Symposia: The Cross, the Atonement, and the Eucharist in Luke (and Hebrews)

Dr. Arthur Just Jr., CTSFW Professor of Exegetical Theology

The biblical story is a story of blood and sacrifice in the presence of God. To enter into the presence of God, one needs to pass through blood. The theology of divine presence is central to the Old Testament and continues into the New in the birth of Jesus Christ. Luke begins by moving from the temple to the baby in the womb of the Virgin Mary. There is a shift from God’s holy of holies in the temple to the flesh of Jesus, who is both God and man.

The story of everything is driven by atonement, by blood and sacrifice, and finally by Eucharist, which is where we join Christ in the blood and sacrifice.

Only Luke and Paul have the words of substitutionary atonement over the bread. “Given on behalf of you.” The language is reminiscent of the sacrificial system of the Old Testament, particularly Leviticus and Isaiah 53. Only in Luke do you also find this substitutionary language in the giving of the blood. As Luke T. Johnson, a historian of early Christianity, once wrote: “For you: the sacrifice is vicarious. The phrase “hyper hymon” ([Greek] ‘for you’) is found in verse 19 [Luke 22:19] and is repeated here; it means both ‘in place of you’ and even more ‘in your behalf.’”

Luke references the death of Jesus in his institution narrative in Luke 22. “Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed” (Luke 22:7). The narrative concerns two distinct and parallel events: the celebration of the Passover according to the old covenant, and an institution of a new covenant. The hearer must keep both of these in mind as the narrative progresses. The Passover lamb must be slain, the Passover feast must be prepared and eaten. But THIS feast will be unlike any other. It makes obsolete the sacrifice of the Old Testament.

The disciples prepared for this meal, with the expectations of celebrating another Jewish Passover. But what these disciples experienced was not another old covenant Passover but one given new meaning in terms of Christ Himself, making it His meal, on the night when He was betrayed. A meal that supersedes all other meals. This is Jesus’ Passover because on this night the Lamb who must be sacrificed stands on the threshold of the new era of salvation. After this Passover, there will be no more need for the Jewish Passover (1 Corinthians 5:7: “Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed”).

The world has passed over from death to life. His life is offered continually. This is the Passover for which all the other Passovers were preparation. Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, as it says in Revelation 5.

Jesus’ impending death is referenced in Luke 22:15 “before I suffer” and verse 37: “For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered [also translated “reckoned” as referenced in an earlier symposia lecture] with the transgressors.’ For what is written about me has its fulfillment.”

In Luke is also the pastoral character of the distinctively added, “for you” and poured out “for you” in the institution narrative. Where Matthew and Mark accent the universal atonement (as ransom for many), Luke makes it personal: for you. For the disciples. It transforms it into a liturgical statement that brings the universal atonements into the mouths of the disciples and us. The worshipper knows himself personally to be addressed by the Lord.

Is this not the Lutheran way? Do we not say, “The body of Christ given for you. The blood of Christ shed for you.” For me [Dr. Just said], this is one of the most pastoral moments in the ministry. When I am placing the body and blood of Christ in the mouths of the saints, and they are in that moment participating in the atonement of Christ. Luke has taken the historical event of atonement and placed that atonement in the mouths of his communicants.

Following the institution in Luke, an argument breaks out among the disciples about who’s the greatest and Jesus responds with the message that they are humble servants as He Himself is. “But I am among you [in certain translations “I am in the midst of you”] as the one who serves” (Luke 22:27). The one who gives His body and blood, for you—He reiterates that—will always be in their midst. The real presence of Jesus. Jesus will continue to be in the presence of his church in Communion as they dine. Goes from the universal to the particular, form the many to one, that what happened on Good Friday happens for every believer.

In Luke, Jesus called the cup “the new testament in my blood,” reflecting the language in the Passover account in Exodus 24, “the blood of the covenant.” They are brought into the cup and receive all its benefits made possible by the sacrifice of Jesus. Since God incarnate is the host and he gives His body and blood with the bread and wine, Luke stresses the new testament, which is unique to Luke. He alludes to the promise of a new covenant, which Jesus fulfills in the shedding of his blood. These are callbacks to the prophetic passages like Jeremiah 31:34: “And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

The accent of the Luke 22 institution narrative falls on the blood of Jesus. Being poured out suggests both the pouring of the cup and the blood that pours from the body of Jesus on the cross. Jesus fulfills all the many bloody sacrifices of the Old Testament, including the poured out in Exodus 24 and referenced in Isaiah 52:15: “until the Spirit is poured upon us from on high, and the wilderness becomes a fruitful field, and the fruitful field is deemed a forest.”

The drinking of blood would have been an extreme offense to the Jews; and now, to refuse to recognize Christ’s body and blood in the Supper, is to court condemnation as Paul warns. As the Church now shares in the body and blood, it is bound together in the new creation in the body of Christ.

In conclusion, the evangelist Luke shows how Jesus, on the night in which He was betrayed, looks forward to His atonement for the sins on the cross in our behalf. And already here in this meal He gives His body for you, and pours out His blood for you. Luke’s atonement theology affirms that at our altars we receive the sacrifice Christ offered once for all on the altar of the cross, so that the body and blood of Christ Jesus as offered on the cross for the atonement of the sins of the whole world will nourish and strengthen us until at least we gather at the heavenly banquet to feast with the Lamb and all His saints.

~~~~
This concludes the lectures for today. A short vespers service (which is not being livestreamed) is taking place right now, and the other excitement for the evening is our second annual King’s Men Alumni Game: current King’s Men versus King’s Men Alumni. All are invited to Wambsgans Gymnasium at 7:00 p.m.

Please note to our livestream watchers that the short exegetical papers being presented tomorrow will not be streamed. Logistically there’s just too many of them, spread across too many classrooms. However, you can view the titles of all 10 papers and their presenters by clicking on the brochure at www.ctsfw.edu/symposia. I would recommend contacting the speakers directly (most are pastors, so you should be able to find their emails through the LCMS locator) if you are interested in reading their paper. We will not be providing summaries for those.

Symposia: Penal Substitutionary Atonement?

Dr. Walter A. Maier III, CTSFW Professor of Exegetical Theology

The phrase “penal substitutionary atonement” captures the essence of what I was taught when I was young: that Jesus not only led the perfect life, He also took upon Himself the sins of the world and paid fully for those trespasses with His suffering and death on a cross. In other words, Jesus took our place and so made possible our salvation.

However, I became aware of another position of the saving work of Christ, which has some influence in the Christian Church, even among Lutherans. This creeping heresy, taught by Gerhard Forde (1927-2005), is why the Exegetical Department chose the theme “The Cross, the Atonement, and the Wrath of God” for this year’s Exegetical Symposium. A summary of Forde’s teachings:

God wants to be merciful, but natural man rejects God’s mercy. This arouses the wrath of God, in which God makes himself absent/hidden from human beings. God then becomes man and comes to us to be present for us. Christ must come this way in order to show His mercy. So Christ came, preaching forgiveness, and unilaterally forgiving sins without any so-called payment being made for the debt of sin, and we, being natural, unconverted man (i.e. works-righteousness legalists) killed Christ. Christ was put to death because he forgave sins. It was not for sins that He died, in order to make forgiveness possible. Instead, we considered what Christ did as wrong. Thus Christ bore our sins in His body not for a substitutionary reality, but because we sinned, beat His body, put a crown of thorns on His head, and nails in His hands.

An analogy of this goes as follows: A child is in the street, a man casts himself in the path of the truck, saves the child, but is in the process killed. He gave his life for another but it was an accident. In this analogy, we are the ones driving the truck of legalism. Jesus’ death was a sacrifice for us, but not in the sense of substitutionary atonement. He did not die for our sins, to pay the penalty for our transgressions. Forde explains that Christ’s death saves in part because it reveals our sin of rejecting the merciful God. Christ’s sacrifice unmasks our legalism and shows His grace and mercy. God is satisfied when we believe and trust in Him as the God who has and shows mercy.

Dr. Maier paused her for a brief comment: we would all agree that humanity is in bondage to works righteousness. Some aspects of Forde’s teachings even come close to the truth, so much so that, at first glance, much of it seems unobjectionable. But a longer looks reveals the untruths at its core.

Forde’s position demands: Why can’t God just pardon without payment for sin or fulfillment of the Law? Why can’t God unilaterally forgive as we do? If God is merciful, why must justice be satisfied before He can enact mercy?

If one says that God must be satisfied, then, according to Forde, “everything depends on Jesus’ punishment and death but not on the resurrection. There is no need for a resurrection really—one could just as well say that the Son of God suffered and was killed to pay the debt and that’s all there is to that. What need is there for anything more?” He argues: “The transfer of someone else’s sin to the innocent is absurd and improper, just as in reverse the transfer of someone else’s righteousness to the unrighteous.”

The deep problem undergirding Forde’s psotion is that Forde does not like or accept all of the teaching of Scripture about God. In a selective manner he holds to the passages he likes. He wants a God that conforms to his preconceived notion about who God should be. But we are to hold to the whole counsel of God’s Word, not parts of it. Certainly God is merciful, gracious, and loving, but so too is He holy, righteous, and just.

Forde does not have the proper balance between his mercy, grace, and love on the one hand, and his holy, righteousness, and justice on the other. “God had to be true to himself” (to borrow Forde’s phrase). God had to be God. In His holy, righteousness, and justice, He could not just ignore sin to unilaterally forgive man’s sin. Something had to be done to take away the offense to those attributes of God. To take from Forde, again: “Let God be God.”

Forde does not speak of God as holy, righteous, and just, but as a kind of celestial bookkeeper, a kind of tyrant. It’s not redemption, but a matter of God being bought off. It’s not His righteousness and holiness that demand blood, but a sort of divine cruelty.

Forde asks, incorrectly: why must God’s justice be satisfied before he can be merciful? We answer: justice is an attribute of God, and because of His mercy, grace, and love, God sent His Son to die for the world. Forde questions why God should find the death of the Son as acceptable and doubts whether His death is even enough to pay for the sins of the whole world. But teachings throughout the Word speak of Jesus as the perfect sacrifice. His death is acceptable because He was not only a man but also God. Because God was involved, redemption is complete and universal.

The whole of the Bible speaks to this truth, beginning with the Old Testament and the first Gospel announcement:

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel” (Genesis 3:15).

God always forgave in view of the coming deliverer, who would be wounded even unto death for the sins of Adam and Eve and their sinful descendants. Genesis 22 (when Abraham is tested, and obediently takes Isaac to the mountain to put Him to death, only to have the Angel of the Lord provide a ram as a substitutionary sacrifice), shows that substitutionary sacrifice is acceptable to God. This vicarious sacrifice foreshadowed both the mosaic sacrificial and the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. One life takes the place of another. “The substitutions of one life for another is acceptable to God—that is what relieves us from sacrificing average sinful life” (Kaiser in “Hard Sayings of the Old Testament”).

Mosaic Law continues the foreshadowing of the substitutionary sacrifice who would be put to death once for all:

“He shall lay his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him” (Leviticus 1:4).

“Speak to the people of Israel, saying, If anyone sins unintentionally in any of the Lord’s commandments about things not to be done, and does any of them, if it is the anointed priest who sins, thus bringing guilt on the people, then he shall offer for the sin that he was committed a bull from the herd without blemish to the Lord for a sin offering. He shall bring the bull to the entrance of the tent of meeting before the Lord and lay his hand on the head of the bull and kill the bull before the Lord…And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands on the head of the bull before the Lord, and the bull shall e killed before the Lord” (Leviticus 4:2-4, 15).

Symbolically, God’s justice was carried out and thus the sinner was spared death. The sacrifice stands between (i.e. “atones for”) the sinner and God’s judgment. The priest atones for the sinner and he (or they) are forgiven. Indeed, the sacrificial directives in Mosaic Law have their roots in Genesis 3:15. The promised savior would be wounded unto death. Thus is demonstrated God’s nature: His holiness, righteousness, justice, as well as His grace, mercy, and life. Payment has been made to God for every sin. Jesus Christ has rendered full payment for our debt.

Zechariah, chapter 3:

Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him. And the Lord said to Satan, “The Lord rebuke you, O Satan! The Lord who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this a brand plucked from the fire?” Now Joshua was standing before the angel, clothed with filthy garments. And the angel said to those who were standing before him, “Remove the filthy garments from him.” And to him he said, “Behold, I have taken your iniquity away from you, and I will clothe you with pure vestments.” And I said, “Let them put a clean turban on his head.” So they put a clean turban on his head and clothed him with garments. And the angel of the Lord was standing by.

And the angel of the Lord solemnly assured Joshua, “Thus says the Lord of hosts: If you will walk in my ways and keep my charge, then you shall rule my house and have charge of my courts, and I will give you the right of access among those who are standing here. Hear now, O Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who sit before you, for they are men who are a sign: behold, I will bring my servant the Branch. For behold, on the stone that I have set before Joshua, on a single stone with seven eyes, I will engrave its inscription, declares the Lord of hosts, and I will remove the iniquity of this land in a single day. In that day, declares the Lord of hosts, every one of you will invite his neighbor to come under his vine and under his fig tree.”

Symposia: Sacrificial Atonement and the Wrath of God in the Light of the Old Testament

Dr. John Kleinig, Professor Emeritus at Luther College Adelaide, South Australia

What I want to do is give you a broad stroke overview of atonement, primarily in the Old Testament and how that hinges on our understanding of the New Testament. People in the ancient world believed they could atone for their sins by offering sacrifices to the gods. That seems to be innate in our humanity. We’ve done something wrong, we’ve disturbed the powers that be, and we’ve got to make amends. I put it to you that’s still ingrained in our humanity.

In stark reversal to that common conviction, the Bible teaches that God Himself atones for the sins of the world by the sacrifice that He provides for them in and through His human Son, His incarnate Son. So not atonement that we make, but that atonement that God makes for us.

As you all know, God so loved the world that He sacrificed His Son that whoever believes him would not perish but have eternal life. And John adds, at the end of that chapter, a verse that is seldom regarded but is significant: “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him” (John 3:36).

Atonement should not be a matter of dispute for us, as it is laid out in the third article of the Augsburg Confession. Jesus was sacrificed not only for original sin but also for other sins, to propitiate God’s wrath. Then in the next article we confess that those who believe in Christ are justified for His sake because He has made satisfaction for their sin by His death.

The doctrine of the atonement doesn’t explain the significance/meaning of Christ’s death (although that’s implied in it), but rather teaches what Christ accomplishes by His death. Atonement isn’t a theory because it doesn’t have to do with idea but with realities, facts. Atonement is not a theory, it’s a reality.

The rite of atonement was part of the order of service in Israel; it was the first enactment every morning and every evening as the daily sacrifice was presented. It very much performs a similar role to our rite of Confession and Absolution in a Communion service. It’s the first act in the order of service. Now, these daily rites of atonement were expanded to include sin offering for purification from particular sins and guilt offerings for particular acts of desecration. In Leviticus 17:11-12, God makes this decree in the rite of atonement:

“For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life. Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood.”

God gives this blood from the sacrifice to His people on the altar, and He gives the blood to make atonement on the altar. Blood, atonement, altar belong together. It is the blood that makes atonement—it’s not the death of the animal that’s necessary. The rite of atonement is not the sacrifice, the killing of the atonement. It’s the splashing, the pouring out of the blood on the altar. Here, as elsewhere in liturgical context, the Hebrew verb for making atonement is the technical term that refers to the very simple act of splashing the blood—the high priest (who both represents the people and also represents God) pouring it out on the altar.

Now by the association of this verb “to make atonement” with the word for ransom in Hebrew, atonement is also to be understood as the payment that God makes to ransom His people.
These are words of institution. The focus on the blood and the application on the altar. God gives the blood. God institutes the use of blood by the means by which He Himself grants/accomplishes atonement. Second, God institutes this rite as a vicarious act by which the life of an animal is exchanged for the life of the people. The death of the animal provides life. Not from the animal, but life from God through the blood. Thirdly, the Israelite are ransomed from death by the blood of the lamb. Since God instituted the rite of atonement as part of the service of burnt offering every morning and evening, it’s placement in the service shows us its nature.

The act of atonement is no longer performed repeatedly as a regular rite each morning and evening as at the temple in Jerusalem, because Jesus has atoned for all human sin once and for all in human history by offering Himself as the perfect sacrificial victim. Secondly, through Jesus as high priest, all people—Jews and Gentiles—now have safe access to God the Father. Through Him and His blood, they may now draw near to God the Father with boldness and confidence to receive grace and mercy from him. “Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need” (Hebrews 4:16).

Since we have been justified by the blood of Jesus, says Paul in Romans 5, we have access to God’s grace (“Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God” Romans 5:2). That’s the term: access. As well as that, we have been consecrated through the blood of Jesus as members of God’s holy priesthood, to serve as holy priests already now with Jesus. Whereas atonement and cleansing was done in the Old Testament for admission to God’s presence in the earthly sanctuary (temporary), now in the New Testament it is for admission to His heavenly sanctuary. We worship with the angels and serve as holy priests even here on earth.

It is by Christ’s suffering and death that He ushers us into His Father’s presence. Because Jesus is God’s Son, atonement is a Trinitarian enactment. You can’t make sense of it except in Trinitarian terms. Jesus was chosen by His Holy Father as the Lamb, the sacrificial offering before the creation of the world, and revealed in the last times for the sake of all men. Since God loved all people, He sent His Son to make atonement for their sins. God the Father offered His Son, once and for all, to bear the sins of the world:

“Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Hebrews 9:26).

Jesus was offered up. The passive indicates that it is God the Father who offers up His Son. Through the eternal Spirit, Jesus, God’s incarnate Son, in turn offered Himself without blemish to God the Father (Hebrews 9:14). Since He loved the Church, He gave Himself up on her behalf as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God the Father.

Notice the Trinitarian movement. Up to down and then up again. Since it is a Trinitarian enactment, atonement is also eternal, eschatological (i.e. “relating to death, judgment, and the final destiny of the soul and of humankind,” as per Google) in nature. It occurs in human history for the benefit of all humanity, but it reaches God’s presence in heaven and, most importantly, anticipates the last judgment. Its practical purpose is the favorable reception of sinners by God now in the Divine Service and on the last day in the last judgment. We meet before God the Judge every Sunday and meet before God the Judge on the last day. Since it has to do with the last judgment, and is eschatological, therefore, the focus of the attention of the New Testament focus shifts from God’s holiness to God’s righteousness.


Also, please note: as per the last couple of summaries, much of this was pulled directly from the speaker as he presented on his topic. Thus the use of “I” throughout. That said, quotes are not perfect; some have been shortened and summarized to assist in the punctual upload of these summaries.

Symposia: Reckoned Among the Lawless: The Gospel as the Law’s Fulfillment

Dr. Peter Scaer, CTSFW Professor and Chairman of Exegetical Theology

Christ was born under the law to redeem those under the law. You were bought with a price, ransomed with the blood of Christ. Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness. Sin is a debt. It cannot be erased. Someone must foot the bill. “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them” (Matt. 5:17).

In loving and obeying His Father perfectly and denying the desires of the flesh, Jesus fulfills the first and second tables of the Law. He came to serve, not to be served. Our Lord had to drink the cup of suffering. The message to the nations becomes the Father’s message to the Son: you must drink. The chief priests were right: he could save others but not himself. There was no other way.

You can see examples of this fulfillment throughout the Bible. Luke repeatedly ties Christ’s death to the Passover, and Isaiah 53 foretold that he would be wounded for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities. Our Lord identifies Himself as that very suffering servant. He was numbered with the lawless (Luke 22:37). The King James translation is even better: he was not merely numbered but reckoned among the lawless. Despite the fact that three times Pilate declared Him righteousness, as did Herod, on Good Friday. Even the centurion in Luke punctuates that truth: “Certainly this man was innocent!” (Luke 23:47).

This brings us back to Romans 4:22-25:

“That is why his faith was ‘counted to him as righteousness.’ But the words ‘it was counted to him’ were not written for his sake along, but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.”

Perhaps this topic seems too simple for symposia, but when the truth is denied it is soon forgotten. Jesus takes the punishment that we deserved. That’s Lutheranism 101 and Christianity 101. All this is simple, but not simplistic. So much is accomplished by Christ’s death and resurrection, all the books written in the world could not contain it.

Dr. Peter Scaer spent much of his lecture hour then speaking on the perilous danger of creating “theories” about atonement. Theories by their nature are tentative; theology is for proclamation and must have content. If proclaiming Christ’s death as a payment for sin is a theory, it marginalizes the truth. For the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world isn’t only an 11th century opinion.

Multiple models of something, even atonement, can give us something to consider, especially as they often overlap. The faithful may hear all these as facets of one song, of melody and voices joined in harmony. In our Lutheran circles we do the same thing when we speak of a theology of vocation, a theology of mercy, a theology of the cross. We do not lose that they are parts of a deep and rich whole. Unfortunately, too often people use one model to take aim at another.

This is where some common heresies come from: that Christianity is an abusive theology that glorifies suffering. The idea of “divine child abuse.” Despite Christ himself saying that he would be lifted up so that all eyes would be drawn to him. It’s the ancient question asked by the serpent in the garden: “Did God really say…?”

Forgiveness affirms the necessity of Christ’s death. Traditional Lutheran atonement is not absurd; it is absurd to think that atonement came at no cost—that any gift has no cost. It’s hard, in some ways, to understand in an age when we give our gifts with a receipt. But given the fall into sin, God cannot simply say, “Let there be forgiveness.” Words have to be backed up by action. Anyone can write a check, but it does no good if there’s no money in the bank.

In the midst of His ministry of forgiveness, Christ prepared for the price He must pay. When Christ is baptized, the heavens are torn open just as the curtain in the temple will be torn upon His death. Jesus was killed by men for reasons of power and jealousy, but at a deeper level He was put to death as the Lamb of God. God’s favor precedes the sending of His Son. This forgiveness precedes death, but not because it is somehow untethered from Christ’s death. God sends his Son and the Son willingly obeys, out of love for the Father and for the world. The crucifixion happened in time, even as atonement is eternal.

This is compelling evidence. “And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins’” (Matt. 26:27-28).


Lectures are breaking for lunch and will resume in an hour. We’ll continue giving updates throughout the day, but to listen to the lectures in whole, purchase a livestream ticket at www.ctsfw.edu/symposia-live. To a view and/or download the schedule (which includes all topics and speakers), go to www.ctsfw.edu/symposia.

Symposia: Substitutionary Atonement in the Joseph Narratives

Symposia opened with Dr. Jeffrey Pulse, Associate Professor of Exegetical Theology here at CTSFW, on “Substitutionary Atonement in the Joseph Narratives.” He began by defining substitutionary atonement: Christ’s death in our place. Such a definition properly excludes the work of man and his participation in the event. It is the complete and exclusive work of Christ on our behalf. This is of immense importance. In the words of Martin Luther: “If the sins of the entire world were on that one man, Jesus Christ, then they are not on the world.”

Articulating this doctrine isn’t difficult. Simply turn to Scripture and see substitutionary atonement throughout its pages. Dr. Pulse explains that you should approach the text, from Genesis to Revelation, as a unified theological narrative. Selective readings can cause you to lose the message. In other words, the grand narrative is to be read as not only unified in one story, it’s also to be understood and read as unified in theology as well. The Israelites, the early church fathers, and Martin Luther all taught that these writings were to be read and understood as a whole. They represent a unified message from God.

The Bible is, admittedly, very long—impossible to read in a single sitting. As such, to keep a handle on this understanding of the Bible as a unified narrative, Dr. Pulse teaches that you should pay attention to the motifs interwoven throughout. A motif is a recurring thematic element (or a dominant idea or central theme), and the Bible is woven as a tapestry from the many, many motifs that serves as its threads. Themes like clothing/being clothed, garden/trees, and substitutionary atonement.

Substitutionary atonement makes its first appearance early on, when Adam and Eve are ejected from the Garden of Eden and God immediately binds Himself to a covenant in which the seed of the woman will crush the head of Satan. Man can do nothing to remove the sin that prevents his reunion with God—and so the coming Messiah will take man’s place, by paying the price of His holy blood and undeserved death.

The institution of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) in Leviticus is another instance of the occurrence of this motif. It’s not a day of feasting or a festival, but is instead a fast in which the high priest stands in place of—as a substitute—in place of the people. As sole celebrant, he acts on behalf of the people.

Motifs are made up of multiple examples, woven throughout Scripture. The Bible was not written as a dogmatic theological text, but as a unified narrative. If we approach the Word of God in such a manner, we’ll avoid the dangers of proof texting, taking passages out of context, etc. When we fall into the trap of reading only portions of God’s word to develop theology that are palatable to our culture and/or world view, we end up with manmade, culturally sensitive dogma. God becomes a merciless judge, or guilty of divine child abuse; substitutionary atonement is accused of being immoral. But these criticisms are shallow—little more than people saying, “I don’t like this doctrine.”


This is only a piece of the full lecture, which was about 50 minutes long and focused the motif of Substitutionary Atonement on the Joseph narratives in Genesis (like Judah offering to substitute himself in the place of Benjamin near the end of the story). To watch this lecture (and the rest of Symposia) in full, you can purchase livestream access at www.ctsfw.edu/symposia-live. The 2020 Symposia lectures will eventually be available and open to all at no cost on our video site in about 6-9 months.

Convocation: Healthcare as a Human Right

The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod has a history of staying out of politics. We don’t preach politics from the pulpits, nor do our leaders tell us how to vote. It’s one of the reasons we survived the Civil War without splintering from within or being pulled apart from without, despite the fact that we were centered in contentious land between Union and Confederate forces. We stick to Scripture: teach and preach God’s Word, and then as individuals we have the Christian freedom to make decisions in the political realm according to our conscience. Our hands are not bound, but freed.

On Wednesday, Dr. Andrew J. Mullally, a pro-life family physician at Credo Family Medicine here in Fort Wayne and Indiana State Director for the Catholic Medication Association, spoke during convocation hour on the topic of Healthcare as a Human Right. He approached it as a doctor but also as a fellow brother in Christ. “I do believe the pro-life movement is inextricably tied to politics,” he explained. But he was equally careful about his political statements. “Religion doesn’t look at political parties, but how to apply Christian principles to caring for our neighbors.”

To navigate these contentious issues, Dr. Mullally encourages everyone to clarify their language. Two people can use the word “right” without realizing they haven’t even agreed on the definition. So what is a right? According to Merriam-Webster, a right is something (such as a power or privilege) to which one has a just claim. Dr. Mullally’s working definition: a right is an objectively grounded benefit that is owed to a person by another person or the community.

Rights take two base forms: natural and political. Natural rights are those given to us by God, while political ones are decreed by government. They’re often related; the right to vote is political, but it’s derived from natural rights. That’s our heritage as Americans: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

As Christians, we also recognize that all people have the same Law written on their hearts. “For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their heart, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus” (Romans 2:14-16).

Dr. Mullally would argue that political rights are only legitimate as they reflect and approach this law written on our hearts. “A right to abortion, for example, appeals as a political right but is in complete conflict with natural law,” he said. While we are tasked with submitting to the authorities (Romans 13:1, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.”), we also remember Peter and the apostles disobeying the high priest in Acts 5:29, when they were ordered to stop teaching in Jesus’ name: “We must obey God rather than men.”

Rights aren’t limitless. They have natural and practical constraints. They’re relational (anything we demand as a right has to be demanded of someone or something else), they’re frequently in competition (my rights aren’t superior to my neighbor’s rights, nor are all rights equal), and every right has corresponding responsibilities. There is no right without a related duty. You have a right to your body, but you also have a duty to take care of the infant who is conceived because of what you chose to do with that right.

“Rights are all about protecting human dignity,” Dr. Mullally said. “Everyone is of infinite value.” We are also called to care for the common good. We don’t just take care of ourselves, we care for our neighbors and our nation—and even the world—as a whole.

So with rights established: what is healthcare? Per Merriam-Webster, healthcare is “efforts made to maintain or restore physical, mental, or emotional well-being especially by trained and licensed professions.” Per Dr. Mullally’s working definition: “Organized provision of medical care to individuals or a community.” For an individual, this means we should have the ability to pursue health in daily life with access to medical care and services to treat illness and prevent death.

“That’s where the confusion lies,” Dr. Mullally said. “What duty does that apply? To what extent is one owed healthcare by others?”

The right to health does appear to be natural (“If I walk by someone in a car accident,” Dr. Mullally said as an example, “I’m obliged as a Christian to help.”). But there are limitations (“I’m not obliged to give my kidney to everyone who asks,” he added). And how is it best discharged? By individuals? By government? Is it also a political right? In specific ways: yes. Our government cares for our health (thus making it a political right) by keeping our water clean of sewage so that we don’t get sick. It’s also a federal law (The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act) that no one can be turned away from a hospital in a medical emergency.

As Christians, we absolutely have an obligation to the vulnerable. From the parable of the Good Samaritan: “Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise” (Luke 10:36-37).

“Be sure to care for the sickest, for the dying, and for the poor folks that cannot care for themselves,” Dr. Mullally said. “And this is because of human dignity.”

So with the words defined and the language clarified, where does that lead us in the question of healthcare? “The presence of a right does not imply a delivery system,” Dr. Mullally pointed out. Instead we ask ourselves these questions: which will work best? Medicare for all (i.e. single-payer system)? Private insurance? Sharing ministries? (You can learn more about official sharing ministries online, but one unofficial example is the way Amish communities are known for never, ever defaulting on a medical bill, even those in the millions. The community comes together and takes care of each other as neighbors and Christians.)

Healthcare is also not limitless. There are real-world, practical limitations. Who should it go to when it has to be rationed because of cost, beds in a hospital, available doctors and other healthcare workers? As with everything else, the person footing the bill is the one making decisions about the extent of and access to care. If government pays, they make the decision; if insurance pays, they make the decision; if you pay, you make the decision.

Right now, healthcare in America follows a business mentality. We have safety nets put in place by the government (like Medicaid, Medicare, EMTALA), but because the government discharges these rights there’s no personalized care. “It’s a contract,” Dr. Mullally said. “If you didn’t fill out the paperwork right, you don’t get Medicare.” He’s known two patients who were treatable but placed in hospice because they didn’t fill out their forms correctly. “They were going to die because they didn’t fill out paperwork properly!” he said. (In this case, the local community and other individuals took care of them when the government failed; both were able to leave hospice for treatment and are doing well.)

Dr. Mullally would argue for a return to the covenant relationship model common in an earlier time in our history. “It’s akin to marriage, to God’s covenants to us. It’s mutual love and respect and what is owed to each other…treating other people as a person rather than a commodity.” A covenant mentality applies a responsibility (what I owe other people) and is very individualized (you’re worried about Bob and Susie rather than a generic “people” in general).

“It’s done best in communities,” he explained. “Before Christianity, there were no hospitals. The Romans had patch-me-up surgeons for the military. But it was a body shop. Definitely no care for the poor or civilian ill.” The charity work of the Church (nuns especially, but there have been many Christians and other church workers who have served the poor and ill across time, not to mention the donations of citizens) began hospitals. But that control has largely passed on to larger and infinitely less personalized systems.

“We’ve lost something by usurping charity from neighbors and giving it to the government,” Dr. Mullally said. “Government has stolen our ability to provide charity. It’s an aggression and an insult.”

That’s his view of the situation. As to healthcare as a right in general: “We have a positive, natural right to basic healthcare, limited by competing rights and natural barriers.” He added, “There is no delivery system implied by this right: there are various ways for society to support it, whether that’s through the government or privately.” That said, he suggested looking not at what they’re giving with any specific system, but what they’re taking away. “Evaluate policies based on the risks of that delivery system.”

As to not speaking over each other: clarify your language and ask questions. “That’s what Socrates did,” Dr. Mullally said. “Really trips people up. Why do you think that? What do you mean? Distinctions must be made to have any fruitful policy discussions.” Ask questions for clarity, show that you’re listening, and have people think through their own viewpoint.

And as Christians, we always look to what Scripture does tell us: “Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise” (Luke 10:36-37).

At His Mercy

For the next two weeks, if you walk past the statue of Luther and on to the expansive campus grounds to the right, you’ll soon come across a very quiet, easy-to-miss memorial. One large cross stands sentinel in the middle of 2,700 smaller crosses, painted pink and blue for the girls and boys aborted every day in the United States. These children have no names, and most of them have no graves. They are members of the generations lost to us since Roe v. Wade. Drive past on the road through campus looking the wrong way and, much like abortion, you may not see what you’re not looking for. But walk between the rows, see these small pink and blue crosses spread out around you, and realize that they represent one day out of the 17,158 since January 22, 1973.

For those of us here in Indiana, they are also meant to more specifically commemorate the 2,411 aborted babies whose bodies were found in a local abortionist’s home garage and car, following the 79-year-old’s death this past September. Records show they were likely from Indiana patients from the years 2000-2002. Dr. Klopfer aborted thousands—likely tens of thousands—in northern Indiana clinics (including one here in Fort Wayne) before the Medical Licensing Board of Indiana suspended his license in 2016. Why he preserved the remains of those 2,411 is a question without an answer. In some ways the whole tragedy and atrocity of abortion feels like an unanswered question: Why, o Lord, do you allow this?

But here, as always, the memorial is centered around the cross. Even here Christ is at the center. We are so valued by God that He sent His only Son to die for our sake. No matter our societal worth, our stage of development, nor even the depth of our sins. We should have been found wanting, and yet we were wanted. And so, on a Good Friday nearly 2,000 years ago, justice and mercy met. There is hope for the lost, the hopeless, the grieving, the guilty. We were bought with a price. We have been redeemed.


If you are in the area, please feel free to stop by; to remember, to mourn, to pray, and to take comfort. Park your car at the Luther Statue and go for a walk. The crosses will be up for the next two weeks, through both the Allen County March for Life (our local Fort Wayne life march) that takes place this Saturday on January 18 and the March for Life in Washington D.C. the following Saturday, January 25. The CTSFW Life Team, who put up the memorial, will take it down sometime in the week following the National March for Life.

Thank yous go especially to first-year seminarian Jeremy Hanson, who was in the military for 20 years before joining the Seminary (“I toured a lot of military graveyards and memorials,” he explained. “When I heard about Klopfer, my heart sank. These innocents couldn’t defend themselves.”), as well as first-year seminarian Daniel Warner, who has a background in woodworking and provided the wood for the crosses as well as the labor putting them together. Thank you also to the many hands that made light the work. The community first took about three hours to paint the crosses, and then this past Sunday planted all 2,700 in about an hour and a half. If you would like to see and learn more, go to Dr. Peter J. Scaer’s Facebook page, as he captured setup day on a handful of videos.

Feast: Circumcision and Name of Jesus

Happy New Year! Though it is the very start of a secular new year, we are already a month into the new Church Year. Our celebration today is centered on the Circumcision and Name of Jesus. First, the history and significance of circumcision, according to Scripture:

When Abram was ninety-nine years old the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless, that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly.” Then Abram fell on his face. And God said to him, “Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make you into nations, and kings shall come from you. And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you. And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.”

And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

Genesis 17:1-14

To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void. For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise.

Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary. Now an intermediary implies more than one, but God is one.

Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law. But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.

Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.

Galatians 3:15-29

And at the end of eight days, when he was circumcised, he was called Jesus, the name given by the angel before he was conceived in the womb.

Luke 2:21

“The Circumcision of Christ” from the triptych’s central panel by Philippe Quantin, 1635.

So now second, regarding the name of Jesus:

O Lord, our Lord,
how majestic is your name in all the earth!
You have set your glory above the heavens.
Out of the mouth of babies and infants,
you have established strength because of your foes,
to still the enemy and the avenger.

When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers,
the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,
what is man that you are mindful of him,
and the son of man that you care for him?

Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings
and crowned him with glory and honor.
You have given him dominion over the works of your hands;
you have put all things under his feet,
all sheep and oxen,
and also the beasts of the field,
the birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea,
whatever passes along the paths of the seas.

O Lord, our Lord,
how majestic is your name in all the earth!

Psalm 8

The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Speak to Aaron and his sons, saying, Thus you shall bless the people of Israel: you shall say to them,

The Lord bless you and keep you;
the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
the Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace.

“So shall they put my name upon the people of Israel, and I will bless them.”

Numbers 6:22-27

She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins…

Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him. John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented. And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

Matthew 1:21, 3:13-17

And when they had set them in the midst, they inquired, “By what power or by what name did you do this?” Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders, if we are being examined today concerning a good deed done to a crippled man, by what means this man has been healed, let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead—by him this man is standing before you well. This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

Acts 4:7-12

Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb through the middle of the street of the city; also, on either side of the river, the tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit each month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. No longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his servants will worship him. They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. And night will be no more. They will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever.

Revelation 22:1-5

“Baptism of the Crowds” by Andrea del Sarto, 1517.

Christmas Eve Devotion

When all was still and it was midnight,
Your almighty Word O Lord, descended from the royal throne.
(antiphon for Christmas Midnight)

Reading: Luke 2:1-21

Joseph, a lowly carpenter, and Mary, a young virgin, were descended from David. The lineage of David was no longer the lineage of kings. The mighty tree of David had been cut down. It was now a stump. But from this stump, this root of Jesse, a new branch broke forth. The true King of nations and rightful heir to the key and scepter of David was born. Christ the Lord is come to dwell with his people. The angels cannot contain themselves: “Glory to God in the highest!” They sing the praises of Christ the Lord. All the world now rejoices, for her King has come!

Prayer: Almighty God, heavenly Father, because You desired that all would be saved, You sent Your only begotten Son into our flesh to bear our sin and to rise for our justification. Grant that, receiving the fullness of faith, we would be sustained until the end as citizens of Your heavenly King¬dom; through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Amen.

Hymn LSB 375:6

Gracious Child, we pray, O hear us,
From Your lowly manger cheer us,
Gently lead us and be near us
Till we join Your choir above.

(Mark Kranz, Sem IV)

Advent Devotion for December 23

O Emmanuel

O Emmanuel, our king and our Lord, the anointed for the nations and their Savior:
Come and save us, O Lord our God.

Reading: Matthew 1:18–23

The God who thundered from Sinai’s peak sheds tears in the manger of Bethlehem. Yahweh, who had wrapped Himself in a pillar of smoke, is now wrapped in human flesh. No longer is His Word simply etched on stone tablets, but is inseparably bound to this flesh. God has made His dwelling among us, not between golden cherubim but in the embrace of His virgin mother and her husband.

Prayer: O Immanuel, You draw near in Word and Sacrament to make Your dwelling among us. Grant us faithful hearts as we tarry in this life, that on the day of Your return You may find in us a mansion prepared for You; for You live and reign with the Father and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever. Amen.

Hymn LSB 357:1

O come, O come, Emmanuel,
And ransom captive Israel,
That mourns in lonely exile here
Until the Son of God appear.
Rejoice! Rejoice! Emmanuel
Shall come to thee, O Israel!

(Timothy Sheridan, Sem IV)