Gary A. Anderson

Summary: A study of the tabernacle and sacrifice connections drawing out the idea of the incarnational presence of God in the physical structure of the tabernacle and the significance of the daily sacrifices for our understanding of atonement.

The passages detailing the construction of the tabernacle and the institution of sacrifices for many of us are a “flyover zone” in our reading. After all, the tabernacle instructions are repeated twice in almost identical detail. Yet Gary A. Anderson proposes that these passages are rich with detail for the development of the Old Testament theology of both incarnation and atonement that will become important in our understanding of the person and work of Christ.

Regarding the tabernacle explores how in the construction, layout, and furnishings of the tabernacle, God indeed dwells among Israel in physical form. The tabernacle in some sense participates in the deity of God. Anderson shows evidence for this in the language used to describe the proper handling of the physical articles that furnish this “house.” While Anderson would certainly not confine God to this structure, he would suggest that in it God is in some way “embodied” in the midst of his people.

He then explores the sacrifice instructions arguing that the central sacrifice is not that of atonement but rather the daily offerings each morning and evening that began on the eighth day of the inauguration the tabernacle and the Aaronic priesthood. In his discussions he explores the intricacies of the procedures, the problem of the “strange fire” of Nadab and Abihu, the golden calf, and the connections in language between the tamid instructions and the Aqedah of Genesis 22. Ultimately, Anderson argues that what is central in sacrifice is the self-giving of Israel rather than the substitution of the death of an animal for sins.

While there was much in Anderson’s study of the tabernacle and in the connections he draws to Abraham, his de-centering of atonement in favor of tamid seems to me driven by his idea that penal substitution must be cruel and we can’t have that. Certainly it is true that there is a self-giving, indeed self emptying aspect to the work of Christ. Might this suggest ways that all the sacrifices from tamid to atonement point to him? But why does Jesus self-empty but to die for sin, acting both in love for the father and humanity through the instrument of the genuinely cruel human actions of whipping and crucifixion that brought about his death? Penal substitution actually makes sense of the cruel death Jesus died, that he could have evaded. Anything else to me appears masochistic on the part of Jesus and truly cruel of God.

What Anderson does offer is an invitation to closely study these “flyover” passages, pointing to their central importance in the life of Israel and in the theology of the church. In particular, he shows how there is no divorce of matter and spirit, no distant deity of the deists in scripture. He insists that we ask what the meaning of Israel’s sacrifices are and that their relevance hasn’t ceased even though they have.

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.… (más)

Sin: A History by Gary Anderson, Professor of Old Testament/Hebrew Bible in the Notre Dame Department of Theology presents a very compelling description of God’s economy.

For a book that spends a good deal of time looking at the historical development of Hebrew words, it was hard to put down.

The book begins by showing the development of sin, as a word and as a tangible evil, and the consequences, need for atonement and lingering effects that sin generates. It takes this discussion into the historical shift in the Biblical language of sin from sin as a weight or stain in the first temple period to language where sin is described as a debt following the exile to Babylon.

One of the key shifts in this language change is that a weight or stain has no corresponding credit metaphor for virtue. A debt, on the other hand, does provide for the accumulation of credit by virtuous activities. Anderson makes a Biblical case that the primary “credit” for virtue is generosity toward the poor. He doesn’t stop there, but addresses the obvious questions regarding works righteousness that arise when we start to speak of earning credit on our sin debt.

Sin: A History provides a Biblical foundation for attempting good works, especially giving to the poor without diminishing the work of Christ on the cross. It brings in the importance of almsgiving and generosity to the Jews and Christians and deals with a number of difficult passages throughout the Bible with a good support into how these are linked together and how they relate to the Biblical language of sin.

And if you ‘ve ever wondered about Esau moving away from Jacob after they reconcile (Genesis 36), Anderson has a very interesting explanation for that….

But I don’t want to give too much away. Read this book!… (más)