On Feb. 20, at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), moderator Mercedes Schlapp, during her 30-minute conversation with Vice President JD Vance, asked him: “Your faith — why is it so important to you?”
To his credit, Vance gave a courageous enunciation of “the fundamental tenet of the Christian faith” that was likely far better than anything Harris or Walz could come up with (if even they believe any of it) or perhaps also Trump. In Vance’s words, “The Son of God became man, he died, and then he raised himself from the dead.”
Every Christian believer … should be able to enunciate the crucial significance of Christ’s amends-making death.
Now, to hear this from a Vice President is extraordinary and worth celebrating (one thinks also of former vice president Mike Pence and former president Jimmy Carter). Yet, what he stated remains deficient as a description of “the fundamental tenet of the Christian faith,” which also points to a deficiency in both the Apostles’ Creed (so-called) and the Nicene Creed.
The deficiency is not that Vance spoke of Christ raising himself from the dead. Yes, “was raised” by God or God’s Spirit or Power is the usual formulation, but a Johannine formulation of Jesus being the agent of his own resurrection is also acceptable in the NT witness (John 2:19; 10:18; 11:25).
No, I’m referring to the most central element of the gospel, which is not just that Jesus “died” (we all eventually do that) but that he “died for our sins” (1 Cor 15:3), that is, to make amends for our sins. Nobody else does that. It is what makes the indwelling of the Spirit and subsequent resurrection possible, and it is what makes Jesus the indispensable medium of salvation for the life of the world, “the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).
I would have expected from a convert to Catholicism (he converted in August 2019) something about Christ dying for our sins. In Vance’s defense, he probably does believe that Jesus died for his sins but thinks of this as a second- or third-order element of the gospel. Also in his defense is the fact that his language of Christ dying, without stating the purpose of that death, is consistent with both the Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed.
The Apostles’ Creed says this about Christ’s death: that Christ “[suffered] under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, [died,] and was buried” (brackets denote what was not in the earliest version). The Nicene Creed says something similar: Christ was “[crucified under Pontius Pilate, and] suffered [and buried]” (brackets denote what was not in the earliest version in the First Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325 but was added by the First Council of Constantinople in 381). Vance’s formulation appears dependent on the formulations of these two creeds, which leave out any mention of the saving significance of Christ’s death “for our sins.”
So we might say that Vance is not to be blamed so much as these historic creeds, which are gravely deficient at this point. True, both of them talk about “the forgiveness of sins” (though this phrase is not in the 325 Nicene Creed but in the Constantinople revision) — but not in connection with the cross. The Nicene creed adds, “for us humans and for our salvation he came down [from heaven] and was made flesh” but again, this does not connect “salvation” specifically with the cross but only more generally with the incarnation.
Neither of these creeds take precedence over the formulation of the gospel accepted by all the churches ca. A.D. 55, found in 1 Cor 15:3-4 which Paul describes as “the gospel that I proclaimed to you … through which also you are being saved, if you are holding firmly to [it] … unless you believed in vain. For I handed over to you among the first things:
that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,
and that he was buried,
and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,
and that he appeared (1 Cor 15:3-5)
The refrain “in accordance with the Scriptures” signals the two essential elements of faith: “Christ died for our sins” and “[Christ] was raised on the third day.” The burial and resurrection appearances are simply confirmations of the two aforementioned essential elements: the atonement could not take place without his death and the burial was the confirmation of that death; and the resurrection was confirmed by his resurrection appearances.
Two First-Order Elements of Christ’s Death
This means that “the first things,” the core “gospel” or “good news” “by which [we] are being saved” (but only if we continue to “hold firmly to it,” otherwise we “believed in vain” or “to no avail”) consists of two central planks so far as what must be believed for salvation:
- Christ died for our sins (i.e., to make amends for them)
- Christ was raised on the third day (i.e., as the start of a new-creation humanity)
Paul emphasized that this understanding of the core gospel is not unique to him: “So whether I or they (i.e., Cephas/Peter, Apollos, etc.), in this way we proclaim and in this way you believed” (15:11). Everywhere this gospel must be believed in order to be saved. This is the irreducible minimum of the gospel, “Jesus is Lord,” at its first-order unpacking.
The first-order significance of these two elements is confirmed throughout not only Paul’s letters but also throughout the NT canon (including Jesus’ definitive words at the Last Supper and the definitive image of the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world in the heavenly throne room scenes in Revelation).
Of these two, atoning death and life-giving resurrection, though both are essential, Paul and the rest of the NT writers appear to view the atoning death as most important, for it is viewed therein as the definitive display of God’s love for us (Rom 5:8; 1 John 4:10).
Every Christian believer from the youngest to the oldest, even Christian politicians, should be able to enunciate the crucial significance of Christ’s amends-making death. Not just that “he died” as we all eventually do. But that he died to make amends “for our sins.”
READ MORE from Robert A. J. Gagnon:
Rick Warren’s Apology Leaves Much to Be Desired
No, Rick Warren, Jesus Crucified Between Two ‘Bandits’ Doesn’t Mean He’s in the Middle
Trump’s Ban on Males in Female Sports: What It Does, Why It’s Justified, and the Left’s Outrage.
