How Jesus understood his death is an important datum for the reconstruction of· the aims of Jesus. Having experienced the rejection of his message of the Kingdom of God, Jesus found himself in a situation of crisis, wherein he was forced to reflect on the theological significance of his failure. He came to the conclusion that it was God's will that his death be an expiation for sin. This is how he incorporated his death into his understanding of his role as the messenger of the Kingdom of God. If the historian does not take Jesus' understanding of his death into consideration, his reconstruction of the aims of Jesus will necessarily be truncated. In particular, Jesus came to understand his approaching death in the light of Jewish paschal theology. He viewed the sacrifice of the Passover lambs in Egypt as typological of his own death. In like manner, his death would be a redemptive event, being both an expiation for sin and the means by which the new covenant, foretold by Jeremiah, would be realized. Appropriately enough, he expressed this to his disciples at his last Passover meal. Jesus' understanding of the significance of his death parallels the Jewish tradition of the Binding of Isaac. In post-biblical Judaism, Isaac's sacrifice or at least his willingness to be sacrificed was interpreted as expiatory and as the ground of the efficacy of the original Passover offerings. Similarly, Jesus saw his own death as expiatory and the typological fulfilment of the original Passover offerings. The words of institution, moreover, represent the establishment by Jesus of a new liturgical practice in continuity with the Passover, reflecting his self-understanding of being the eschatological messenger of God. / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

This thesis examines the penal substitutionary atonement theory (PSA) considering recent critical theological scholarship. The theological implications of PSA are applied to several systematic categories such as the Trinity, God’s wrath, sin, and forgiveness, demonstrating that Evangelicals should adopt a different framework to articulate the meaning of Jesus’ death. Instead of describing Jesus’ death in punitive and legal terms, this thesis contends that Jesus’ death should primarily be understood and communicated as being “for us,” and imagined as a kingly and fatherly “intervention.” Finally, this thesis makes several applications as to how the evangelical church should communicate atonement theology. / Thesis / Master of Arts (MA)