¹ This is generally referred to as the ‘Christus Victor’ idea of atonement, following the title of Gustav Aulén's classic study on the subject (Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of Atonement, ET, New York: MacMillan, 1969 [1931])Google Scholar. On the patristic teaching, see especially Chapters 2 and 3 of this work (pp. 16–60).

² This is basically the view of both Rudolf Bultmann and Karl Barth; for Bultmann, Jesus' death and resurrection are salvific in that human beings may now participate or share in this event, dying and rising with him, while for Barth, all of humanity has already done so. This idea has gained considerable popularity since then, especially among biblical scholars; see for example Whiteley, D. E. H., The Theology of St. Paul (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1964), p. 130Google Scholar; Sanders, E. P., Paul and Palestinian Judaism (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1977), pp. 453, 467–8, 507, 511Google Scholar; Hooker, Morna, From Adam to Christ: Essays on Paul (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), pp. 9, 26–7 et passimGoogle Scholar; and Dunn, J. D. G., Romans 1–8 (Dallas, TX: Word, 1988), pp. 172, 181, 284–5, 329 el al.Google Scholar

³ On this point, see (among others) Borg, Marcus J., Jesus in Contemporary Scholarship (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1994), pp. 188–189.Google Scholar

⁴ See especially Wright, N. T., The New Testament and the People of God, Vol. 1 of Christian Origins and the Question of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1992), pp. 126–144, 148–51.Google Scholar

⁵ For examples of laws such as these, see especially Exod. 20:1 – 23:13; Lev. 18:1–20:22; 25:1–55; Deut. 1:16–17; 15:1–18; 20:5–7; 23:9–25:16; 27:16–26.

⁶ On this point, see Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, pp. 110–11. Ps. 119 provides an excellent example of this understanding of the law as blessing.

⁷ See, for example, the covenant curses in Lev. 26:14–45, where after each description of the divine punishment which will follow disobedience, God tells the people in different ways, ‘and if after that you continue to disobey me, I will punish you yet further’ (w. 18, 21, 23, 27); yet his unconditional love for the people is evident from the fact that at the end of the passage he promises never to abandon or destroy them completely (w. 40–5). The idea that punishment has the aim of correcting the people and bringing them back to YHWH is also found in passages such as Deut. 8:5;Judg. 2:11–22;Job 5:17; Ps. 81:11–16; 94:12; Prov. 3:11–12; Jer. 2:30; 5:3; 7:28; Ezek. 14:10–11, 22–23; Am. 4:6–11; Zeph. 3:2–7; 2 Mace. 6:12; 7:32–33, et at.

⁸ On these promises, see Isa. 9:6–7; 11:1–9; 16:5; 42:4; Jer. 31:31–34; 33:6–16; Ezek. 11:19–20; 34:23–30; 36:26–30; 37:24–27; Zech. 9:9–10, et al.

⁹ With regard to the idea of the exile of Israel in first-century Jewish thought, in addition to Wright's work, see several of the essays in Scott, James M., ed., Exile: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Conceptions (Leiden: Brill, 1997).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Wright, , New Testament, p. 273.Google Scholar

¹¹ Wright, , New Testament, p. 320.Google Scholar

¹² Wright, N. T., Jesus and the Victory of God, Vol. 2 of Christian Origins and the Question of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996), pp. 191–192.Google Scholar

¹³ See Matt. 13:40–43, 47–49; 25:31–46; Mark 13:24–27 and pars; John 5:25–29.

¹⁴ Förster, Werner, Palestinian Judaism in New Testament Times (ET, Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1964), p. 197. Cf. Wright, New Testament, pp. 220–2.Google Scholar

¹⁵ On this and many of the following points, see especially Sanders, E. P., Jems and Judaism (London: SCM Press, 1985), pp. 208, 240, 253–5, 260, 293, 307–8Google Scholar; Sanders, E. P., The Historical Figure of Jesus (London: Penguin, 1995), pp. 225–227, 236–42.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Matt. 11:28–29.

¹⁷ Mark 2:23–3:6; John 5:16–18.

¹⁸ Mark 1:40–45; 3:1–6; 5:24–34; Luke 5:12–14, 13:10–17; 17:11–19.

¹⁹ Matt. 13:36–43; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27–31; Mark 14:62.

²⁰ For a comparison of different views on the subject, see Tan, Kim Huat, The Zion Traditions and the Aims of Jesus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), pp. 11–23Google Scholar.1 would agree with her conclusion that ‘the action in the temple was a protest by Jesus, carried out in the spirit of the classical prophets, against the oppressive and profiteering regime run by the establishment under the cloak of the temple cult’ (pp. 231–2).

²¹ Boff, Leonardo, Passion of Christ, Passion of the World (ET, Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1987), pp. 44–45.Google Scholar

²² Wright Jesus, pp. 538, 565, 570–1, 608–9; cf. pp. 473, 577–8. Wright's view that all of God's people participate in Jesus' story is also found in The New Testament and the People of God, where he argues that ‘Israel's story has been embodied in one man’, that the Gospels are ‘the story of Jesus told as the history of Israel in miniature’, and that Jesus ‘as Messiah summed up Israel in himself (pp. 402, 447; cf. p. 406). This idea is further developed in The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991)Google Scholar, where he posits a ‘corporate christology’ in order to affirm that Jesus ‘is Israel’ (pp. 151–3). In order to attempt to ground these theological ideas in ancient Jewish history and thought, rather elaborate arguments are required, as is evident from Wright's work.

²³ Acts 20:28; Tit. 2:14; cf. 1 Cor. 6:20; Phil. 3:12; Rev. 5:9–10.

²⁴ Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; cf. 1 Tim. 2:6.

²⁵ Heb. 5:7–9; 9:12; 10:12–14.

²⁶ Gal. 3:10–14.

²⁷ Rom. 5:9–10; Col. 1:20–22.

²⁸ Gal. 2:17–21; l John 2:1–2; cf. Rom. 8:34.

²⁹ Rom. 5:8–9; 1 Cor. 15:3; Gal. 2:20; Eph. 5:2; 1 Thess. 1:10.

³⁰ Eph. 1:4; 5:25–30; Col. 1:22; Heb. 10:10, 14. Luther expresses this idea well when he writes that ‘through baptism and repentance, we begin to become godly and pure. God does not hold against us whatever sin is still to be driven out, because of the beginning that we have made in godliness.… He chooses not to charge this sin against us, though, until we become perfectly pure, he might justly do so. For this reason, he has given us a bishop, namely Christ, who is without sin and who is to be our representative until we too become entirely pure like him. Meanwhile, the righteousness of Christ must be our cover.’ Luther's Works, Pelikan, Jaroslav and Lehmann, Helmut T., eds (St Louis, MO: Concordia, Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1955–1974, Vol. 32, p. 28Google Scholar; cf. Vol. 31, pp. 298–9; Vol. 27, pp. 21, 227.

³¹ The only sense in which it might properly be said that God sent his Son to die is the sense in which we say that a country sends its soldiers out to die; actually, of course, it sends them out on a mission, and does not want their death, but it recognizes that the death of many will be the consequence of sending them out on that mission.

³² Brown, Joanne Carlson and Parker, Rebecca, ‘For God So Loved the World?’, in Brown, Joanne Carlson and Bohn, Carole R., eds, Christianity, Patriarchy, and Abuse: A Feminist Critique (Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim, 1989), p. 27. While I would agree with these conclusions, I would not agree with many of the other conclusions at which they arrive there.Google Scholar

³³ The New Testament never affirms that we are saved, justified, redeemed or reconciled to God ‘by’ Jesus' death or blood (hupo + genitive), but ‘by means of’ or ‘through’ his death or blood (dia + genitive or en + dative), that is, through his faithfulness unto death, the giving up of his life through which he sought our salvation.

³⁴ Sobrino, Jon, Jesus the Liberator: A Historical-Theological View (ET, Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1993), pp. 209–210.Google Scholar

³⁵ Sobrino, Jon, Christology at the Crossroads (ET, Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1978), pp. 207–208.Google Scholar

³⁶ See Malt. 16:21; Luke 13:31–34; 20:9–19, et a1.

³⁷ Squires, John T., The Plan of Cod in Luke-Acts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 173; see pp. 166–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁸ Cosgrove, Charles H., ‘The Divine dei in Luke-Acts’, Novum Testamentum 26, 2, p. 189.Google Scholar

³⁹ See Matt. 26:53–56; Luke 18:31; 24:44–47;John 19:24, 28, 36; Acts 1:16; 2:23; 4:27–28, el al.

⁴⁰ Rom. 6:3–11.

⁴¹ This means that there is both a Godward and a humanward aspect to Christ's work: however, the basis for Christ's past and present activity in relation to God on our behalf (pro nobis) is the change in us (in nobis) resulting from his past, present and future activity in relation to us (his teaching and example, the gift of the Holy Spirit, his ongoing activity in and through his body the church, the final transformation of believers which he will one day bring to pass, etc.). God accepted Christ's intercession for our salvation on the basis of the new life he would (and will) bring about in us through all of that activity.