Is The Cross of Christ Even Necessary?

[From the archives.]


Language – Go Figure

When love and apples meet (

When love and apples meet

Language can be literal and language can be figurative. But all language is an analog. It stands for something else. The word “apple” is not itself an apple. The word “love” is not itself love. Words stand in for the real thing.

Perhaps the simplest languages are the ones called on to work hardest at being analogous. Think of how computer programmers use zeroes and ones – and nothing but zeroes and ones – to carry out complex functions. English, on the other hand, has one of the largest stores of words known, with the 20 volumes of the Oxford English Dictionary (2nd ed.) listing over 170,000 words in current use and another 47,000 obsolete words. That’s a lot different than trying to express everything with only a zero and a one to call upon.

Words, then, are symbols we use for expression. C.S. Lewis once divided these expressive symbols into two categories:

Two kinds of symbol must surely be distinguished. The alphabetical symbol comes naked into the world of mathematics and is clothed with value by its masters. A poetic symbol – like the Rose, for Love … – comes trailing clouds of glory from the real world, clouds whose shape and color largely determine and explain its poetic use. In an equation, x and y will do as well as a and b, but the Romance of the Rose could not, without loss, be re-written as the Romance of the Onion, and if a man did not see why, we could only send him back to the real world to study roses, onions, and love, all of them still untouched by poetry, still raw.

The titular question – Do We Really Need the Cross of Christ? – is not meant to lead us to a discussion of atonement doctrines. This post is not about Governmental Atonement versus Christus Victor versus Penal Substitution versus Ransom versus whatever other doctrines you care to list. I am concerned here with the question of whether we need the cross of Christ as a symbol.

Ripping Off Crosses

When I was an atheist, I wore a cross. It was a gift from an old girlfriend, a small silver cross on a thin silver chain. I liked the way it looked and it gave me something to fiddle with when I was bored.

Not the cross I wore - wrong color (Wikimedia)

Not the cross I wore – wrong color

One time, shortly before becoming a Christian, a couple of young Christian women I’d met asked me about it. I told them the story, and that to me its symbolic attributes were of nothing more than a relationship past. Later, after I came to Christ, one of the women told me that every time she saw me wearing it she wanted to rip it from my neck.

That cross, even merely a tiny metal symbol of the one Jesus hung on, meant something to her quite different from what it meant to me. I’m glad she didn’t give in to her urges.

The Reality of Symbols

Some might say that symbols are irrelevant when you have the real thing. Jesus died on a cross, they’d point out, isn’t that enough? In a sense, yes it is.

But God himself uses symbols, metaphors, idioms, and more in his very own word. (I wrote about it here.) In fact, the Bible itself speaks of the cross as symbol.

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18.)

Crucifixion, Marco Palmezzano (1459-1539)

A cross made of real wood was the instrument of death for our Savior, who was nailed in place with real metal spikes. Yet God’s word says that very real cross is also a symbol, a message. Depending on the hearer, that message is either foolishness or the power of God: think of me in my atheist days and my friend who controlled her urge to rid my neck of the cross, chain and all.

Yet do we need the cross as a symbol? Apparently we do. It symbolizes for us God’s power of salvation, what he as done in sending the Son into the world. As Jesus himself told us:

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. (John 3:17-18.)

The cross, then, symbolizes much. Salvation. Freedom from condemnation. The hope of the world. And as Lewis said, such a symbol trails “clouds of glory from the real world”, the reality of what Jesus has done for us.

So I’d say yes, we really do need the cross of Christ. Symbolically and literally, it exists for our salvation.


What comes to your mind when you see the symbol of the cross?

Has seeing a cross ever realigned your thoughts to God?


This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Is The Cross of Christ Even Necessary?

  1. Laura Droege says:

    I must’ve missed this post the first time around, because I don’t remember it! (Either that, or early-onset dementia is messing with me.)

    I really enjoyed what you have to say here. I like that God uses figurative language and symbols, as well as more literal language; as a creative writer, that is powerful: God is speaking a language that I appreciate and enjoy (rather than 0s and 1s!) I’m not sure that everyone appreciates God’s metaphors and symbols, though, because there’s a sense of mystery about them; they can be misinterpreted (as your old atheist self misinterpreted the real meaning of the cross) or misused (as in the case of someone who worships the cross rather than Christ). Have you found that certain types of Christians would rather eschew all symbols/figurative language than embrace them?

    • Tim says:

      I have heard people say they completely avoid symbols and just focus on Jesus, but in reality they can’t. Metaphor is required for us to understand God, since his ways are higher than ours, etc. And if God isn’t afraid to use metaphor, why should we avoid it?

  2. Gwen says:

    Yes. Necessary. I do not see Jesus as the human/God to choose to do anything unnecessary, or by mistake. Whether, it is worn by a fellow believer, or a rock star, or atheist, it always draws my mind to Christ’s love for us. But here is a pause I have. I teach people from cultures all over the world, through my orchestra classes. I love them. I pray for them. I know, that some of them may have been taught that the cross is wicked, and an enemy. I do not wear the cross every day, because I must be the hands, feet, words, and love of Christ, without a symbol that means a great deal to me, but may not help me build good relationships with someone, who, for some reason may not be able to see past it. Does that seem wrong to you?

    • Tim says:

      I don’t think it’s wrong. It’s the message of the cross we need to live out: Jesus loves those people he puts in your life sop much that he died for them, and he wants you to love them too. You can’t let the symbol get in the way of the reality. And I figure that if a person comes to understand the reality of Jesus’ love, they will then be able to understand the importance of the cross itself both symbolically and literally.

Talk to me (or don't)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.