In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

357 CHAPTER THIRTEEN ATONEMENT: QUMRAN AND THE NEW TESTAMENT Paul Garnet INTRODUCTION The phrase “to make atonement” in the KJV usually translates a Hebrew word rp=ek=i (kipper), which occurs frequently in the sacrifice rules of the Pentateuch. This has given the word its meaning in modern speech (making up for wrong done) and in Protestant theology, where the term is used to describe the saving value of the death of Christ. Catholics usually refer to this as “redemption” rather than as “atonement.” The early church fathers often thought of the death of Christ as a “ransom,” following Mark 10:45: “The Son of Man came…to give his life as a ransom for many.” Speculation arose over the question, “To whom was the ransom paid: to God or to the devil?” The Fathers also put a strong emphasis on the death of Christ as a victory over sin, death, and the devil.1 In the Middle Ages, Anselm taught that the death of Christ was efficacious as a satisfaction given to the Father for the outrage made by sin to the divine honor; Abelard saw it as a demonstration of God’s love. More recently, moral-influence theories have pursued Abelard’s line of thought. Thus, for Socinus, Christ saves by revealing God as Savior by his life and by his death. Anselm’s view is more akin to later views of Christ’s death as substitutionary: he took humanity’s guilt and paid the penalty of sin (Luther, Calvin, Brunner, Berkouwer).2 In discussing the history and the significance of the idea in the biblical period, twentieth-century debate has centered around the question of 1. This has been taken up and strongly emphasized by Gustaf Aulén, Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of the Atonement (trans. A. G. Hebert; London: SPCK, 1931). 2. Besides ibid., for the history of the Christian doctrine of atonement, see Robert S. Franks, The Work of Christ in Its Ecclesiastical Development (London: Nelson, 1918); and, more recently, Hugh D. McDonald, The Atonement of the Death of Christ: In Faith, Revelation, and History (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1985). 358 ATONEMENT: QUMRAN AND THE NEW TESTAMENT whether atonement is propitiation or expiation. One propitiates the offended person (God), but one expiates one’s sin. In support of propitiation , some have pointed out that atonement brings about an end of the wrath of God. Obviously, the propitiation understanding would give weight to the Anselmian tradition. Supporters of expiation point out that God is never the object of the verb kipper in the OT or of its NT Greek equivalents. No one ever propitiates God, since it is not God but humanity that needs to be reconciled. Only the guilt of sin stands in the way, and this requires expiation. This idea is closely linked to the thought that atonement is really a cleansing.3 Scholars have attempted to make progress in the debate about propitiation/expiation by examining the grammatical usage of the verb kipper in the OT and the DSS. In the middle of the twentieth century, two such inquiries resulted in two opposite conclusions (Leon Morris for propitiation, and Stanislas Lyonnet for expiation).4 Another center of discussion is the question of the origin of the idea of the atoning value of the death of Jesus and in particular of possible roots in Judaism. Do the DSS offer views of a saving, vicarious suffering or death, which may turn out to be an important source of NT atonement ideas? It should be borne in mind, however, that the doctrine of atonement is only a part of any theology of salvation. In the case of the NT, it is a vital part, though much less so in the DSS. There are ways in which the scrolls illuminate NT soteriology, including its atonement doctrine, apart from DSS atonement statements as such. At the end of the article I shall outline two of these, which I have found to be helpful: 1. Fire imagery and the idea of accepting the punishment, 2. The passing of time and the idea of exilic debt. First, however, I tackle the two questions of the meaning and origin of NT atonement ideas by the following procedure: 1. Briefly summarize previous findings on the use of the term kipper and its cognate kôpher (rpewOk=, bribe, compensation payment, or ransom) in the OT. 2. Analyze the grammar of the use of this term...

Share