In various context the issue of atonement has come up in this forum, whether it is by Christians insisting that we can only be saved by Christ's blood or Muslims asking how the crucifixion can ever be an expression of divine love. I'd like to address both of these things here from the standpoint of both a Baha'i and a historian (the latter means this will be a long post.)
Most Christian conceptions of atonement, even when they don't realize
it, are based on a formulation made by a Christian theologian named
Anselm who lived a thousand years ago. He had a neo-platonic
conception of a God as possessing both perfect justice and mercy which
must be satisfied. Because of His perfect justice He cannot forgive
sins without satisfaction. And because He is merciful the means had to
provided for making that satisfaction. Living in the hierarchical
world of early medieval Europe, Anselm felt the gravity of a sin or
crime was measured by the station of the one against whom the crime or
sin had been forgiven.God being exalted above all stations, it stood
to reason that a sin against Him was of infinite gravity with eternal
repercussions. It therefore incurred a debt which man could not hope
to satisfy. The only way in which the satisfaction could be made, and
men could be set free from sin, was for God Himself to make the
satisfaction as a man. This formula seems to have more to do with
'fire insurance' than a relationship, except if one is seeing
'relationship' in cold, legalistic terms. It seems to me this is
necessarily so, because when God's attributes are seen these kinds of
static categories of justice and mercy we are trying to look at God in
Greek terms of essence rather than Hebrew sense of conception of God
as a Living God, a Person. And we can only have a relationship with
the latter, not the former.
Having said that, there are passages in the Baha'i Writings that appear to
accept the notion of atonement and sacrifices for sin. For instance,
we have this:
"Fix your gaze upon Him Who is the Temple of God amongst men. He, in
truth, hath offered up His life as a ransom for the redemption of the
world. He, verily, is the All-Bountiful, the Gracious, the Most
High.If any differences arise amongst you, behold Me standing before
your face, and overlook the faults of one another for My name's sake
and as a token of your love for My manifest and resplendent Cause."
Gleanings, 314.
and
"That which thou hast heard concerning Abraham, the Friend of the All-Merciful,
is the truth, and no doubt is there about it. The Voice of God commanded Him to
offer up Ishmael as a sacrifice, so that His steadfastness in the Faith of God
and His detachment from all else but Him may be demonstrated unto men. The
purpose of God, moreover, was to sacrifice him as a ransom for the sins and
iniquities of all the peoples of the earth. This same honor, Jesus, the Son of
Mary, besought the one true God, exalted be His name and glory, to confer upon
Him. For the same reason was Husayn offered up as a sacrifice by
Muhammad, the Apostle of God.
No man can ever claim to have comprehended the nature of the hidden and
manifold grace of God; none can fathom His all-embracing mercy. Such hath been
the perversity of men and their transgressions, so grievous have been the
trials that have afflicted the Prophets of God and their chosen ones, that all
mankind deserveth to be tormented and to perish. God's hidden and most loving
providence, however, hath, through both visible and invisible agencies,
protected and will continue to protect it from the penalty of its wickedness.
Ponder this in thine heart, that the truth may be revealed unto thee, and be
thou steadfast in His path." Gleanings 75-76.
So the Writings do speak of ransom but they also speak of repentance
as being the sole prerequisite of forgiveness. We even have references
to the kind of 'death-bed' conversions that some people make fun of
Christianity for:
"He should forgive the sinful, and never despise his low estate, for
none knoweth what his own end shall be. How often hath a sinner, at
the hour of death, attained to the essence of faith, and, quaffing the
immortal draught, hath taken his flight unto the celestial Concourse.
And how often hath a devout believer, at the hour of his soul's
ascension, been so changed as to fall into the nethermost fire." KI
194-95
He likewise says; "Should anyone be afflicted by a sin, it behoveth
him to repent thereof and return unto his Lord. He, verily, granteth
forgiveness unto whomsoever He willeth, and none may question that
which it pleaseth Him to ordain."
Repentance doesn't mean simply feeling sorry for one sins, it means
turning towards God. One story that is told about Muslim mystic Rabi'a
is that one day she came upon Hasan al-Basra (an earlier Muslim
mystic) who was weeping and wailing over his sins, saying what a
wretched man he was. Rabi'a said, "Yes, you are. Because had you truly
turned towards God you would be looking at Him and not noticing your
own sins."
If repentance is the only prerequisite for forgiveness why then does
Baha'u'llah speak of 'ransoms'? Perhaps it is because only these kinds
of sacrifices which make true repentance, true focusing on God out of
love possible. This is what another medieval Christian theologian,
Peter of Abelard argued. He held that the Crucifixion was necessary to
forgive men's sin not because it was required on God's part but
because only such a dramatic expression of God's love would enable
people to repent and cause them to turn towards Him.
It strikes me that this form of atonement, unlike Anselm's formulation
is relational. But it is also something which could not be done once
and never again as in Christianity. If it is indeed grounded in God's
determination to reach us, instead of satisfying some abstract
requirements of the Divine Essence, then it would happen again and
again as Baha'u'llah seems to affirm.
I think there is a great danger in seeing God as static,
understandable by human categories like justice and mercy as Anselm
liked to do. The God of the Hebrew Bible was a Living God, a Person
and like all persons (and unlike pure essences) He had a Will, one
like all wills was subject to change on occasion. It seems to me this
attempt to make God fit our mental conceptions, to put Him into a
predictable box is in the end, a form of idolatry. The Living God is
not so predictable. He fulfills prophecies in ways we don't expect,
and at times appears to fulfill them not at all.
Most Christian conceptions of atonement, even when they don't realize
it, are based on a formulation made by a Christian theologian named
Anselm who lived a thousand years ago. He had a neo-platonic
conception of a God as possessing both perfect justice and mercy which
must be satisfied. Because of His perfect justice He cannot forgive
sins without satisfaction. And because He is merciful the means had to
provided for making that satisfaction. Living in the hierarchical
world of early medieval Europe, Anselm felt the gravity of a sin or
crime was measured by the station of the one against whom the crime or
sin had been forgiven.God being exalted above all stations, it stood
to reason that a sin against Him was of infinite gravity with eternal
repercussions. It therefore incurred a debt which man could not hope
to satisfy. The only way in which the satisfaction could be made, and
men could be set free from sin, was for God Himself to make the
satisfaction as a man. This formula seems to have more to do with
'fire insurance' than a relationship, except if one is seeing
'relationship' in cold, legalistic terms. It seems to me this is
necessarily so, because when God's attributes are seen these kinds of
static categories of justice and mercy we are trying to look at God in
Greek terms of essence rather than Hebrew sense of conception of God
as a Living God, a Person. And we can only have a relationship with
the latter, not the former.
Having said that, there are passages in the Baha'i Writings that appear to
accept the notion of atonement and sacrifices for sin. For instance,
we have this:
"Fix your gaze upon Him Who is the Temple of God amongst men. He, in
truth, hath offered up His life as a ransom for the redemption of the
world. He, verily, is the All-Bountiful, the Gracious, the Most
High.If any differences arise amongst you, behold Me standing before
your face, and overlook the faults of one another for My name's sake
and as a token of your love for My manifest and resplendent Cause."
Gleanings, 314.
and
"That which thou hast heard concerning Abraham, the Friend of the All-Merciful,
is the truth, and no doubt is there about it. The Voice of God commanded Him to
offer up Ishmael as a sacrifice, so that His steadfastness in the Faith of God
and His detachment from all else but Him may be demonstrated unto men. The
purpose of God, moreover, was to sacrifice him as a ransom for the sins and
iniquities of all the peoples of the earth. This same honor, Jesus, the Son of
Mary, besought the one true God, exalted be His name and glory, to confer upon
Him. For the same reason was Husayn offered up as a sacrifice by
Muhammad, the Apostle of God.
No man can ever claim to have comprehended the nature of the hidden and
manifold grace of God; none can fathom His all-embracing mercy. Such hath been
the perversity of men and their transgressions, so grievous have been the
trials that have afflicted the Prophets of God and their chosen ones, that all
mankind deserveth to be tormented and to perish. God's hidden and most loving
providence, however, hath, through both visible and invisible agencies,
protected and will continue to protect it from the penalty of its wickedness.
Ponder this in thine heart, that the truth may be revealed unto thee, and be
thou steadfast in His path." Gleanings 75-76.
So the Writings do speak of ransom but they also speak of repentance
as being the sole prerequisite of forgiveness. We even have references
to the kind of 'death-bed' conversions that some people make fun of
Christianity for:
"He should forgive the sinful, and never despise his low estate, for
none knoweth what his own end shall be. How often hath a sinner, at
the hour of death, attained to the essence of faith, and, quaffing the
immortal draught, hath taken his flight unto the celestial Concourse.
And how often hath a devout believer, at the hour of his soul's
ascension, been so changed as to fall into the nethermost fire." KI
194-95
He likewise says; "Should anyone be afflicted by a sin, it behoveth
him to repent thereof and return unto his Lord. He, verily, granteth
forgiveness unto whomsoever He willeth, and none may question that
which it pleaseth Him to ordain."
Repentance doesn't mean simply feeling sorry for one sins, it means
turning towards God. One story that is told about Muslim mystic Rabi'a
is that one day she came upon Hasan al-Basra (an earlier Muslim
mystic) who was weeping and wailing over his sins, saying what a
wretched man he was. Rabi'a said, "Yes, you are. Because had you truly
turned towards God you would be looking at Him and not noticing your
own sins."
If repentance is the only prerequisite for forgiveness why then does
Baha'u'llah speak of 'ransoms'? Perhaps it is because only these kinds
of sacrifices which make true repentance, true focusing on God out of
love possible. This is what another medieval Christian theologian,
Peter of Abelard argued. He held that the Crucifixion was necessary to
forgive men's sin not because it was required on God's part but
because only such a dramatic expression of God's love would enable
people to repent and cause them to turn towards Him.
It strikes me that this form of atonement, unlike Anselm's formulation
is relational. But it is also something which could not be done once
and never again as in Christianity. If it is indeed grounded in God's
determination to reach us, instead of satisfying some abstract
requirements of the Divine Essence, then it would happen again and
again as Baha'u'llah seems to affirm.
I think there is a great danger in seeing God as static,
understandable by human categories like justice and mercy as Anselm
liked to do. The God of the Hebrew Bible was a Living God, a Person
and like all persons (and unlike pure essences) He had a Will, one
like all wills was subject to change on occasion. It seems to me this
attempt to make God fit our mental conceptions, to put Him into a
predictable box is in the end, a form of idolatry. The Living God is
not so predictable. He fulfills prophecies in ways we don't expect,
and at times appears to fulfill them not at all.