
1. Original Sin, part 23
In recent weeks, I have been discussing how rejecting the “Original Sin”
of scapegoating can be liberating. I think that a stumbling block making it
difficult for Christians to reject scapegoating is the popularity of
substitutionary atonement theory. This theory holds that Jesus’ death was a
necessary, “perfect” sacrifice to God to atone for Adam’s sin of
disobedience, a sin that all humanity inherits. This sacrifice “saves” and
“redeems” humanity, permitting faithful Christians to join God in heaven.
Substitutionary atonement theory holds that it was God’s desire that an
innocent individual (in this case the sinless Jesus) was murdered for the
benefit of others. Does this precedent put other innocent individuals at
risk?
Many Christians hold substitutionary atonement theory ensures that Jesus
was the final sacrifice, because sacrificial violence has become necessary
for redemption or salvation. However, the logic of substitutionary atonement
theory still threatens vulnerable humans and nonhumans. People might no
longer worry about the path to heavenly paradise, but they still want to
satisfy their terrestrial, carnal needs and desires. As long as people
believe that the murder of the innocent Jesus accorded with God’s plan to
save humanity, they will be open to the notion that it is acceptable to
enslave humans to profit from their labor, to kill animals to satisfy food
preferences, and to experiment on animals for the supposed benefit of
humankind.
In essays 14-16 of this series, I discussed theological problems with substitutionary atonement theory. I will continue that exploration next week.
Stephen R. Kaufman, M.D.
2. This Week’s Sermon from Rev. Frank and Mary Hoffman
Selfishly Wanting Physical Healing