The Atonement Part 8: Jesus Died for Us

Today we get to the crucial question of what does it mean that "Jesus died for us?”, The Nicaean Creed says that Jesus died “for us and for our salvation” In evangelical and western theology, we make a lot of these phrases, and they are important theologically, but we put a lot of freight into the preposition “FOR” and assume an understanding that might not even be in the text.     “For” Does this phrase, “for us” (or “for all”), mean “for our sake” (benefaction), or “on our behalf” (representation), or “in our place” (substitution)? There are 4 Greek words used as the 1 English word “for”. Greek is specific.     Anti: this for that (substitution or exchange) • Eye for (anti) an eye, tooth for (anti) a tooth (Matt 5:38)  • “Do not repay anyone evil [in exchange] for (anti) evil” (Rom 12:17)  • Ransom for (anti) many (Mark 10:45)  Dia: Because of or on account of  • We looked at this in our Isaiah 53 episode (dia and mim)  • Doesn’t ever mean “in the place of”  Peri: Concerning, about    Huper:   • in some entity’s interest: for, on behalf of, for the sake of,  • the moving cause or reason: because of, for the sake of, for, and • denoting general content: about, concerning.  • It is interesting that Paul always uses huper when talking about Christ’s death being “for us” or “for our sin”  Conclusions:   • “For us” is about   • Representation not substitution  • Rescue and healing not punishment  • benefit out of love not wrath or appeasing justice  • Huper and peri are always used in the “for us” and “for our sins” verses.  • These are about representation or simply concerning the benefit  • If they meant to communication substitution or PSA, they would have used anti, but that word for exchange or substitution is never used except in Mark 10:45 (ransom for many), which we covered in our gospel episode and showed that it is not about Penal Substitution.   • Substitution neglects the two-sidedness of Christ’s work: Christ acts both on behalf of God, representing God to humanity, and on behalf of humanity, representing humanity to God.  • Penal Substitution flies in the face of the Torah which in multiple places forbids for someone to die in the place of another for their sins.   • Representation, therefore, allows us to express the two-sidedness of the one undivided divine work of salvation.   • Substitution carries an individualistic emphasis: we think of substitution as primarily an exchange between individuals—this one in place of that one. Yet, Paul nearly always uses plural, corporate language when speaking concerning Christ’s death “for” others. Only twice does Paul use singular terms with an individual emphasis.   • In every other instance, some fifteen times, Paul uses plural language with a corporate emphasis. This corporate emphasis is reflected in the plural language used elsewhere in the New Testament concerning Christ’s death “for” others. Jesus is not the universal substitute, taking the place of each human one by one (exclusion), but rather our corporate representative, representing the place of all humanity at once (inclusion)— “once for all” (Rom 6:10).