In the Second Temple period, the Jewish community saw the Day of Atonement having specially modified requirements. As originally given, the Day of Atonement was to cover over sins committed by the nation of Israel in ignorance. This requirement had taken on another nuance by adding to it the requirement of repentance for the efficacy of the sacrifice to be realized. Why this is important is that repentance presupposes the understanding of an authoritative standard to which one must conform. Repentance also presupposes conviction of the transgression to this standard in such a way that immediate judgment is not realized and restitution may be undertaken. Interestingly enough, these components of repentance were seen as offered only to the nation of Israel as covenant partners with God. Accordingly, the Day of Atonement was transformed from a covering of sin that was unknown to the person and forgiveness extended solely by the good pleasure of God to being a type of forgiveness earned through meritorious acts by those afforded the privilege. No longer was atonement seen as covering those sins still unknown to the sinner leading the pardoned sinner to pursue obedience to the Law out of gratitude to God’s covenantal faithfulness. Rather, atonement became the process by which the guilty sinner sought to mitigate his judgment before God for transgressions committed; all under the label of repentance.
The Removal Of Guilt Upon Entry Into The Community
The fact that all of the Torah including its civil, ceremonial and sacrificial aspects had been given exclusively to the nation of Israel only augmented the erroneous belief that right standing with God was only offered to the Jewish community. This same community that came to see the forgiveness of transgressions as realized primarily from the act of repentance resulted in a religious system that understood God to be merciful but only to some. The pagan world was not privy to this forgiveness and would in fact be harshly judged for their rebellion before God; a rebellion that the Jewish community saw themselves exempted from. This was not primarily by the expiation of iniquity through faith but because of the covenantal promises to the nation as a whole. In like manner, many evangelical Christians today see their right standing before God as dependent upon acts of piety such as repentance. It is clear that the biblical narrative does include repentance as one aspect of saving grace but a right understanding of Scripture leads one to see that genuine repentance is the result of saving grace and not the ground. Additionally, many evangelicals affirm the notion that such acts of piety are by necessity found within the faith community of the church. It is rightly understood that without the saving grace of God, as embodied within the Church, such acts of piety are impossible to the unregenerate world. The error occurs when the faith community is seen as the seminal factor to a restored relationship with God. In short, when one is seen as gaining access to all that is required in salvation by becoming a member of the faith community as opposed to the biblical presentation that saving grace comes to the individual at the sole prompting of God resulting in entrance into the faith community, the error has occurred. What is at play here is that although entrance into the covenant community of faith is a necessary result in the biblical economy of salvation, it is a result that is founded upon God’s regenerating activity in the life of the sinner. To put it another way, entrance into the covenant community of faith flows out of God’s regeneration of the sinner and is not prerequisite as some act of piety bringing about salvation. God has elected to save His Church because of His love for Her and not because one is found on Her roles.
Older
Top
