Periodical Reviews -- By: Anonymous

Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 150:598 (Apr 1993)
Article: Periodical Reviews
Author: Anonymous


Periodical Reviews

“The Absence of an Atoning Sacrifice in Paul’s Soteriology,” Bradley H. McLean, New Testament Studies 38 (1992): 531-53.

In this article McLean argues that “an honest and critical understanding of OT sacrifice on the one hand, and of Paul’s letters on the other hand, prohibits a sacrificially based interpretation of Christ’s atoning death” (p. 531). He defends this thesis with five points: “1) sacrifice does not atone for personal sin; 2) a sacrificial victim becomes neither sinful nor accursed, but remains holy; 3) there are no explicit textual references in Paul’s letters to Christ’s death as an atoning sacrifice; 4) references to Christ’s blood in Paul’s letters cannot be interpreted as implicit references to an atoning sacrifice; 5) Paul’s interpretation of the suffering and death of Christ is incompatible with sacrificial theology” (pp. 531-32).

The first argument is foundational for McLean’s contention that Christian conceptions of the atonement, perhaps even in Paul, are incompatible with the Old Testament understanding of sacrifice. Writing with considerable dependence on the work of Jacob Milgrom, McLean maintains that the חטאת sacrifice was an offering of purification intended not to cleanse the offerer, but the sanctuary, which was contaminated by the sin of the offerer. McLean’s explanation neglects the fact that this ceremony results in the forgiveness of the sinful offerer (Lev 4:26, 31, 35) or offerers (4:20). Further, his argument that כפר על refers to the purification of the temple “on behalf of” the offerer does not do justice to Leviticus 16:16–20, where the priest “makes atonement for” (כפר על) the holy place. Just as the temple is cleansed in this passage, so are the people cleansed when atonement is made for them. McLean does not adequately support his thesis at this point, for the Levitical system does address the issue of human atonement, not just temple purgation, through sacrifice.

McLean argues that Paul’s understanding of the atonement is foundational to his soteriology, but he contends that the apostle’s doctrine is unrelated to the Jewish concept of sacrifice. Several comments are in order here. First, one’s understanding of the Old Testament sacrifices will affect one’s understanding of Paul’s background and his references to the death of Christ. McLean recognizes that Paul speaks of the “blood” of Christ as a synonym fo...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()