Why Did Jesus Have to Die?

For the 5^th Wednesday in Lent March 24 2010

Homily on the Daily Readings

Luke 18: 31-34

We continue our reflection on last Sunday’s gospel story, when Mary anointed Jesus for his burial.  In John Jesus knew he had to die.  He also knew this from tonight’s text from Luke:

 

“For he will be mocked and insulted and spat upon.  After they have flogged him, they will kill him, and on the third day he will rise again.”

 

As we move to the last days of Lent and prepare for Palm/Passion Sunday and Holy Week, we see that Jesus knew what he was talking about.  He is about to die.

But the twelve in Luke understood nothing about all these things.

 

Now is not the time to blame the dense disciples, but it is the time to ask, Do we understand?  Do we really understand why Jesus, Son of God had to die on a cross in order to complete his purpose for us?

 

So, let’s ponder a bit... Throughout history there have basically two explanations.

 

The most popular, as depicted in the movie “The Passion of the Christ”, is called the Substitutionary Atonement theory or Christ as sacrificial victim.

 

In a nutshell it goes like this:

We humans have sinned.  God needs to appease or satisfy this gross mistake of human beings.  What human being could be found who is good enough to pay the price of sin?  Only his Son Jesus…  As sacrificial victim Jesus, receives in his own person the righteous judgment of God against human unrighteousness. 

 

Is that why we have the cross. 

 

Now there is some real truth here, Christ substitutes for us something we cannot do. Christ does sacrifice for us.  But during the Middle Ages and into our own time something changed. In order to point out how awful our sin is the innocent victim needs to suffer greatly.  Thus the more blood, the pain, the more humiliation, the more suffering the better….The more Jesus suffers the better we feel.

 

What is wrong with this? After all, Jesus does suffer and die on a cross. But all one needs to do is read the stories of the Passion and then watch the movie the Passion of the Christ again and see the bloody liberties the director of the film took with the Biblical text and you see more clearly this explanation.

 

Elizabeth Moltmann Wendell sums up this approach as it has evolved:

“God wanted to damn everybody, but his vindictive sadism was sated by the crucifixion of his own Son, who was quite innocent, and therefore, a particularly attractive victim.  He now only damns people who don’t follow Christ or who have never heard of him.” 

 

Using last weeks question when we reflected on the Prodigal Son story, what image of the Father does this theory paint?  How does that image of the blood thirsty God compare with the Prodigal Father?

 

The other major theory: The Moral Theory… Why the cross, to show the depth of divine love…

Now this one sounds much better...  The intention of the sacrifice is not more blood and suffering but to see forth an ultimate truth which if received by the recipient will alter the perspective of the recipient.  The cross as a positive demonstration of universal love appeals both to our kindlier conception of humanity and our friendlier conception of God. 

 

But here, the effect of the cross depends upon us and our response.  If it changes you than God’s plan worked, if not well, it’s your fault…

 

Are these good reasons for God in human form to die on a cross?

 

Instead how about some reasons you and I could come up with simply from reading the Bible this Lent.

 

How about the temptation story on the first Sunday in Lent, in which Jesus was told by the devil he would be given the power to turn stones to bread; authority over all the kingdoms of this world, the possibility that he would not die. Note that Jesus was offered the means to feed the hungry, the authority to end war between peoples, and even the defeat of death itself.  But he refused.

 

His refusal begins to get at the why of the cross. He refused because he knew God’s kingdom cannot be forced into existence. God acts, God promises, God attracts us, God does not force us to believe.

 

Remember the story of The God of Abram and the covenant in Genesis 15 from Lent 2, in which God does all the promising, God takes the burden of the curse of our brokenness on him.  When we believe this story, there is no possibility of vindictiveness in the God who made unconditional promises to Abram. 

 

And remember, the God whose ways do not fit into explanations of why people suffer in the Lenten 3 Gospel?

 

And remember, the God who breaks all the rules in order to reconcile with us in the story of the prodigal God who is the God Mary anointed for his burial in last Sunday’s Gospel…

 

Now we have some Biblical reasons for Jesus dying on a cross.  He refused the powerful political and religious systems of the world which promise to give security and prosperity through violence and force…and he claimed power over them…

 

But God’s way which is not our way, which is why the disciples did not understand it, is to defeat the world’s power and idolatry, through weakness, suffering and death. 

 

In the Empire’s hands, the cross was simply the way of getting rid of rivals. 

 

In God’s hands, the Cross became God’s way of dying to the Empires way,  and our ways and through death, giving us life and a new way, free from violence, fear and death in God’s new kingdom.  

 

So, now with our Bibles in hand, let’s get ready to go to Jerusalem with Jesus. A parade, a last supper, washing of feet, a trial, a cross and a big surprise are waiting for us. 

 

Amen