Hamartiology from Soteriology

Lynn Vogel 18 February 2014 Systematic Theology

Anthropology, hamartiology, and soteriology come one right after the other in most systematic theologies. Typically, students begin with an analysis of humanity and what it means to be in the image of God. Naturally, the question of what sin does to humanity comes next, followed closely by the study of salvation. It is my suggestion that an adequate study of sin requires a deep understanding of the effects and results of salvation beforehand. What follows in this paper is a hamartiology that is derivative of soteriology. In other words, what does sin look like in the light of salvation? First, I will detail my methods. Second I will analyze the effects that salvation has on sin. Finally, I will consolidate these attributes of sin into a concise description. Predominantly the field of systematic theology has first dealt with hamartiology before analyzing soteriology. However, this is not pragmatic. It is not until we realize the holiness of God through the person of Christ, and come to put our faith, hope, and trust in Christ as a result, that we begin to see our utter sinfulness. Existentially, we experience salvation before we understand sin. Why not, then, have a hamartiology that is derivative of a soteriology? To be fair, the salvation and sin are in a sort of perichoresis. Without sin, there would be no need for salvation; without salvation there could be no understanding of utter sinfulness. As I have personally studied the debates between Calvinism and Arminianism, I have become growingly discontent with the lack of treatment of salvation before sin. Having laid out my methods, I will now move into an analysis of the Work of Christ, namely Jesus' life, death, resurrection, ascension, and His gift of the Holy Spirit. I will progress through each phase and determine what influence it has on sin. Before Jesus died, He was born. This may seem like an obvious statement. But many who study Soteriology forget that Jesus lived and taught before He was crucified. Is there anything

that can be said of Jesus' life and its effect on sin? Hastings Rashdall seems to think so. Building on the foundations laid out by Peter Abelard, Rashdall pursues an understanding of the life of Christ that falls under the Moral Exemplar theory of atonement. What effect does this theory have on sin? Rashdall points out that the life of Christ "really does make men better.1" In other words, the life of Christ is an example that actively changes people for the better during or after justification. Rashdall does not deny the power of the other aspects of Jesus' work, but does consider the life of Christ to initiate what we might call "sanctification or the move from a state of sinfulness toward one of sinless union with God. It is only in incorporating the life of Jesus into the atonement (or, as Rashdall says, "at-one-ment") that we are capable of "restor[ing] between God and man the union which sin has destroyed." This last claim is interesting. Rashdall has strong Biblical grounds for claiming that sin has destroyed the union between God and humankind. This is seen in many passages, not the least of which is Romans 1:20ff. Humankind, in its depravity, turned from God to worship everything but God. Consequently, God turned them over to do what they wanted, letting them loose on themselves and the consequences of their actions. Furthermore, John informs us in his first epistle, chapter 2, that we should live the sort of life Christ lived. It is through a proper way of living that our love for Christ is manifest; otherwise, by failing to follow Jesus we are in darkness and stumble about. But while Christ does teach us how to be better people, to help us on our journey of sanctification, this covers only the middle of the story of our salvation. Where does this story start? It starts at the end of Jesus' life. The death of Jesus Christ could be the singularly the most referenced event in the New Testament when it comes to atonement. The New Testament authors seemed to think that this

Rashdall, Hastings. The Abelardian Doctrine of the Atonement. In Doctrine and Development: University Sermons. London: Methuen, 1898.

one event was key in understanding the salvation story. In turn, understanding the effect of Christ's death in dealing with Sin will allow us to better understand the nature of Sin itself. I will begin with the words of Jesus Himself in Matthew 26:28. In these words we learn that the shedding of blood was for the purpose of forgiving sins.2 The parallel passage in Mark 14:24 states that the blood was poured out "for many." John tells us that Jesus Himself was the

i`lasmoj, or the atoning sacrifice, for the entire world, including his audience, his
colleagues, and (presumably) all believers, if not everyone in the world. If we were to conflate these ideas, we could say that Jesus died in order to forgive the sins of the whole world. Furthermore, we must consider Paul's understanding of the death of Jesus if we are to provide a holistic description of atonement and its effects on sin. Dunn notes that, for Paul, "the soteriological moment focuses entirely on the cross.3" Paul expounds greatly on the idea of Jesus' death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins. In Romans 8:32, Paul agrees with John (rather, it was the other way around) that the Son's work was on behalf of someone else. However, Paul expounds greatly on what the death of Christ does for believers, and he makes a unique claim. In Romans 6:2-7 Paul concludes that believers in Christ participate in Christ's death. Participation in Christ's death frees us from sin's power over us. Additionally, in Romans 5:8-9 Paul makes an argument from the lesser to the greater, indicating that we who believe will be saved because we have been declared righteous "by his blood.4" So we see a strong thread of at least identification,5 if not substitution, running through Paul's understanding of the atonement.

Cf. Matthew 26:28. The phrase reads eij afesin a`martiwn in which the preposition serves to begin a purpose clause. The purpose of the shedding of blood is the forgiveness of sins. 3 Dunn, James D. G. The Theology of Paul the Apostle. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1998. 4 The preposition in Romans 5:9 is actually en, but is commonly translated as an instrumental dative, resulting in a translation similar to the one provided here. See Wallace, 372 for more details on the possible translations of en. 5 See Dunn, 223 for an alternate description. He suggests we should refer to it as a participatory event.

Finally, in Paul we see that death is the natural consequence of sin (Romans 6:23). Paul sees the death of Christ on our behalf as a removal of the consequence of sin for those who believe in Him. Those who share in Christ's death, even though they still die physically, they die the temporary death that Christ dies. Those who die without Christ die the permanent death of sin.6 Because Christ was raised from the dead, those who die the death of Christ will also be raised from the dead. In effect, the power that sin once had, the power of permanent death, has been rendered powerless. Christ's work does not conclude with His death and resurrection. Christ ascended to the right hand of the Father and is serving, as the author of Hebrews says, as a high priest forever (cf. Hebrews 10:12ff for one example). What does a high priest do? He offers sacrifices for sin. But our Great High Priest, says the author of Hebrews, has offered a sacrifice once for all and is serving in the presence of God for all time on our behalf. Therefore, because our sins have been forgiven, we can hold on to our hope of the resurrection, we can "spur one another on to good works," we can encourage one another. In other words, we can live appropriately in community with one another, which community sin previously infected and prevented. Fortunately, living appropriately in community with one another is not accomplished by our own power. Paul criticizes the Galatians for trying to do just this. In Galatians 3:3 he asks his audience "Although you began with the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by human effort?" Later, in Galatians 5, Paul commands his readers to live in the Spirit, whereby we are able to refrain from provoking each other and causing others to stumble. Rather, by the power of the Holy Spirit we are able to effectively resist sin. So then, what can we say about sin after so many words have been said about salvation? Fortunately, many things. Without a life to live up to, without Jesus as an example, we are left to
6

Dunn, 223

our own devices. Paul laments that the Galatians are attempting to live apart from the Spirit. And where does this life apart from God leave? Romans 1:24 tells us that God handed those who rejected Him over to their own behavior, which (to understate the result) doesn't end well. It ends in utter sinfulness, corruption, and depravity. Further, sin separates. It separates humankind from God, and it separates humankind from itself. No one from among human beings is passed over by sin; all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God (Rom 3:23). Ultimately, sin affects everyone. Being infected by sin results in death for the individual. It lingers on after justification and continues to influence us away from God. If we are left to ourselves, we will naturally decline into more and more sin. Fortunately, the power of sin which is death has been rendered powerless via Christ's work in his death. Christ neutralized the power of sin in death by using death against it. While sin still influences us, we have another option: sin has become resistible. We might not always be aware of the option, given our sinful nature, but the option is there. The Holy Spirit helps us, guides us, and informs us of the other option to follow God. There are a few foreseeable critiques to the methods that I have used. Some might question my premise that "If Scripture says that Salvation solves a problem created by sin, then sin must actually pose that problem." Many of the ways of talking about salvation, justification, and sanctification are metaphorical. So can we draw conclusions about the way sin is dealt with by looking to these metaphors? My answer is that I have not carried the metaphor forward in my analysis of sin. The metaphor speaks to the reality of a process, and it is this reality that I have attempted to capture in my analysis. We could say that we metaphorically lay our hands on the

sacrifice of Christ, but this would be meaningless without understanding the underlying issue of the sacrificial system: that of the exchange of guilt and life.7 Another critique that someone might raise is the question of whether God was required to deal with sin in these ways because of the nature of sin. This is a restatement of the Euthyphro dilemma: Is something good because God says so, or does God recognize something as good? God deals with sin in this way because this is part of his nature. This is simply how God deals with sin. A third critique, stemming from the second, is the question of whether God could have dealt with sin in another way, perhaps just by forgiving it all without punishing or sacrificing. My answer to this is simply that counterfactual speculation is, at best, unnecessary, and at worst a cheapening of the reality of Christ's work.8 As such, I will not address counterfactual possibilities in this paper. As I have shown, sin affects us all, leads to death, and lingers on past justification. The Holy Spirit works with us to overcome the draw of sin now by conforming us to the life Christ lived. But the ultimate power of sin, death, has been rendered powerless through the work of Jesus Christ on the Cross. This view of sinfulness has been arrived at by an analysis of Christ's work and the salvation it brings. Studying soteriology has provided at least a base line for studying hamartiology.

7 8

Dunn, 221-2 Tyler Huffman, in conversation on the evening of 18 February 2014

Dunn, James D. G. The Theology of Paul the Apostle. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1998. Rashdall, Hastings. The Abelardian Doctrine of the Atonement. In Doctrine and Development: University Sermons. London: Methuen, 1898. Wallace, Dan B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.