In What Sense is the Incarnation A Salvific Act ?

R Lincoln, EMMTC,
Year 2, MA Programme,
Christian Doctrine: The Theology of Salvation
 In What Sense is the Incarnation A Salvific Act ?

Introduction

I will answer the question by discussing

- the use and abuse of metaphor and imagery
- metaphors and salvation, I shall look at aspects beyond critiquing the well-known
theories
- metaphors and incarnation, looking at how the incarnation can be a metaphor
- how we can see the whole of the incarnation as salvific.

The Use and Abuse of Metaphor and Imagery

Metaphor is the primary method of communicating to, with, and about God. Being this side
of eternity, we struggle to do justice to the width and depth of God with our language,
philosophies and concepts that are never deep or wide enough. Every time we try and
convey what we believe, or why we believe it, we are pushing the boundaries of language to
try and expand it to fit God. Metaphors must be clarified and discussed as they are a
fundamental part of my argument.

The incorrect "man in the street" assumption is metaphor = lies1; a similar misconception
is myth = fairy story. But when a concept, object, experience, whatever, goes beyond the
bounds of currently available language, we need metaphor to convey what we are trying to
say2. This process of seeing all forms of description as potentially, if not actually,
metaphorical has been extended both through research into language, societal, and religious
development, as well as being a by-product of post-modernism 3.
The irony is that science, while seen as destroying religion and metaphorical language, uses
metaphor 4 especially with new discoveries, and also uses multiple working hypotheses 5;
precisely what Christianity used to have and now doesn't. In the early stages of faith
development6, literalism and a desire to have concrete stability mean a rejection of later
stage abilities to have this very "both / and" simultaneity of concepts 7.

Because the metaphor is based upon drawing parallels between one thing and another, it
is shaped by that thing, and illuminates both parts 8. Metaphors work by being a fusion of

1
Gunton, p29
2
ibid, p31
3
ibid, p33, also Doctrine Commission, p321
4
ibid, p34, and White, p42
5
Morton, p77 and p216
6
Fowler, Ch 17
7
In the Star Trek: Next Generation episode "Darmok", an entire race makes extensive use
of metaphors and has a rich vocabulary. The humans don't know what the
metaphors relate to so there are extensive communication problems. The episode
features a member of each starship's crew being stranded on a planet to face a
common situation with a view to finding a new common metaphor. I cite this as an
example of how metaphors are used, and point out how Christians have done similar
things by appropriating the surrounding culture for examples to use in metaphors.
On a different note, the London Underground map is both true and yet untrue, but
as a non-literal representation of reality, it is very useful (Doctrine Commission,
p326)
8
Gunton, p114

1
mind, heart, logic, feeling 9: metaphors that do not have this, eg bananas and knitting, have
too great a cognitive dissonance. According to Gunton10, Christians are not good at
explaining things, and everybody else got hung up on science / rationality.

Language changes over time, and metaphors become literal11; this is the basis of, for
example, feminist objections to the use of "Father"12. We can see this elsewhere: every
cliche started out a radical truth, becoming a victim of its own success as it became over-
used and became less effective as a result. Post-modernism denies universals, so we have
a need to rediscover the variety of past imagery13, as well as learning to be more sensitive
in the use of the ones we already have.

Finally, empiricism doesn't work with God 14. Reduce rich imagery to one "final solution"
of metaphor is doomed to failure, both in evangelism and spiritual development: metaphor
reveals the referent, the language, and the user 15. Theology is not just describing God 16,
but a process of discovery, allowing God to speak in a variety of means17. We need to run
metaphors simultaneously18.

Metaphors And Salvation

I will look at some current ways of thinking in the use of metaphor and these concepts,
finishing with how people are thinking in terms of new metaphors19.

Briefly, Gunton 20, thinks Law was not as easily defined then as now, and so this should be
combined with other metaphors21. My view is that we will have to wait for the revised view
of Paul to have more of an effect, and for the re-discovery of the richness of Jewish traditions
to be appreciated, as the view of the Law is tainted by a select reading of Luther's select
reading, and so with a faulty view of the Law, we have a faulty view of the whole metaphor.
Wallace22, suggests we shouldn't think in terms of law but exchange.
Another way of viewing sin is not to see it as something that angers God, but something that
arouses concern because of the disorder it causes 23: sin is a state of being not a quantifiable
amount24. How we view sin can mean the cross is the only way25, and that explicitly

9
ibid, p37
10
ibid, p53
11
ibid, p35, also Doctrine Commission, p424
12
McFague, Metaphorical Theology, Ch 5
13
White, p65
14
Gunton, p43
15
ibid, p45, also Doctrine Commission, p424, metaphors should be "necessarily
imaginative", and p433, the damage done by over-emphasising certain metaphors
16
ibid, p46
17
ibid, p80
18
Migliore, p154-155
19
At the risk of seeming a know-it-all, I became very familiar with the major theories of
salvation having attended Unit 12 of the Methodist Lay Preachers' course,
supporting my fiancee, and led a teaching session
20
Gunton, p85
21
ibid, p105
22
ibid, p116
23
ibid, p96
24
ibid, p129
25
ibid, p164

2
removes any metaphors involving choice, relationship, etc that may be healthier or make
Christianity more relevant, accessible, etc.

For Gunton, the traditional way of viewing sin is the wrong way round: the symptom is
treated as the cause 26, and sin is not seen relationally so the solution / treatment and effects
are also not seen relationally27. The purpose of creation, or the solution to the problem of
sin, is not a battle between God and Satan28. Modern life splits things up into discrete
units29. Theories that are dependant upon evil should be the other way round 30; who is in
charge here ? 31

With these recent insights into traditional metaphors, where are people's thoughts going
now ? Gunton's perceptive question is to ask "is salvation restoration to purpose or re-
direction to a new purpose"32 ? Similarly, White posits that the atonement is re-creation
not retribution33. These are in reaction to the recent tradition of seeing creation as flawed,
with an angry God demanding payment for the mess. Gunton is a little sweeping in saying
all theories imply failure of original purpose 34, but the point is well made that why should
a flawless God created a deliberately flawed creation only to then get upset about it ?

Wallace 35 updates Abelard's moral imperative by applying the moral imperative to Jesus,
saying if the cross illuminates His life then His life illuminates the cross. Forsyth 36 has a
relational view, Jesus actions laying bare our sinfulness by showing us aspects of immanence,
eternity, morality, a solution to problems, and a destruction of anomalies. This last one
being an interesting up-dated variation on the Christus Victor metaphor.

Barth 37 thought of it as God's self-humbling bringing us humankind's elevation to full

humankindness with Jesus as the mediator. The more humans wants to be the judges, the
more God becomes the not-judge (my phrase), and inverts victory and loss. There is
judgement and death, but this is on our old selves. Given the implication of this being a
pride-based problem, I am not sure that feminists will agree with this perceived male
problem and solution 38.

Metaphors And Incarnation

Is the incarnation a metaphor ? In the sense that we can only describe this in metaphorical
terms, yes. Similarly, is "hypostasis" a metaphor ? Yes, by taking the example os science
in likening new discoveries to known items, we can take what we know of humans and what
we think we know of God, and through the process of prayer, contemplation, discussion,

26
ibid, p186
27
Goldingay, Ch 9, further investigated in Appendix 1
28
Gunton, p147
29
cf Fowler's stage 2 literalism, "Stages of Faith", p135-150. The way this metaphor is
handled also limits spiritual development.
30
Goldingay, p95
31
ibid, p98
32
ibid, p150
33
ibid, p103
34
ibid, p151, also Doctrine Commission, p316-7, creation is corrupted, leading to a lack
of care for it. For opposite view F Young "Can These Dry Bones Live ?", and
Goldingay, p203
35
ibid, p94
36
ibid, p106-109
37
ibid, p109-112 and Migliore, p155
38
Goldingay, Ch 9 is explained further in Appendix 1, also Doctrine Commission, p292-3

3
praxis, worship, etc, we can postulate and extrapolate a new metaphor that needs a new
word.

Migliore39, says the Word works through sacraments and the Word works through Jesus,
so Jesus' life is a sacrament. Because sacraments can be read a metaphors because a
metaphor is a "pointer" to what we are trying to convey, then the incarnation can also be
seen as both sacrament and metaphor. Goldingay 40 explains the many different types of
sacrifice, and each sacrifice is a different types of metaphor, so we need the whole of Jesus'
life to get full range of metaphors, subtle nuances, and range of possible sacrificial language.

Seeing Jesus' life as a metaphor means we can see Jesus as an example of how to live 41.
That he is a "fellow sufferer" gives greater weight to message42, and for whatever reason,
Jesus has to go there first43. Wallace 44 sees both active obedience and passive obedience,
providing two metaphors for our use. Moltmann's "whole salvation for salvation of whole
life"45 is a pithy metaphor for Jesus, and therefore for the incarnation.

White says the myth of God incarnate limits God 46 as he can only see a real Jesus being able
to do what is necessary. I disagree, and it strikes me White is getting hung up on
something specific to him and "washing his own theological laundry in public". That he can
not switch off his requirement for logic is symptomatic of the problems people have with
metaphor as they can't let go of the rational to let the emotional have a say, especially
throughout Chapter 7, where he obviously has a problem with dual nature and how it works;
but don't we all ?

Moltmann says it is our nature to ask how rather than to accept and have faith47, as does
Bockmuehl48, for whom the best Christologies deal with who not how, a question that runs
throughout Bonhoeffer's work. For example, Paul concentrates on the benefits of
atonement / incarnation, not how it works. Too see Jesus' life as a metaphor does not make
it fiction; he is perpetrating the basic error of seeing metaphors as lies. The metaphor here
comes in explaining
a) the relevance of Jesus
b) how He can be both God and Man at the same time.
Neither of these mean He is a work of fiction.

Liberalism sees Jesus as a metaphor49 and the gospel, if not the whole Bible, as "creative
writing" / metaphors. As a non-liberal, I would like to see this as a "both / and" rather than
an "either / or", and use the concept of Jesus as a metaphor within the context of
Evangelicalism by holding onto doctrine and scripture but experimenting a bit and trying
things out. this is useful when people begin to have difficulties with doctrine or scripture.
The trip around the outside of the conventional is useful by clarifying one's relationship to
the conventional by viewing it from the unconventional.

39
Migliore, p212-3
40
Goldingay, Ch 1, argument runs throughout
41
Gunton, p157
42
White, p40
43
ibid, p53
44
ibid, p96
45
ibid, p45
46
ibid, p71
47
ibid, p48
48
Bockmuehl, p213
49
ibid, p201

4
Bockmuehl50 brings us the cautionary tale of Barth noting how culture determined
interpretation. This applies to all people at all times, including liberals (and I mention this
as the Barth example was with conservatives) trying to see Jesus as a metaphor potentially
in order to overcome their own problems with doctrine / scripture rather than changing
themselves in the light of a potentially uncomfortable message 51. White says beware of
saying "God works like this" because Jesus becomes an example and therefore is no longer
God 52. I would caution against this because the image can because idolatrous.

Finally and briefly, Gunton says Anselm has too little incarnation 53. Increasing the
incarnational aspect may have prevented his work being misconstrued as penal substitution
doesn't work with a true(r) view of Trinity and Christology.

How We Can See the Whole of the Incarnation as Salvific

Tying together the above two sections, I have shown that salvation has to be viewed as a
metaphor, and also that the incarnation must be described in metaphorical terms; we have
no other way of doing so as all we have is human language that by necessity of its
limitations, has to use metaphor to point to God. Therefore, we can connect the two
metaphors together and use that to posit the whole of the incarnation as being part of a
continuous process of salvation.

In doing the background reading, I noticed a tendency to just baldly state that the
incarnation was salvific, eg Gunton (Aulen uses whole of life and says whole life discussed
in his view of salvation)54, and Alsford 55. I wonder if this is because some people just find
it obvious.

To me, the answer works apophatically: how can the incarnation not be salvific ? Rather
than expecting those who think it is to prove that it is, I wonder if it wouldn't be better for
those who think it isn't to show how it can not be. Once one begins to contemplate the fact
that God / Jesus / the hypostasis therefore has to have some time when it is not salvific, just
where does this time begin and end and why at those points.

On a different note, Migliore stresses the necessity of humanity, what is not assumed not
healed 56. The necessity of the humanity aspect necessitates an incarnation, therefore
salvation can not happen without an incarnation, so the incarnation must be salvific. I
acknowledge the problems over Jesus' gender but that is not for expansion here other than
to remind the reader that this the danger of a metaphor being taken too literally, being too
frequently used at the cost of others, and being abused (see above)57.

Four points occurred to me while I was doing the background reading, which were
subsequently answered in other books.

50
ibid, p217
51
Hence my insistence of hanging on to doctrine / scripture: the metaphor here is doctrine /
scripture as the pole in the middle, with a person spinning on the end of a rope a bit
like a roundabout.
52
White, p37
53
Gunton, p93
54
ibid, p74 and p145
55
Goldingay, p165
56
Migliore, p146
57
Doctrine Commission, p293 and p314

5
1) What was God doing if not salvation ? Is it a case of Jesus magically appears, clicks
fingers, and make sit all pretty ? It seems God isn't working that way, eg Ephesians
gives thanks for J's life58. How can the incarnation not be salvific ? If not it is not
salvific, then what is it ? To say the incarnation not salvific means the history of
Trinity was not always salvific, therefore God has not been Love at some point59.
The Trinity has been at work throughout history, the incarnation is just one aspect
of this60.

2) Can we see sacrifice as kenosis to bring salvation ? Yes, the Lamb as kenosis of
Godhead is not seen because we have problems with this from a contemporary
society upbringing 61. God is close to creation, and the incarnation is not untypical62.
To me, this is an advantage of Christianity over other religions.

3) What is point of Jesus' baptism if He is already perichoretically connected to the

Godhead ? The necessity of baptism implies the Holy Spirit is not present prior,
therefore no perichoresis, so what was going on in the Trinity ? According to
Moltmann 63, the Holy Spirit is part of Jesus. Stemming from reading Moltmann 64,
if the two natures are there from the start, then was one dormant until switched
on ? 65 If not, what was it doing up to that point ? Only Moltmann covered this
point, without resolving it, and for all White's agonising over the dual natures he
didn't (above). The relevance of this is can a non-perichoretic incarnation exist or
be salvific ?

4) If we see Jesus life as a play, do we need the whole play to understand ? Yes 66,
otherwise why are we told so much else in the Gospels ? One way / event won't
cover all people67, we need many views, cf many traditions to cover the range of
personalities, experiences, and ways of expression. If Christopraxis equals social
justice equals a lifetime's work, then surely Jesus' lifetime's work is important 68.
Gorringe's "The Sign of Love"69 shows how table fellowship impacts upon society
and politics, and the demonstration of this in Jesus' life has more impact than just
getting a message from above70. The whole of Jesus' life breeds a healthier view of
Christianity71: it stops abuse of people. The atonement is a development resulting
from incarnation 72.

58
Gunton, p125
59
Moltmann, p71
60
Goldingay, p106-108
61
Gunton, p148
62
ibid, p146, also Doctrine Commission, p337
63
Moltmann, p93-4
64
ibid, p51 et seq
65
For Jesus, did life began at thirty ?
66
Migliore, p143
67
White, p35
68
Moltmann, p43
69
argument runs throughout
70
Doctrine Commission, p350, theories of the atonement come second to the impact of the
particularity of the incarnation
71
Goldingay, p162
72
Wallace, p97, also Doctrine Commission, p343 and p350, the particularity of the
incarnation results in engendering service

6
Conclusion

Assuming that we have to discuss terms purely through metaphor, and I think we do, then
I see no reason why we can't say "incarnation = salvation" and both parts illuminate the
other. As Gunton asks73, do we really understand what is going on anyway ?

Sankey raises an interesting point for the implications 74: the maturity of attitude and the
relationship to the Trinity by participating in salvation. This again probably works both
ways round. We know how "immature" some Christians can be: as the basis for belief is
faulty, so metaphors are faulty, so attitudes are faulty, eg a tradition thinking they are the
only real Christians. There is a resistance to getting involved in theology thinking that it is
really only abstruse irrelevant intellectualism, and I am getting an inkling that my potential
future ministry is to challenge this and to present, as has been seen in this essay, the
practical benefits of an enriched thinking about God.

Migliore 75 urges us to
- respect the variety of metaphors
- see atonement as all of life
- see grace as requiring a human response
- understand that grace requires judgement, not as one or the other in conflict
- see the significance spreading from individual to community to creation.

The problems of language keep re-appearing, be it post-modernism causing major problems

as it deconstructs everything, or marginalised voices critiquing the lack of progress and
development. Previous generations of Christians had no problems coming up with lots of
definitions, imagery, metaphors, etc, yet one this seems to be struggling, strangled even, by
having so few. After all this, I conclude that perhaps we need to re-discover the benefits of
seeing the incarnation as salvific as part of a wider programme of more metaphors.

73
Gunton, p186
74
Goldingay, p107
75
Migliore, p155-6

7
Appendix 1

According to the feminist viewpoint, as expressed by Alsford in "Atonement Today", the

male view of sin is pride, and associated ills, leading to seeing the atonement purely as the
restoration of "I-Thou" and self-giving. While no bad thing in itself, this does not deal with
everything, and women may need to deal with different issues, eg a lack of assertion, dignity,
etc, leading to see sin as a lack of healthy pride and the atonement being a process of
restoration and empowerment. The last thing some women need is to hear about a suffering
servant and self-denial.

There is a resistance to pigeon-holing either gender or making either problem gender-

specific. The argument acknowledges that characters and situations are not rigid and that
both sides can learn from each other and that one can find overly assertive women and under
assertive men. This is not in opposition to Scripture that sees sin as falling short, and
leaving things undone, as well as what was done.

It is therefore possible to ignore alternative definitions of sin to concentrate upon a select

few, which imply only a select few metaphors / interpretations of solutions, ie an atonement
metaphor involving greater self-assertion and the power structures being revised is the last
thing one needs when excessive assertion and biased power structures are already causing
problems.

Further examples, and the viewpoints requires from an interpretation of atonement, are :-
1) chauvinism, requiring a re-assessment of gender definitions and oppressive societal
structures
2) polarisation, requiring a changed world view from Cartesian dualism, hierarchies,
excessive individualism, etc
3) responsibility, away from either extreme of too much or too little, but a more considered,
simultaneously objective and subjective "both / and" view reviewing how the blame
is apportioned and defined
4) anthropology, looking at people's actual experiences, learning from them, and
understanding what they have been through, recognising the universal may not be as
relevant as the specific, ie an individual's current needs might require a different
metaphor from another's, or even a different metaphor for each thing that needs to
be resolved
5) sacrifice, engaging with the many different types of sacrifice other than self.

Further to Alsford's view, the Church of England Doctrine Commission ("The Mystery of
Salvation, Chapter 2, in "Contemporary Doctrine Classics"), shows that
1) as the view of the universe has changed
2) so the way in which sin operates has changed
3) so the view of what is required of salvation has changed
4) and so the way in which the cross and the incarnation have been seen has also changed.

There is also a recognition that what works in Western cultures doesn't work in other
cultures. The metaphor has to be grounded in the everyday life of the people who need to
hear the message. We are in a position now where we could plunder the past for a wide,
rich, and deep collection of tried and tested metaphors and imagery.

This cultural significance of metaphor, and how sin needs to be re-defined for non-Western
cultures as other views of situations are so radically different form ours, is the main theme
running throughout Green and Baker's "Recovering the Scandal of the Cross".

For example, the Eastern view, that the protagonist in a situation needs to show shame for
the offence committed, does not fit at all with any of the Western views. It is to the shame

8
of Western missionaries that there has been an attempt to Westernise non-Western cultures
so that they then suffer from an understandable problem that Westerners can then solve !

9
Bibliography

Ed M Bockmuehl, "The Cambridge Companion to Jesus", CUP, 2001

Doctrine Commission of the General Synod of the Church of England, "Contemporary
Doctrine Classics", Church House Publishing, 2005
Ed J Goldingay, "Atonement Today", SPCK, 1995
J B Green and M D Baker, "Recovering the Scandal of the Cross", Paternoster Press, 2003
J Fowler, "Stages of Faith", Harper Collins, 1995
T Gorringe, "The Sign of Love", SPCK, 1997
C Gunton, "The Actuality of Atonement", T&T Clark International, 1988
S McFague, "Metaphorical Theology", SCM, 1983
D Migliore, "Faith Seeking Understanding", Eerdmans, 1991
J Moltmann, "The Way of Jesus Christ", SCM, 1990
O Morton, "Mapping Mars", Fourth Estate, 2002
R Wallace, "The Atoning Death of Christ", Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1981
V White, "Atonement and Incarnation", CUP, 1991

10