“Christ Died For Us”

By Douglas J. Moo

[Douglas J. Moo is Wessner Chair of Biblical Studies, Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois.]

[This is the third article in the four-part series “Salvation in Paul’s Epistles,” delivered as the W. H. Griffith Thomas lectures at Dallas Theological Seminary, February 5–8, 2019.]

But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
—Romans 5:8

In the first two lectures, I surveyed in a cursory fashion the “why” and the “what” of salvation in Paul. The grace and love of the triune God are the motive for the inauguration of the new realm, even as God’s glory is its end. This new realm is filled with spiritual blessings that people, transferred into this realm from the old realm, enjoy. We now turn to the critical question of “how” God makes it possible for these blessings to be conferred on believers.

The Breadth Of Atoning Events

Our focus is on the founding events of the new realm, particularly Christ’s death and resurrection. These events constitute for Paul the heart of the “good news,” as the famous summary in 1 Corinthians 15:1–8 makes clear:

Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. 3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.[1]

Paul’s concern in this context, as the elaboration in verses 5–8 suggests, is with the third point in this summary: “he was raised.” But he sets this point in the broader context of the essential elements of the gospel he preaches: Jesus died, was buried,[2] was raised, and (proving that resurrection) “appeared” to many. The language Paul uses to introduce this passage makes clear that he is citing tradition: what he “passes on” (παρέδωκα) to the Corinthians is something he himself has “received” (παρέλαβον) (v. 3; compare also v. 1). It is entirely to be expected that the earliest Christians would have grappled with the significance of these redemptive events. Why did the Messiah have to die? What does the resurrection accomplish? Peter’s speech in Acts 2 reveals one early attempt to answer these questions—and, of course, Jesus himself addressed this issue in his own teaching. Paul assures the Corinthians that his teaching is located within this developing Christian tradition. Paul undoubtedly contributes significantly to this tradition. But we should not forget that he is not creating theology on this point, but developing and extending a theology that was already in place.

Paul’s brief outline of the “gospel I preach” focuses on the end of Jesus’s life. The history of theologizing about the atoning value of Jesus’s work has followed suit, with Jesus’s death on the cross as the focus of attention. However, we should begin by noting that Paul can attribute general soteriological significance to the entire “Christ event.” In Ephesians 3:11, he refers to “his [God’s] eternal purpose that he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord.” In 2 Timothy 2:9–10, he refers to the “appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.” When Paul becomes more specific about this “in Christ,” he mentions nine different “moments” in the story of Christ that have some kind of soteriological value:

Pre-existence. See Ephesians 1:4: “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.”

Incarnation. See for example, 2 Corinthians 8:9: “For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich.” See also Romans 8:3; Galatians 4:4.

Life. As noted above, it is possible, maybe probable, that Paul’s references to Jesus’s obedience (Rom 5:19; Phil 2:8) at least include Jesus’s life of faithful submission to the will of his Father, culminating at the cross.

Death. Paul refers to Jesus’s death in several ways: cross/crucify; blood; “flesh” (Eph 2:15; see cross in v. 16; compare also Col. 1:22); “handed over” (Rom 4:25; 8:32; Gal 2:20; Eph 5:2, 25; note 2 Cor 4:11, referring to Paul: “given over to death” [εἰς θάνατον παραδιδόμεθα]; compare also “gave himself” in Gal 1:4). References to Jesus’s sufferings probably focus mainly on Jesus’s death, but may include his “passion” more generally (2 Cor 1:5).

Burial. Christ’s burial is one of the elements of the gospel Paul passes on to the Corinthians (1 Cor 15:4); in Romans 6:4 and Colossians 2:12 he implies that believers benefit from their identification with Christ in his burial.

• Resurrection (Rom 4:25; 5:10; 7:4; 14:9; 2 Cor 4:10–11; 5:15; 13:4; 1 Thess. 1:10).
• Exaltation/Ascension (Rom 8:34; Eph 4:8–10).
• Intercessory Ministry (Rom 8:34; 1 Cor 1:8; Phil 1:6).
• Coming Again in Glory (for example, Phil 3:20–21; 1 Thess 1:10; 4:16–17).

This list should not deceive us into thinking that Paul is always interested in investing one moment above others with particular significance. These various moments are finally all of one piece, and we should be wary of too neatly distinguishing them. For instance, being “handed over,” which we have included above under Christ’s death, may include (or at least imply) his being “sent” into this world and the life of obedience that eventuated in the cross.

We noted earlier that in recent years scholars have criticized traditional atonement theories for being too narrow, in the sense that they have been preoccupied with the means of redemption at the expense of the outcome of redemption. Scholars have criticized traditional views for being too narrow in another sense as well: for focusing too exclusively on Christ’s death while inappropriately minimizing other aspects of Christ’s redemptive work, such as his life, his resurrection, and his exaltation.[3] When considering the

New Testament as a whole, this criticism may to an extent be justified. The Gospel of John attributes redemptive significance to the great sweep of Christ’s coming to earth and being “lifted up” on the cross. The Letter to the Hebrews, as has recently been emphasized, highlights the atoning significance of Christ’s ascent to and ministry in the heavenly tabernacle. And, while the Gospels clearly present the death of Christ as the culmination of his work, we should not neglect the theological significance of his life and teaching.[4]

However, the claim that we have focused too much attention on Jesus’s death has less force when we consider Paul’s letters. This is particularly so when we zoom in on the issue we are concerned with in 1 Corinthians 15: the inauguration of the new realm. Many of the soteriological benefits associated with various aspects of Christ’s life have more to do with the believer’s entry into the new realm, or ultimate salvation within that realm, than with God’s inauguration of that realm in Christ. We are reminded here again of the difficulty of neatly separating the work of God in Christ in inaugurating the new realm from our appropriation of that work as we enter that realm. However, if we ask which events Paul cites in the life of Christ as the basis for bringing people into the new realm, his focus on Christ’s death emerges clearly. Paul never explicitly cites Jesus’s earthly life as having soteriological value, although, as we have seen, references to Christ’s obedience in Romans 5:19 and Philippians 2:8 might include Jesus’s life.[5] Paul ties the inauguration of the new realm to Jesus’s incarnation once (2 Cor 8:9; compare Gal 4:4?), to Jesus’s resurrection five times (Rom 1:4 [?]; 4:25; 5:10; Eph 1:19–23; Col 2:12)—and to Jesus’s death 28 times. The implication of these statistics is confirmed by explicit references. In the 1 Corinthians 15 text quoted above, for instance, it is only Jesus’s death that Paul claims is “for our sins” (1 Cor 15:3). Paul elsewhere summarizes his message in terms of the “message of the cross” (1 Cor 1:18; see also 1:17; Gal 3:1; 6:14; Eph 2:16; Phil 3:18; Col 1:20; 2:14). Of course, there are clear rhetorical reasons for this focus on the cross in some contexts, where Paul is countering a spirit of triumphalism with a reminder of the believer’s cruciform existence. And not all these references are connected directly to soteriology. But the focus remains clear enough. Paul’s focus is clearly and unarguably on the cross as the decisive event in securing salvation for the people of God; any atonement theory that lays claim to Paul’s witness must account for that focus.

Before moving on to probe the significance of Jesus’s death for Paul, we should briefly comment on the significance of resurrection for our subject.[6] In general, Paul’s references to Christ’s resurrection take on seven patterns. Christ’s resurrection:

1. Is critical to faith (Rom 10:9; 1 Cor 15:14, 17; compare 2 Tim 2:8–9);
2. Is simply paired with death (Rom 4:25; 5:9–10; 6:3–10; 7:4; 8:17, 34; 14:9; 1 Cor 15:3–4; 2 Cor 4:10–12; 5:14–15; 1 Thess 4:14);
3. Is contrasted with Jesus’s earthly life (Rom 1:3–4; 1 Tim 3:16; 2 Tim 2:8–9);
4. Leads to exaltation (Rom 8:34; Eph 1:20; 2:6–7);
5. Guarantees the resurrection of believers (Rom 8:11; 1 Cor 6:14; 2 Cor 4:13–14; 1 Thess 4:14);
6. Leads to new life/power for the Christian life (Rom 6:4; 7:4; Col 3:1);
7. Confers soteriological benefit (Rom 1:4 [?]; 4:25; 5:10).

Several points in this list deserve comment.

First, Paul’s very common pairing of death and resurrection captures what is, for him, a fundamental pattern of Christ’s life.[7]

On one hand, this pattern provides a template for the lives of his followers, who by identifying with Christ’s death are assured of new life and are called on to lead lives of humiliation, service, and even suffering in order to enjoy new life and ultimate resurrection life. See especially 2 Corinthians 4:10–12:

We always carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body. For we who are alive are always being given over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that his life may also be revealed in our mortal body. So then, death is at work in us, but life is at work in you.[8]

At the same time, the two events in this pattern are often cited as the basis for benefits granted the believer: Christ’s death providing the basis for initial entrance into the new realm, with his resurrection providing the basis for faithful living in that realm (see especially Rom 5:10; 6:3–8; 7:4; 2 Tim 2:11–12). It is then, as believers participate in this life and are represented before God by this “living one,” that they find hope for ultimate vindication in the judgment of God. As I noted in an earlier lecture, Paul’s concept of justification includes not only a decisive moment of entrance into divine favor at conversion, but also a final declaration of “being right with God” in the judgment to come. Christ’s resurrected life is important as the means by which this final verdict will be confirmed.

Second, while this pattern might suggest we can neatly link the death of Christ to our entry into the new life, and the resurrection to its ultimate confirmation, Paul’s theology resists such a neat categorization. Death and resurrection are together fundamental for both aspects of our salvation. Romans 4:25 is especially important, since it claims that Jesus’s resurrection contributes to our justification (taking the Greek preposition διά to mean “for the benefit of”). We could perhaps think that Paul is focusing on the final aspect of justification, but this is unlikely in the context. Perhaps Paul is suggesting that, while Christ’s death is the definitive moment of justification, the resurrection was also necessary as the moment when that “justification” in its more positive aspect—a new status of “rightness”—was secured.[9] We may helpfully compare the (probably traditional) christological claim Paul makes in 1 Timothy 3:16: Christ “was vindicated [ἐδικαιώθη, “was justified”] by the Spirit.”[10]

The Meaning Of Jesus’s Death

Martin Hengel claims that Jesus’s atoning death and resurrection is “the most frequent and most important confessional statement in the Pauline Epistles.”[11] This observation is easily confirmed by even a cursory reading of Paul’s letters. However, what is somewhat surprising is that, while Paul repeatedly stresses the central importance of Christ’s death “for our sins” and his resurrection, he rarely comments directly on the way in which Christ’s death and resurrection takes care of the human sin problem. We may surmise that this was not an issue in the churches of Paul and that, for this reason, he had no need to address the matter in any detail.

However, while our evidence is not as abundant or as clear as we might like, Paul provides enough data for us to get a good general sense of how he views the significance of Christ’s death.

We begin at the most basic level: Paul’s frequent claim that Christ died “on behalf of” believers. He makes this point, using the preposition ὑπέρ, sixteen times.[12] Most of the occurrences of the preposition in these texts have a personal object. Romans 5:8 is typical: “God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (see also Rom 5:6; 14:15; 2 Cor 5:14–15; 1 Thess 5:10). Similarly, Paul speaks of Christ being “crucified” for us (1 Cor 1:13), “giving” himself for us (using a form of παραδίδωμι: Rom 8:32; Gal 2:20; Eph 5:2, 25; using δίδωμι: 1 Tim 2:6; Titus 2:14), being made sin for us (2 Cor 5:21), and becoming a curse for us (Gal 3:13). In a departure from normal Greek usage, Paul also speaks of Christ dying (1 Cor 15:3) or “giving himself” “for our sins” (Gal 1:4).[13] Paul’s use of both these formulas makes clear that Christ dying “for us” has atoning significance: it is by dealing with our sins that Christ’s death benefits us.[14] In dying, Christ takes on himself “the consequences of our sins.”[15]

If we probe just how Christ’s death is “on our behalf,” we naturally turn to the Old Testament, which has such a formative influence on Paul’s theology. Indeed, in 1 Corinthians 15:1–8, Paul claims that Christ’s death “for our sins” was “according to the Scriptures”—κατὰ τὰς γραφάς (v. 3). It is probable that this phrase modifies both parts of the previous sentence: it is not only Christ’s death that is “according to the Scriptures,” but Christ’s-death-for-sins.[16] It is not clear just which Old Testament texts Paul might have in view here. Nor does it help to look at Paul’s teaching elsewhere. Somewhat surprisingly, he never explicitly cites an Old Testament text to illuminate or explain the death of Christ for us. Most interpreters, however, rightly consider that the figure of the Servant in the fourth “servant song” (Isa 52:13–52:12) is a key Old Testament source for Paul’s thinking about Jesus’s death, especially in 1 Corinthians 15:3. As is well known, the Servant in this passage suffers and is “handed over” (in the Septuagint) to death because of the sins of the people. See especially:

Verse 5a: “he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities”; Septuagint: “But he was wounded because of our acts of lawlessness and has been weakened because of our sins [διὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν]” (New English Translation of the Septuagint);

Verse 8b: “for the transgression of my people he was punished”; Septuagint: “he was led to death on account of the acts of lawlessness of my people” (New English Translation of the Septuagint);

Verse 12, Septuagint: “because his soul was given over to death, and he was reckoned among the lawless, and he bore the sins of many [διὰ τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν παρεδόθη]” (New English Translation of the Septuagint).[17]

This is the only passage in the Old Testament in which someone’s death is pictured as “for” or “in place of” others. The profile of this servant figure, as one who dies because of and for the sake of the sins of the people, provides an obvious source for Paul’s elaboration of the meaning of Jesus’s death—a connection that had already been forged in the Christian tradition, going back to Jesus himself.[18] But there is no reason to think that Isaiah 53 is the only part of the “Scriptures” that Paul has in view here. The tradition before him, for instance, used psalms that describe the suffering and vindication of a “righteous person” (often, David himself) to characterize Jesus’s death (for example, Pss 22, 69).[19] That we hear words from one of these psalms on the lips of Jesus in Romans 15:3 (Ps 69:9b) makes clear that Paul was familiar with this tradition.

Another important Old Testament source for Paul’s interpretation of Jesus’s death is the Old Testament sacrificial system. The “Scriptures” Paul cites in 1 Corinthians 15:3 probably include reference to this tradition. We must remember that these passages and concepts do not exist in watertight compartments. The sin-bearing work of the Servant of Isaiah 53 is interpreted in sacrificial terms: “the Lord makes his life an offering for sin [Heb. אָשָׁם; Septuagint περὶ ἁμαρτίας]” (v. 10). While it is debated, Paul’s use of this same phrase in Romans 8:3 is probably a further allusion to this sacrifice (see New International Version, New Living Translation, New Jerusalem Bible, Christian Standard Bible).[20] This “sin offering,” also called a “guilt offering” (most English versions) or a “reparation offering” (New American Bible; compare New Jerusalem Bible), is prescribed in Leviticus 5:14–6:7. “Reparation” is argued to be the better rendering, because the text emphasizes that the sin involves a “direct offence against the Lord.”[21] The slaughter and offering of the animal “makes atonement” (Lev 6:7). However, the background for Paul’s sacrificial language should not be confined to one sacrifice. He also compares Christ to “the Passover lamb” (1 Cor 5:7) and, as we will argue below, also refers to the Day of Atonement ritual in Leviticus 16, referenced in Romans 3:25. And the words of institution that Paul quotes in 1 Corinthians 11:24–25—“This is my body, which is for [ὑπέρ] you,” and “This cup is the new covenant in my blood”—are ultimately allusions to the covenant-inaugurated sacrifice of Exodus 24:8 and, probably, to the Passover Lamb as well. Finally, Paul also alludes in Romans 8:32 to the Genesis 22 story about Abraham’s “sacrifice” of Isaac. Compare the first part of this verse—“He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all” (ὅς γε τοῦ ἰδίου υἱοῦ οὐκ ἐφείσατο ἀλλ᾿ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν πάντων παρέδωκεν αὐτόν)—with Genesis 22:12: “You have not withheld from me your son, your only son” (Septuagint, οὐκ ἐφείσω τοῦ υἱοῦ σου τοῦ ἀγαπητοῦ).

Of course, Paul also ties God’s redemptive work in Jesus into the larger biblical story. He utilizes two levels in this story to interpret the work of Christ: the broad human story in which Adam and Christ function as representative heads of humanity, and the story of Israel, with a particular focus on the plight created by her sin and idolatry and the anticipated rescue from that plight in a fresh and spectacular work of God.

While, as so often is the case, the Old Testament and Jewish teaching provide the key background for Paul’s theologizing, we should not neglect the larger Greco-Roman world, where the idea of giving one’s life for another was fairly widespread. Recent discussion of Jesus’s vicarious death has drawn attention, for instance, to the Greek “heroic death” motif, which features a person dying in order to avert a catastrophe.[22]

Notes

1. Quotations of Scripture come from the New International Version, unless noted otherwise.
2. Paul does not ascribe any explicit soteriological value to Jesus’s burial. Paul probably includes it here, and in Romans 6:3–4 and Colossians 2:11–15, to attest to the reality of Christ’s death.
3. For example, Peter J. Leithart (Delivered from the Elements of the World: Atonement, Justification, Mission [Grand Rapids: Baker, 2016]) argues that the pattern of the Levitical sacrifices, whose efficacy is based on several distinct “moments,” and not on death alone, is reason to think Christ’s atoning work likewise includes his life, death, resurrection, and ascension (for example, p. 115).
4. For criticism of the tendency to ignore Jesus’s life in atonement discussions, see, for example, N. T. Wright, The Day the Revolution Began: Reconsidering the Meaning of Jesus’ Crucifixion (New York: HarperOne, 2016), 170–73, 195–200; Leithart, Delivered from the Elements of the World, 115, et al.
5. On one reading of 2 Corinthians 5:19, God’s reconciling activity is the product of his “being in Christ”—probably a reference to the entire life of Christ. Murray J. Harris, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 442–43. This conclusion assumes the much-debated point that the syntax of the verse consists of an independent clause—“God was in Christ”—followed by an adverbial participle—“reconciling the world” (New Living Translation—rather than a periphrastic construction—“God was reconciling the world in [or through] Christ” (New International Version, English Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, Common English Bible, Christian Standard Bible).
6. For an emphasis on the theological centrality of resurrection in Paul, see Beale: “The majority of Paul’s doctrines ultimately derive from his continuing reflection on Christ’s resurrection as a new creation and escalation of the kingdom that he has already begun to establish” (G. K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New [Grand Rapids: Baker, 2011], 297).
7. Ridderbos plausibly suggests that death and resurrection were basic for Paul, and thus his inclusion of other moments in Jesus’s life involve moving backward (for example, incarnation, life) and forward (ascension, session) from this center focus (Hermann Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975], 54).
8. See also, for example, Rom 5:9; 8:17; 2 Cor 5:14–15; 13:4; Phil 3:10–11.
9. See, for example, Michael Horton, Justification, New Studies in Dogmatics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2018), 2:257–80.
10. On the soteriological significance of the resurrection, see especially Richard B. Gaffin Jr., Resurrection and Redemption: A Study in Paul’s Soteriology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978); and also I. Howard Marshall, Aspects of the Atonement: Cross and Resurrection in the Reconciling of God and Humanity (London: Paternoster, 2007), 68–97. I should note, however, that, as the New International Version translation “vindicated” suggests, it is also possible that Paul is using δικαιόω in this verse with a meaning unrelated to the doctrine of justification.
11. Martin Hengel, The Atonement: The Origins of the Doctrine in the New Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981), 37; see also Simon J. Gathercole, Defending Substitution: An Essay on Atonement in Paul (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2015), 78.
12. Martin Gaukesbrink, Die Sühnetradition bei Paulus: Rezeption und theologischer Stellenwert, Forschung zur Bibel (Würzburg: Echter, 1999), 261.
13. See Reimund Bieringer, “Dying and Being Raised For: Shifts in the Meaning of Hyper in 2 Cor 5:14–15, ” in Theologizing in the Corinthian Conflict: Studies in the Exegesis and Theology of 2 Corinthians, ed. Reimund Beiringer et al. (Leuven: Peeters, 2013), 167.
14. Contra Cilliers Breytenbach, “‘Christus Starb für Uns’: Zur Tradition und Paul-inischen Rezeption der sogenannten ‘Sterbeformeln,’” New Testament Studies 49 (2003): 447–75.
15. Simon J. Gathercole, “The Cross and Substitutionary Atonement,” Scottish Bulletin of Evangelical Theology 21 (2003): 160–61; “for the removal of sins,” see also Bieringer (“Dying and Being Raised,” 167).
16. Wolfgang Schrage, Die Erste Brief an die Korinther, vol. 4: 1Kor 15, 1–16, 24, Evangelisch-katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament (Neukirken-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2001), 34.
17. Two other passages in Paul may allude to the servant figure in connection with Jesus’s death: Romans 4:25—“He was delivered over to death for our sins” (ὃς παρεδόθη διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν); compare Isaiah 53:12; and Romans 5:19b—“through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous”; compare Isaiah 53:11b: “by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many.” See Douglas J. Moo, The Letter to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2018), 288, 345.
18. For the view that Isaiah 53 was important in Jesus’s own description of his death, see Douglas J. Moo, The Old Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 1983), 79–172.
19. See, again, Moo, The Old Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives, 225–300.
20. Moo, The Letter to the Romans, 480.
21. See, for example, Nobuyoshi Kiuchi, Leviticus, Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2007), 116. Jay Sklar sees the betrayal of covenant loyalty to be the fundamental issue with which this sacrifice deals (Leviticus: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2014], 118–25).
22. A notable example of this tradition is Alcetis, who, in the play of that name by Euripides, gives herself to death in place of her husband Admetus. See, on this tradition, Christina Eschner, Gestorben und Hingegeben “für” die Sünder: Die griechische Konzeption des Unheil abwendenden Sterbens und deren Paulinische Aufnahme für die Deutung des Todes Jesu Christi, 2 vols., Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 122 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2010). See also Gathercole, Defending Substitution, 85–107 (with particular focus on Rom 5:6–8); Michael Wolter, Paul: An Outline of His Theology (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2015), 101–2.