we do not keep the resurrection closely connected to the cross, it can easily become a triumphant explosion of supernatural power that not only lacks the enemy-loving, self-sacrificial character of the cross; it actually subverts it!

There is a strand in theology that implies that God merely used the humble, self-sacrificial approach reflected through Jesus’s life leading up to the cross because it was necessary to get Jesus crucified to atone for human sin. Once this was accomplished, this misguided line of thinking goes, God could return to using his superior brute force to get his will accomplished on earth and to defeat evil, which in this view, is what the resurrection signifies.

This line of thinking allowed theologians to assure Christian rulers, soldiers, and others that God didn’t intend all Christians to follow the enemy-loving, nonviolent example and teachings of Jesus. It was a line of thinking that was unfortunately very convenient whenever Christians felt the need to set Jesus’s teaching and example aside to torture heretics, massacre enemies, or take over countries.

Though it was never openly acknowledged, this perspective implies that Jesus’s humble, servant lifestyle, his instructions to love and bless enemies, and especially his self-sacrificial death conceal rather than reveal God’s true character! If we’re totally honest about it, it implies that God was only pretending when he assumed a humble posture in Christ. His true character is displayed when he acts more like a cosmic Caesar than the crucified Christ, accomplishing his plans and achieving his purposes by flexing his omnipotent muscle rather than by picking up the cross.

If we accept this line of thinking, it has the effect of making Jesus into a liar when he said, “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father” (Jn 14:9).

Against this view, I contend that the cross and resurrection must be considered as two sides of one event. The resurrection confirms not only that the Son of God was victorious over sin, death, and the powers of hell, it also confirms that the way the Son defeated evil is God’s way of defeating evil.

It confirms that Jesus’s humble, servant lifestyle, his instructions to love and bless enemies, and especially his self-sacrificial death reveal rather than conceal God’s true, eternal character. The humble character of Christ wasn’t something God adopted for utilitarian purposes, as though it were foreign to him. Christ rather displayed this character because this is “the exact representation of [God’s] being (Heb 1:3).

The power that raised Jesus from the dead and that is at work in all who have been raised with him (Eph 1:17-23) isn’t a power that contrasts with the cross; it’s the power that leads to the cross and that confirms the cross as God’s way of responding to evil, even as it confirms that the cross reflects the kind of God that the true God is.

—adapted from Benefit of the Doubt, pages 242-244

Photo Credit: Marcia Erickson

Related Reading

The Cruciform Trinity

As paradoxical as it sounds, if God is supremely revealed when he stoops to the infinite extremity of becoming his own antithesis on the cross, then we must conclude that stooping to this extremity out of love must, in some sense, be intrinsic to who God eternally is. And rendering this coherent necessitates that we…

Topics:

Part 3: Disarming Flood’s Inadequate Conception of Biblical Authority

Image by Ex-InTransit via Flickr In this third part of my review of Derek Flood’s Disarming Scripture I will offer a critique of his redefined conception of biblical inspiration and authority. I will begin by having us recall from Part I that Flood holds up “faithful questioning” over “unquestioning obedience” as the kind of faith that Jesus…

Don’t Be a Functional Atheist at Christmas

All of us raised in Western culture have been strongly conditioned by what is called a secular worldview. The word secular comes from the Latin saeculum, meaning “the present world.” A secular worldview, therefore, is one that focuses on the present physical world and ignores or rejects the spiritual realm. To the extent that one…

Reading the Bible “by Faith”

The cruciform approach to reading the Bible—and specifically the culturally-conditioned and sin-stained portraits of God—requires faith on the part of the reader, which I argue in Crucifixion of the Warrior God. On one level we can discern by faith that often times God broke through the limitations and sin of the ancient authors, for we…

Reflections on the Influence, and Damage, of Plato’s Timaeus 28a

The Timaeus is Plato’s account of the creation of the world. Ancient philosophers were divided as to whether Plato meant the work to be taken literally or mythically, as are modern scholars. The work was arguably the single most cited work by early church fathers. And the text I want to reflect on (28a) is…

Topics:

Podcast: Does God Strike Jesus Down?

Greg looks at how Matthew uses the Old Testament—specifically, Matthew 26:31. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0258.mp3