We might think that in the case of God his offer of forgiveness should then be possible without any demand for retribution or satisfaction. But although such an offer is made, the offender may not be contrite, and the grip of sin is such that sinners are not capable of showing the necessary contrition.
OT sacrifices could be understood as expressions of contrition, with the offering of a (valuable) article as expression and proof of the inner feeling, and these were offered in accordance with a divine direction that this way of dealing with sin was prescribed by God and acceptable to him. The sins in question were publicly confessed, the sinner laid hands on the sacrifice to indicate that it was their sacrifice and was in respect of the actual sins confessed. In this way the sacrifice could be said to take away sin.
In the NT, the danger of thinking that an outward act can deal with sin is clearly recognised (Hebrews 10:4, 11). God, who provided the path of sacrifice in the OT, now intervenes to provide a new offering, himself dying in the person of the Son who has united himself with humanity, to make the offering which will deal with sin. Christ, or his name or his death are integral to the New Testament concept of forgiveness. In Hebrews it is seen as the fruit of sacrifice (Hebrews 9:22, 10:18). In Ephesians 1:7 it is linked to the blood of Jesus. In Colossians 1:14 it is not far distant from a reference to peace being made by the blood of the cross (Colossians 1:20).
Thus God takes the initiative, God himself bears the sin and gives his Son in his sacrificial death as the way or means by which sinners can come to him. The sinner no longer needs to bring an offering to God, for Christ has already made that offering in the heavenly sanctuary. The conferral of forgiveness costs the sinner nothing, but it costs God everything.
- I. Howard Marshall, The Theology of the Atonement
No comments:
Post a Comment