unpacking justification: the mechanics of representation and substitution
Click here for the series outline.
Like all ancient Mediterranean societies, Israel was characterized by a collectivist or group mentality. Individuals certainly thought of themselves as individual persons, but this individual identity was understood within the context of the group (especially kinship group) to which they belonged. These individual-corporate dynamics played a significant role in shaping their covenantal understanding. For example, kinship groups were viewed through the lens of their major heads (such as Adam, Abraham, or David) and thus were thought to have been shaped by the significant actions of those kinship heads and to reflect their dominant characteristics - a "like father, like son" sort of perspective. So, the descendant of Adam is affected by Adam's initial disobedience, the seed of Abraham is characterized by Abraham's obedience of faith, the son of David is marked out by David's purity of heart, and so on.
A related factor also at play in ancient Israelite society was that of substitution, the idea that one person or thing could stand in the place of another person or even the group. This was especially evident in sacrificial notions, whether atoning or otherwise. The two goats on the Day of Atonement stood in the place of the nation of Israel, carrying Israel's corporate sin in both death and exclusion (Lev 16:7-10). The animals offered by individuals stood in the place of the individual person, atoning for individual sin in death (Lev 17:11). In covenant ratification ceremonies, the sacrificial animal did not atone for sin, but still stood in the place of the two parties, reflecting their personal commitment to the terms of the covenant (e.g. Gen 15:8-21).
Furthermore, these representative and substitutionary facets of Israelite thinking were occasionally combined in some interesting ways related to sin, righteousness, and covenantalism. For example, Phinehas' slaughter of the Israelite man and the Midianite woman in Numbers 25:7-8 functions in a substitutionary fashion, whereby his individual action atones for the sin of the group, and in a representative fashion, whereby his action initiates a new divine covenant with him and his descendants.* Or, as another significant example, the Servant of Isaiah 40-55 functions as both representative of Israel and substitution for Israel, atoning for Israel's sin through his suffering and death, and through this bringing about a new exodus and a new covenant for God's people.
*By the way, there's lots of interest here for Pauline thought, not least the fact that this incident became the paradigm for willingness to do violence to fellow Jews out of zeal for the Law; cf. 1 Macc 2:23-26; Phil 3:5-6.
Click here for the next post in the series.
Like all ancient Mediterranean societies, Israel was characterized by a collectivist or group mentality. Individuals certainly thought of themselves as individual persons, but this individual identity was understood within the context of the group (especially kinship group) to which they belonged. These individual-corporate dynamics played a significant role in shaping their covenantal understanding. For example, kinship groups were viewed through the lens of their major heads (such as Adam, Abraham, or David) and thus were thought to have been shaped by the significant actions of those kinship heads and to reflect their dominant characteristics - a "like father, like son" sort of perspective. So, the descendant of Adam is affected by Adam's initial disobedience, the seed of Abraham is characterized by Abraham's obedience of faith, the son of David is marked out by David's purity of heart, and so on.
A related factor also at play in ancient Israelite society was that of substitution, the idea that one person or thing could stand in the place of another person or even the group. This was especially evident in sacrificial notions, whether atoning or otherwise. The two goats on the Day of Atonement stood in the place of the nation of Israel, carrying Israel's corporate sin in both death and exclusion (Lev 16:7-10). The animals offered by individuals stood in the place of the individual person, atoning for individual sin in death (Lev 17:11). In covenant ratification ceremonies, the sacrificial animal did not atone for sin, but still stood in the place of the two parties, reflecting their personal commitment to the terms of the covenant (e.g. Gen 15:8-21).
Furthermore, these representative and substitutionary facets of Israelite thinking were occasionally combined in some interesting ways related to sin, righteousness, and covenantalism. For example, Phinehas' slaughter of the Israelite man and the Midianite woman in Numbers 25:7-8 functions in a substitutionary fashion, whereby his individual action atones for the sin of the group, and in a representative fashion, whereby his action initiates a new divine covenant with him and his descendants.* Or, as another significant example, the Servant of Isaiah 40-55 functions as both representative of Israel and substitution for Israel, atoning for Israel's sin through his suffering and death, and through this bringing about a new exodus and a new covenant for God's people.
*By the way, there's lots of interest here for Pauline thought, not least the fact that this incident became the paradigm for willingness to do violence to fellow Jews out of zeal for the Law; cf. 1 Macc 2:23-26; Phil 3:5-6.
Click here for the next post in the series.
Labels: justification, paul and his letters, theology
posted by Michael Pahl at
6/25/2008
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home