Episode 110: Because We're the Problem, Too (Atonement Theories, Part 3)

"Jesus died for us," says the New Testament.  And once we ask, "What exactly did that DO?" we are doing the work of atonement theology.  And the Scriptures are full of various ways of talking about it.  In their ongoing series for this Lent, pastors Erica, Sarah, and Steve have been looking at some of those descriptions.  Having already looked at the Bible's talk of Jesus' death and resurrection as a "victory" in a battle over sin, death, and evil, they now turn to another well-known picture, that for many folks is their default assumption: the idea that Jesus' death paid a debt for humanity or took our punishment, in order to satisfy the debt owed to God or God's sense of justice.  But... even that picture raises more questions, like: "If God is just going to forgive us, why does someone need to die?"  and "If it's OUR sin that needs punishing, why does it count as justice for someone else to die for it?"  and "Is God just demanding a pound of flesh as punishment, and if Jesus takes my punishment, can I just be a jerk to everyone?"  It turns out that the penal substitution theory for the atonement raises at least as many questions as it answers, and that there are limits to this analogy just as there were to the Christus Victor analogy we looked at last time.  Join us for an engaging conversation that includes conversation partners ranging from John Calvin to Harry Potter, and from Anselm in the 11th century to the young adult novel, "The Whipping Boy."