What do you think?
Rate this book
Saved from Sacrifice: A Theology of the Cross
The cross has long been not only a scandal but also a profound filled with saving significance and power, it is at the same time a sobering tragedy. In Saved from Sacrifice theologian Mark Heim takes on this paradox, asserting that the cross must be understood against the whole history of human scapegoating violence.
In order to highlight the dimensions of his argument, Heim carefully and critically draws on the groundbreaking work of French theorist and biblical scholar René Girard. Yet Heim goes beyond Girard to develop a comprehensive theology of the atonement and the cross through his fresh readings of well-known biblical passages and his exploration of the place of the victim.
In order to highlight the dimensions of his argument, Heim carefully and critically draws on the groundbreaking work of French theorist and biblical scholar René Girard. Yet Heim goes beyond Girard to develop a comprehensive theology of the atonement and the cross through his fresh readings of well-known biblical passages and his exploration of the place of the victim.
360 pages, Paperback
First published August 15, 2006
43 people are currently reading
233 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
February 16, 2017
Two thousand years ago, Jesus of Nazareth died on a cross. Ever since then, those who consider themselves his disciples have been putting forth various interpretations for what Jesus' death means for humanity. Unlike such subjects as the Trinity and the dual-nature of Jesus, what happened on the cross was never included as part of the great creeds of the early church. It is as if Christians have always realized that the cross was too big an event to squeeze into one explanation.
So we have various "theories of the atonement": there is the penal substitution theory which states Jesus Christ took our place and accepted the wrath of God that our sin deserved. There is Christus Victory, where Jesus defeated Satan and the evil powers that held us in slavery, freeing us to know God. Then there is the exemplarist view, where Jesus on the cross is the ultimate example of how we ought to live, it moves us to live differently.
Of course each of these views is open to various nuance, and holding to one of them does not rule out the others (it makes me think of Scot McKnight's great book, A Community Called Atonement, where he likens these theories to golf clubs: each different club has a purpose in different situations and all are needed for a full game of golf, or understanding of the cross).
Mark Heim presents another theory of the atonement, relying heavily on the work of Rene Girard. Briefly: humans tend to mimic each other, leading us to desire the same things which brings us into conflict. Such conflict causes unrest in societies, so historically all this unrest would lead to one person being chosen and killed as a sacrifice. This person was the scapegoat, blamed for all problems and evils in the society. At the same time, since this killing brought peace, this person was honored. Girard argues that this story is seen throughout religions and literature, though it is hidden. The real story cannot be told, in other words the innocence of the scapegoat cannot be admitted. For the sacrifice to do its work, the society must convince itself of the guilt of the scapegoat.
What is unique in the Jewish scripture is the unmasking of this story. Alone among ancient religion, Girard argues that the Bible is filled with stories of innocent victims. The clearest example of this is Jesus himself who dies as the ultimate innocent victim.
Heim's book spends a lot of time looking at what this all means. It is one of those books that is hard to grasp, I think, because I am so familiar with the source material. In other words, I am so familiar with the New Testament that I have preconceived notions of what it all means. Heim's book tries to show the stories in a different light which is fantastic as you read it, but hard to grasp in the face of a lifetime of reading it differently. That said, this understanding of the cross is rewarding.
One point Heim returns to over and over is that the stories in the gospels of Jesus' crucifixion emphasize two points: the crucifixion should NOT be happening, for Jesus is innocent, yet it is good that it is happening. Holding these two points together is the challenge for any explanation of what it all means.
Heim argues that Jesus going to the cross was not God's plan so much as God condescending to a human idea. Many Christians think God became human in Jesus Christ and went to the cross because it was all God's plan and idea. Yet Heim argues, following Girard, that executing innocent victims is not something God would do, it is something humans do. Thus Jesus goes to the cross to save humans from our sacrifice innocents and through that to bring peace.
On the cross God identifies with innocent victims. Thus, those who claim to be on God's side can no longer take part in the sacrificial, scapegoating system. We are saved from creating scapegoats, from blaming our problems on others, from forming unity via violence and excommunication. Instead diverse people join together in communion (mass, eucharist), a ritual that requires no continued sacrifice and no continued violence. You could say we are set free.
I thought it was especially interesting how Heim shows that part of the reason we miss this way of looking at the cross is that it was so successful in changing how our culture thinks of sacrifice. This goes so far as to see the complete redefinition of sacrifice. We still talk about sacrifice and self-sacrifice but not in literal terms, such as those prior to the execution of Jesus spoke.
One thing I wish Heim had spoken of more was how this would preach. It is pretty clear how Christians utilize the scapegoat idea today in such things as the "culture war", casting all the blame on one group, seeing them as the reason why everything is wrong. I spent a lot of time thinking of everyday people and how they may scapegoat others and how this message of the cross could be applied to free them from that. Is it as simple as saying not to blame your coworker, neighbor or whomever when something in life goes wrong?
As you can see, this book has given me a lot to think on, which alone makes it a worthwhile book.
So we have various "theories of the atonement": there is the penal substitution theory which states Jesus Christ took our place and accepted the wrath of God that our sin deserved. There is Christus Victory, where Jesus defeated Satan and the evil powers that held us in slavery, freeing us to know God. Then there is the exemplarist view, where Jesus on the cross is the ultimate example of how we ought to live, it moves us to live differently.
Of course each of these views is open to various nuance, and holding to one of them does not rule out the others (it makes me think of Scot McKnight's great book, A Community Called Atonement, where he likens these theories to golf clubs: each different club has a purpose in different situations and all are needed for a full game of golf, or understanding of the cross).
Mark Heim presents another theory of the atonement, relying heavily on the work of Rene Girard. Briefly: humans tend to mimic each other, leading us to desire the same things which brings us into conflict. Such conflict causes unrest in societies, so historically all this unrest would lead to one person being chosen and killed as a sacrifice. This person was the scapegoat, blamed for all problems and evils in the society. At the same time, since this killing brought peace, this person was honored. Girard argues that this story is seen throughout religions and literature, though it is hidden. The real story cannot be told, in other words the innocence of the scapegoat cannot be admitted. For the sacrifice to do its work, the society must convince itself of the guilt of the scapegoat.
What is unique in the Jewish scripture is the unmasking of this story. Alone among ancient religion, Girard argues that the Bible is filled with stories of innocent victims. The clearest example of this is Jesus himself who dies as the ultimate innocent victim.
Heim's book spends a lot of time looking at what this all means. It is one of those books that is hard to grasp, I think, because I am so familiar with the source material. In other words, I am so familiar with the New Testament that I have preconceived notions of what it all means. Heim's book tries to show the stories in a different light which is fantastic as you read it, but hard to grasp in the face of a lifetime of reading it differently. That said, this understanding of the cross is rewarding.
One point Heim returns to over and over is that the stories in the gospels of Jesus' crucifixion emphasize two points: the crucifixion should NOT be happening, for Jesus is innocent, yet it is good that it is happening. Holding these two points together is the challenge for any explanation of what it all means.
Heim argues that Jesus going to the cross was not God's plan so much as God condescending to a human idea. Many Christians think God became human in Jesus Christ and went to the cross because it was all God's plan and idea. Yet Heim argues, following Girard, that executing innocent victims is not something God would do, it is something humans do. Thus Jesus goes to the cross to save humans from our sacrifice innocents and through that to bring peace.
On the cross God identifies with innocent victims. Thus, those who claim to be on God's side can no longer take part in the sacrificial, scapegoating system. We are saved from creating scapegoats, from blaming our problems on others, from forming unity via violence and excommunication. Instead diverse people join together in communion (mass, eucharist), a ritual that requires no continued sacrifice and no continued violence. You could say we are set free.
I thought it was especially interesting how Heim shows that part of the reason we miss this way of looking at the cross is that it was so successful in changing how our culture thinks of sacrifice. This goes so far as to see the complete redefinition of sacrifice. We still talk about sacrifice and self-sacrifice but not in literal terms, such as those prior to the execution of Jesus spoke.
One thing I wish Heim had spoken of more was how this would preach. It is pretty clear how Christians utilize the scapegoat idea today in such things as the "culture war", casting all the blame on one group, seeing them as the reason why everything is wrong. I spent a lot of time thinking of everyday people and how they may scapegoat others and how this message of the cross could be applied to free them from that. Is it as simple as saying not to blame your coworker, neighbor or whomever when something in life goes wrong?
As you can see, this book has given me a lot to think on, which alone makes it a worthwhile book.
May 23, 2020
Provides a valuable perspective on scapegoating, sacrifice and violence among humans. In my humble opinion though, there are only glimpses of where I felt the theology needed to go. If we are see the cross as ending scapegoating, and violence the cross needs to be able to transform our hearts with love.
May 7, 2013
This may well be one of the most important theologies published in recent memory. Heim's reinterpretation of the theology of the cross is a theory of the atonement for the 21st century.
Like all good Protestants for the past 400 years or so, I was raised with a basic understanding of the atonement as Jesus' sacrifice to take upon himself God's righteous punishment for all human sin, the core of John Calvin's "penal substitutionary theory of atonement," itself a derivation of the (now) nearly 1000-year old interpretation by Anselm of Canterbury. Like so many of my generation, however, I have in recent years called this concept more and more into question. For one thing, it seems to set up God not as the Loving Father whom Jesus taught but more as a divine child abuser, raging at an innocent and dealing out destruction to His child in His wrath. For another, this theory of atonement has been used too often to encourage passive acceptance of abuse and injustice in women and minorities. More and more, Calvin and Anselm's dominant theology seemed bankrupt in the face of human fallenness.
Heim, a fellow American Baptist, reinterprets Jesus' death on the cross. He reminds us, first of all, that penal substitution is far from the only honored theory of the atonement in the Christian past or present: not only is it a development extant for only half (in the case of Anselm's theory) or a quarter (in the case of Calvin's more thoroughgoing work) of the history of Christianity but Catholic theology is not of the Calvinist school and Orthodox theology does not even include Anselm's formulation. The universality of belief in penal substitution is a myth.
Heim then goes on to weave his new soteriology from elements of the older and non-Protestant streams plus the work of a 20th Century anthropologist and philosopher, Rene Girard. Drawing on Girard's work on scapegoating and the place of sacrificial violence in the history of religions, Heim shows how the revealed word of God, from Genesis through Revelation, actually shatters the scapegoating myth. More crucially, he shows how the Incarnate Word of God, Jesus, became a scapegoat at the hands of sinful humanity in order to free us from the sin of scapegoating, our broken conception of a vengeful God, and the foundational sins of rivalry with God and each other.
I found this book to be exciting and inspiring. While many of the serious books of theology I have read in the past few years have pointed out the shortcomings of penal substitutionary atonement, this is the first that has presented a thorough and compelling replacement for the outmoded Calvinism. Heim writes well, only occasionally lapsing into the overwriting so many theologians are prone to. I am looking forward to this book becoming more widely read and generating reviews and reflections from other theologians. In my opinion, Heim has given us a theology of the cross that 21st century Christians can relate to.
Like all good Protestants for the past 400 years or so, I was raised with a basic understanding of the atonement as Jesus' sacrifice to take upon himself God's righteous punishment for all human sin, the core of John Calvin's "penal substitutionary theory of atonement," itself a derivation of the (now) nearly 1000-year old interpretation by Anselm of Canterbury. Like so many of my generation, however, I have in recent years called this concept more and more into question. For one thing, it seems to set up God not as the Loving Father whom Jesus taught but more as a divine child abuser, raging at an innocent and dealing out destruction to His child in His wrath. For another, this theory of atonement has been used too often to encourage passive acceptance of abuse and injustice in women and minorities. More and more, Calvin and Anselm's dominant theology seemed bankrupt in the face of human fallenness.
Heim, a fellow American Baptist, reinterprets Jesus' death on the cross. He reminds us, first of all, that penal substitution is far from the only honored theory of the atonement in the Christian past or present: not only is it a development extant for only half (in the case of Anselm's theory) or a quarter (in the case of Calvin's more thoroughgoing work) of the history of Christianity but Catholic theology is not of the Calvinist school and Orthodox theology does not even include Anselm's formulation. The universality of belief in penal substitution is a myth.
Heim then goes on to weave his new soteriology from elements of the older and non-Protestant streams plus the work of a 20th Century anthropologist and philosopher, Rene Girard. Drawing on Girard's work on scapegoating and the place of sacrificial violence in the history of religions, Heim shows how the revealed word of God, from Genesis through Revelation, actually shatters the scapegoating myth. More crucially, he shows how the Incarnate Word of God, Jesus, became a scapegoat at the hands of sinful humanity in order to free us from the sin of scapegoating, our broken conception of a vengeful God, and the foundational sins of rivalry with God and each other.
I found this book to be exciting and inspiring. While many of the serious books of theology I have read in the past few years have pointed out the shortcomings of penal substitutionary atonement, this is the first that has presented a thorough and compelling replacement for the outmoded Calvinism. Heim writes well, only occasionally lapsing into the overwriting so many theologians are prone to. I am looking forward to this book becoming more widely read and generating reviews and reflections from other theologians. In my opinion, Heim has given us a theology of the cross that 21st century Christians can relate to.
July 3, 2021
I just finished "Saved from Sacrifice," by S. Mark Heim.
It seems that no matter what I do I will end up getting my hands on more atonement theology/theology of the cross than anything else. (Based off a footnote in the intro i have already bought a Girard's "I saw Satan Fall.")
Heim opens by dealing kindly and fairly with quick blurbs about the main models of the atonement. What I greatly appreciate is how he suggests blending them as needed: "And yet there is nothing about exemplarist views or Christus Victor or incarnational ones that intrinsically rules out combination with sacrificial elements," p 7. So true. Be creative and faithful.
This is very good so far. Heim states that the atonement deals with three situations, and these three are reflected in our models of atonement: sin (estrangement from God); evil (estrangement from humans); death (morality and estrangement from nature. Christ's three roles deal with each of these problems (historically the emphasis has been on estrangement from God): prophet to reconcile us to God, priest to reconcile us to others, and King who is triumphant over death. These likewise correspond to substitution, moral influence and Christus Victor with Recapitulation being a bit of an odd one because the eastern model defies the western categories. It just hot me that this form of model also corresponds to Adam and Eve to God, Cain to Able, and the Hebrews to God in wanting a king other than God. The aforementioned are the unwinding which is restored in Christ. The purpose of this book is dealing with the interpersonal evil aspect of the cross and doing so from a Girardian (scapegoat) perspective. Heim's goal is to pick up at the place of criticism recieved by Girard.
"If the saving effect of Jesus' death refers to only the next life, or to transformations in the inaccessible inner lives of the individuals, then the whole question remains a matter of belief. Girard's contention is that there is a distinct, empirical level on which the cross illuminates and affects human history, a level that can be grasped rationally and is not a matter of subjective belief," p 13.
"God is not the author of the [passion], but the one crushed by it. God reverses the violence of the cross and vindicates the victim executed on it," p 17.
"In scriptural and theological context, the three sides of the cross [prophet, priest and king] are simply different entry points for telling the same story, a story that always comes round all three points," p 19.
Heim states that the reason working from a Girardian framework is so valuable is that sacrifice and scapegoating were real answers to real problems. So be it any ANE sacrificial and scapegoat situation it really did something. I believe at this point Girard and Heim would say "it really impacted the community as far as they saw sin in the community."
It seems that scapegoating sacrifice "works" when no one takes the side of the sacrifice or thinks that person innocent, when "no one withholds participation in the collective violence against the person," p 65. I think Heim is going to say that the early churches reaction as being the antithesis of the above where they actually knew Christs innocence, saw the cross as something to participate in.
"If Girard is right that ritual sacrifice largely comes from our social conflicts to begin with, then the prophets are only following it back to its roots," p 95.
"[T]his new community [the Church] explicitly rejects both the sacrificial violence that killed Christ and the contagion of revenge that the sacrificial system existed to contain," p 128.
"By resurrection Jesus is cleared of the scapegoat charges against him. But the resurrection also awaits those who scapegoated him. While they certainly committed the crime and are certainly guilty, it is also incontestable that the one they are charged with killing is alive," p 146.
"If we sinned against Jesus and do not believe in his resurrection, we do not believe in the basis of our own acquittal; we have rejected the ground on which we might be delivered," p 146.
"Christians are fixated on Jesus' death and will accept no other like it. The accusation is perfectly correct. To believe in the crucified one is to want no other victims. To depend on the blood of Jesus is to refuse to depend on the sacrificial blood of anyone else. It is to swear off scapegoats. Sacred violence promises to save us from retaliatory catastrophe. But what will save us from sacred violence? Only some event that may achieve once and for all what sacred violence attempts by endless repetition," p 195.
"God would never build a world on innocent sacrifice, but since humanity did, God will find a way, once, to turn to good what we have founded in evil," p 196.
"The work of the cross is the work of a transcendent God, breaking into the cycle we could not change alone. It is a saving act of God, a victory over the powers of this world, a defeat of death. If we limit Jesus' work to that of a human exemplar, the crucifixion becomes more of a prescription for suffering than if we grasp it as the work of the incarnate one, once for all. The place of the ritual victim is open to all, and refilled perpetually. Jesus' role cannot be replaced and therefore should not be," p 197.
"[T]he cross is a kind of intersection, where different atonements meet," p 198.
"The gospel is not ultimately about exchange of victims, but about ending the bloodshed," p 200.
"[A]nti-Semitism is a test for a healthy atonement theory," p 212. This is very good. His theological reasoning here is that if one holds that "Jews killed Jesus" and that "...the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all (Is. 53:6), they have an unavoidable contradiction that must be dealt with. We either accept that our iniquity was laid on Him and give up the "who" or we blame the Jews (and Gentiles if one wants to be historically accurate) and give up claim that our iniquity was laid on Him. We cant claim both.
Per the eucharist: "the crowd does not gather around a body; it gathers to become Christ's body in the world, animated by the Holy Spirit of peace," p 233.
"Those who would follow His teaching and His desire and His example, then, should have no desire to join Him on the cross. If we did have such an aim, then Christ's death would be in vain. The intended reign of God is a life without crosses, peace without scapegoats. Short of the reign of God, may the faithful Christian life lead to suffering? May it bring the specific suffering of scapegoat or of those who cross to the side of scapegoats? Yes," p 259.
A wonderful subjective atonement book.
It seems that no matter what I do I will end up getting my hands on more atonement theology/theology of the cross than anything else. (Based off a footnote in the intro i have already bought a Girard's "I saw Satan Fall.")
Heim opens by dealing kindly and fairly with quick blurbs about the main models of the atonement. What I greatly appreciate is how he suggests blending them as needed: "And yet there is nothing about exemplarist views or Christus Victor or incarnational ones that intrinsically rules out combination with sacrificial elements," p 7. So true. Be creative and faithful.
This is very good so far. Heim states that the atonement deals with three situations, and these three are reflected in our models of atonement: sin (estrangement from God); evil (estrangement from humans); death (morality and estrangement from nature. Christ's three roles deal with each of these problems (historically the emphasis has been on estrangement from God): prophet to reconcile us to God, priest to reconcile us to others, and King who is triumphant over death. These likewise correspond to substitution, moral influence and Christus Victor with Recapitulation being a bit of an odd one because the eastern model defies the western categories. It just hot me that this form of model also corresponds to Adam and Eve to God, Cain to Able, and the Hebrews to God in wanting a king other than God. The aforementioned are the unwinding which is restored in Christ. The purpose of this book is dealing with the interpersonal evil aspect of the cross and doing so from a Girardian (scapegoat) perspective. Heim's goal is to pick up at the place of criticism recieved by Girard.
"If the saving effect of Jesus' death refers to only the next life, or to transformations in the inaccessible inner lives of the individuals, then the whole question remains a matter of belief. Girard's contention is that there is a distinct, empirical level on which the cross illuminates and affects human history, a level that can be grasped rationally and is not a matter of subjective belief," p 13.
"God is not the author of the [passion], but the one crushed by it. God reverses the violence of the cross and vindicates the victim executed on it," p 17.
"In scriptural and theological context, the three sides of the cross [prophet, priest and king] are simply different entry points for telling the same story, a story that always comes round all three points," p 19.
Heim states that the reason working from a Girardian framework is so valuable is that sacrifice and scapegoating were real answers to real problems. So be it any ANE sacrificial and scapegoat situation it really did something. I believe at this point Girard and Heim would say "it really impacted the community as far as they saw sin in the community."
It seems that scapegoating sacrifice "works" when no one takes the side of the sacrifice or thinks that person innocent, when "no one withholds participation in the collective violence against the person," p 65. I think Heim is going to say that the early churches reaction as being the antithesis of the above where they actually knew Christs innocence, saw the cross as something to participate in.
"If Girard is right that ritual sacrifice largely comes from our social conflicts to begin with, then the prophets are only following it back to its roots," p 95.
"[T]his new community [the Church] explicitly rejects both the sacrificial violence that killed Christ and the contagion of revenge that the sacrificial system existed to contain," p 128.
"By resurrection Jesus is cleared of the scapegoat charges against him. But the resurrection also awaits those who scapegoated him. While they certainly committed the crime and are certainly guilty, it is also incontestable that the one they are charged with killing is alive," p 146.
"If we sinned against Jesus and do not believe in his resurrection, we do not believe in the basis of our own acquittal; we have rejected the ground on which we might be delivered," p 146.
"Christians are fixated on Jesus' death and will accept no other like it. The accusation is perfectly correct. To believe in the crucified one is to want no other victims. To depend on the blood of Jesus is to refuse to depend on the sacrificial blood of anyone else. It is to swear off scapegoats. Sacred violence promises to save us from retaliatory catastrophe. But what will save us from sacred violence? Only some event that may achieve once and for all what sacred violence attempts by endless repetition," p 195.
"God would never build a world on innocent sacrifice, but since humanity did, God will find a way, once, to turn to good what we have founded in evil," p 196.
"The work of the cross is the work of a transcendent God, breaking into the cycle we could not change alone. It is a saving act of God, a victory over the powers of this world, a defeat of death. If we limit Jesus' work to that of a human exemplar, the crucifixion becomes more of a prescription for suffering than if we grasp it as the work of the incarnate one, once for all. The place of the ritual victim is open to all, and refilled perpetually. Jesus' role cannot be replaced and therefore should not be," p 197.
"[T]he cross is a kind of intersection, where different atonements meet," p 198.
"The gospel is not ultimately about exchange of victims, but about ending the bloodshed," p 200.
"[A]nti-Semitism is a test for a healthy atonement theory," p 212. This is very good. His theological reasoning here is that if one holds that "Jews killed Jesus" and that "...the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all (Is. 53:6), they have an unavoidable contradiction that must be dealt with. We either accept that our iniquity was laid on Him and give up the "who" or we blame the Jews (and Gentiles if one wants to be historically accurate) and give up claim that our iniquity was laid on Him. We cant claim both.
Per the eucharist: "the crowd does not gather around a body; it gathers to become Christ's body in the world, animated by the Holy Spirit of peace," p 233.
"Those who would follow His teaching and His desire and His example, then, should have no desire to join Him on the cross. If we did have such an aim, then Christ's death would be in vain. The intended reign of God is a life without crosses, peace without scapegoats. Short of the reign of God, may the faithful Christian life lead to suffering? May it bring the specific suffering of scapegoat or of those who cross to the side of scapegoats? Yes," p 259.
A wonderful subjective atonement book.
January 21, 2016
This is a great book that outlined our human tendencies toward mimetic and scapegoating practices of sacrifice. They are acts of "redemptive violence" that are shrouded in myth and hide the victims of this violence. This violence does bring about a temporary peace, but always eschews more violence because sacrifice is never complete. The cross, however, unveils the reality of our violent tendencies by revealing that this violence is, in fact, not redemptive. Thus, this unveiling act and sacrifice on the part of Jesus is redemptive because it has the power to save us from the myth of redemptive violence. Furthermore, Jesus' identification with the victim gives voice to those silent victims. The cross is a furthermore redemptive act because it is not engaged with violence, which would only participate in that which it exposes. This would be no real change. Instead, it is increasingly difficult to no longer see victims of violence and to turn a blind eye. It can only be done through conscientious effort. As such, the purpose of the Church and Christians, as followers of Jesus, is to rid the world of crosses and to no longer participate in such violence.
November 24, 2012
One of the best books for re-thinking Atonement theology. Much "traditional" theology suggests, at least implicitly, that God wills the violence of Jesus' death. Heim (along with Raymund Schwager) uses René Girard's thought to argue that all of the violence is willed by humans and none of it by God. Anyone inclined towards an argument for a loving as opposed to wrathful God should find this an encouraging book.
July 5, 2012
Incredible presentation of the Gospel in light of Mimetic Theory (Rene Girard)! This book is amazing :)
July 28, 2018
Amazing. Changed the way I understand atonement and sacrifice--total paradigm shift.
May 31, 2019
Could have been shorter (too much repetition of the same ideas), but I still enjoyed this straightforward explanation of Girard's scapegoat theory. Very clear, accessible writing.
April 25, 2024
I have significant reservations about the validity of this theory as a standalone account of the atonement. Anthropologically, scapegoating is far from the universally foundational practice that Girard asserts it to be. Theologically, I am not sure a dispassionate exegesis permits scapegoating to be regarded as the principal component of the sinfulness of fallen humanity either. Those caveats aside, scapegoating is still obviously a part of what happens at the crucifixion, and so a sustained theological treatment is both warranted and, in this case, amply rewarding.
In the course of plowing what, to me, is an infertile furrow, Heim manages to uncover a seam, to mix a metaphor, of theological gold. His criticisms of competing atonement theories are often apposite, and his understanding of their mechanics, as it were, as significant addition to the analysis of their validity. He is strongest politically, and the comparison between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia as twin hereseiarchies is particularly well framed by the concept of scapegoating.
Well worth the read.
In the course of plowing what, to me, is an infertile furrow, Heim manages to uncover a seam, to mix a metaphor, of theological gold. His criticisms of competing atonement theories are often apposite, and his understanding of their mechanics, as it were, as significant addition to the analysis of their validity. He is strongest politically, and the comparison between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia as twin hereseiarchies is particularly well framed by the concept of scapegoating.
Well worth the read.
April 2, 2019
Heim's book is a critical read because it takes Girardian thought, and really makes it intelligible to the Christian tradition, particularly for clergy persons. Heim goes through the litany of scriptures that describe mimetic rivalry, scapegoating, and how the cross and resurrection event forever changed, and even now speaks to, sacred violence. He also offers interpretation of the Lord's Supper. He gives language for these scriptures and symbols so that we can offer world changing meaning to the cross, which is not connected to forgiveness and substitutionary atonement.
I would rank this book as one of four "must-read" theology books for any divinity student or clergy person (along with "Exclusion and Embrace", "She Who Is", "The Art of Biblical Narrative").
I would rank this book as one of four "must-read" theology books for any divinity student or clergy person (along with "Exclusion and Embrace", "She Who Is", "The Art of Biblical Narrative").
April 22, 2019
Saved from Sacrifice contains a thoroughly biblical refutation of Penal Substitutionary Atonement (as taught by Anselm and Calvin) that succeeds precisely where progressive Christian theology often fails - by saying more about the cross rather than less. Heim’s alternative understanding of the biblical atonement will strike some readers as strange at first, but upon closer examination will answer many of their deepest questions about why Jesus died and how his sacrifice brought reconciliation to the world.
May 18, 2020
Brilliant! One of the most influential, paradigm-shifting books on theology and Christology I've ever read. Radically changes the lens through which to view Jesus' ministry and passion and rejects traditional Christian notions of atonement, while offering a new theology which is stunningly and elegantly supported by scripture. Like having the curtain pulled back on the "deeper magic". I will never again read scripture or view atonement in the same way.
November 20, 2019
A good introduction to Rene Girard's mimetic theory!
July 6, 2021
A provocative and helpful view of atonement theology mostly following Girard, but discovering biblical voicing. It’s not only interesting, it will continue to be a resource
November 12, 2014
Dr. Mark Heim is a theologian who thinks about matters on a deep level. In his book The Depth of the Riches, he beautifully delineates among the different religions by using their respective ends. In his book Saved From Sacrifice, Heim takes much popular topic of the Cross and challenges the set norms. He starts with the question whether God is the one who demands the sacrifice of the cross. Heim adopts the scapegoating philosophy of Rene Girard and uses it as a foundation for his theology of the Cross in which God takes a place next to the victim and relieves his people of the scapegoating mentality. At times hard to understand, the book will be a good read for students of theology and anyone interested in wrestling with the topic of the Cross. Moreover, students of politic science and historians will find the book thought provoking and giving its readers new ideas.
April 6, 2007
A provocative reworking of atonement theology, along the lines of Rene Girard's theological anthropology. I found it surprisingly compelling and conservative in its outlook. Though I can't agree with Heim's reading of Hebrews or Revelation, his reflections on the Gospels and the flow of redemptive history must be engaged by Reformed orthodoxy. I only wish I were theologically and exegetically sophisticated enough for the task.
January 1, 2017
An in depth and inspiring reading of the atonement through a close reading of Rene Girard. The last two chapters were especially deep and rich in their explanation of the complexity of how the entire complex of texts, images, and history of what happened on the cross, gets worked out through time in human lives and communities.
December 8, 2016
This is a thorough study of the concept of atonement in Christian theology, with an accent on the work of Rene Girard. I consider it a must-read for a contemporary understanding of the problems inherent in this topic.
December 10, 2007
I have read half of this book, intend on finishing. If you like something new and challenging to consider, check out heim.
Read
May 18, 2012very good coverage of girard but lacks a coverage of an alternative to penal substitution
April 8, 2018
Brilliant. Carefully details the difference in theologies over the atonement and shows how one leads to error, one leads to life.
July 4, 2022
A great introduction to Girard— if you have questions or concerns about substitutionary atonement this is a must read.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews