How did Jesus save us? We know that he died. We know that he rose from the grave. And we know that somehow those things saved us. But how? 1 Peter 2 says, “He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross, so that, free from sins, we might live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed.” By Christ’s wounds we have been healed. But how exactly do his wounds heal us? There are a number of theories to answer this question. These theories are called atonement theories. How did Jesus’ death “atone” for our sins? This morning we are continuing our Eastertide sermon series “Mysteries of the Faith” by looking at the mystery of the Atonement, the way Jesus’ death healed us and made us one with God again. So, in order to do that, we are going to look at four possible answers to that question. However, I will preface by saying that I don’t believe that any one of these answers on its own is correct. But perhaps that truth lies somewhere in the mixing of them all.

I think it is a little bit like what Em Griffin says, in his book Making Friends, about three kinds of London maps: The street map, the map depicting throughways, and the underground map of the subway. “Each map is accurate and correct,” he writes, “but each map does not give the complete picture. To see the whole, the three maps must be printed one on top of each other. However, that is often confusing, so I use only one ‘layer’ at a time.” As we look at each of these concepts, we will find truth in all of them. But we will likely also find things that are lacking in each one. But perhaps all of them offer a different perspective that can help us to see the whole.

The first of the four atonement theories we are going to look at is often called the Ransom theory or the Christus Victor theory. These are sometimes considered two separate theories, but for our purposes we are considering them together. The basic principle of this theory is that Jesus’ crucifixion defeated the power of sin and death and the devil. We can see this theory in the letter to the Hebrews chapter 2. It says, “Since, therefore, the children share flesh and blood, he himself likewise shared the same things, so that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death.” Jesus’ death saved us by defeating the thing that held us captive…sin and death. In the Christus Victor theory, Jesus looks a bit like Superman… defeating the evil villian who has threatened the world with total destruction.

A second theory of the atonement is called the Satisfaction theory. In this theory, Jesus’ death restored the balance of justice. Adam and Eve’s disobedience toward God needed to be atoned for. Anselm, an 11th and 12th century theologian, thinks of this original sin as defrauding God of the honor that is due him. Humanity was meant to praise God, not disobey God. And so that disobedience took away the honor that God was due. That means that in order for the world to be put right again, satisfaction must be made for that wrong…and for every wrong that came after that. Jesus lived a life of such obedience…even to the point of being put to death on the cross for that very obedience…that it brought God great honor. In fact, Jesus’ obedience even to death was beyond the call of duty and therefore gave honor to God in overflowing abundance. And that abundance of honor more than made up for the deficit our sins have created. Thus, Jesus satisfied God by giving him all the honor due him and more.

One of the scriptures that Anselm references when talking about the satisfaction theory is Colossians 2:13-14. It says this: “And when you were dead in trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive together with him, when he forgave us all our trespasses, erasing the record that stood against us with its legal demands. He set this aside, nailing it to the cross.” We owe a debt that we cannot pay. Satisfaction theory of atonement says that Jesus paid that debt for us. Jesus erased the record. He removed the charges against us and made us right with God. For some reason, this theory made me think about the movie Groundhog Day. In that movie, Bill Murray’s character gets trapped repeating Groundhog Day over and over and over. And at first it makes him angry and depressed. But eventually he decides to use the repetition to try to create the perfect day. And eventually, he creates a day so great that his love interest says to him, “This day was perfect. You couldn’t have planned a day like this.” And he responds, “Well, you can. It just takes an awful lot of work.” An article I read estimated that Bill Murray’s character likely relived that day over and over for over 33 years, which means he re-lived it over 12,000 times. Most of us don’t get 12,000 tries to live each day perfectly and in a way that honors God. The satisfaction theory of atonement says that Jesus lived in perfect obedience to God in order to make up for our inability to do so.

A similar theory of atonement is called the Substitution Theory. This is probably the most well known theory. The substitution theory is very similar to the satisfaction theory except instead of Jesus’ death paying to God the honor owed to him, Jesus’ death took on the punishment owed to us for our disobedience to God. We see this theory abundant throughout scripture. Consider the familiar words of John 3:16. “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.” Because of our sin, we are destined to perish. The letter to the Romans tells us that “the wages of sin is death.” In Matthew 25, Jesus talks about dividing the sheep from the goats, the sheep being those who care for those in need and the goats being those who don’t. And Jesus says at the very end of that passage when talking to those who didn’t help others, “And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” Substitutionary Theory of atonement tells us that Jesus took the punishment that we deserved and gave to us a reward that we did not deserve.

The last theory of the atonement that I want to talk about this morning is called the Moral Example theory. This theory was developed as an alternative to the satisfaction and substitutionary theories by a man named Abelard. Abelard did not like how those other theories portrayed God as harsh or judgmental. He felt the idea of Jesus paying a ransom to the devil made the devil into a rival god. And he thought that the idea of Jesus’ death changing God’s mind to be in conflict with a perfect, unchangeable God. So Abelard focused on Jesus’ life and death as a demonstration of God’s love. And Abelard believed that Jesus’ demonstration of love was so powerful that it could transform our hearts and minds and turn us back to God.

Like the others, this theory has some support in the Scriptures. For example, Jesus tells his disciples to take up their crosses and follow him. Then in the passage we read for today from 1 Peter we read, “For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you should follow in his steps.” And also in John’s first letter he writes, “[W]hoever obeys his word, truly in this person the love of God has reached perfection. By this we may be sure that we are in him: whoever says, ‘I abide in him,’ ought to walk just as he walked.” The moral influence theory of atonement says that Jesus demonstrated God’s love to us in a transformative way through his life and death and that demonstration turns us back to God.

So which one of these theories is the right one? In talking about the Moral Influence Theory, Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry wrote: “I don’t believe it’s the whole story. But I think it’s [definitely] part of the story and we need to look at it more.” That is how I feel about all of these theories we’ve discussed. I don’t really believe any one of them is the whole story, the whole explanation of how we are saved, but I do believe that each one is a part of the story. And each one has value that we need to look at. To use the illustration of maps that Em Griffin spoke about in the quote I shared earlier, each of these theories is like a map of the same area but on a different layer. It is not unless we put them all together that we see the whole picture. Yet when we do that, it can be pretty confusing.

The answer to how Jesus’ death on the cross saves us is both all of these and none of them. It is a mystery that no one answer can fully explain. But that mystery doesn’t make it any less true. It simply reminds us that God’s ways are higher than our ways. God’s thoughts higher than our thoughts. What we know is that Jesus’ death reconciled us with God. It overcame whatever division has existed between humanity and God since the fall of Adam and Eve. How it did that is a bit of a mystery to us. But we can still rejoice in the mysterious salvation of God that promises us not only help in this life, but joyful hope for an eternity with God. Let us embrace this wonderful mystery and praise our loving God! Amen!