Girard argued that his scapegoat formula gives a coherent reading of the New Testament.
Certainly, his formala gives new impetus to Jesus’ command to “turn the other cheek”.
For Girard, Jesus was a scapegoat, not a sacrifice. Christians went wrong when they interpreted Jesus’ death as “sacrifice” (and thereby consciously identified themselves as the justifyingself “good”). Interpretations of Paul’s Letter to the Hebrews 9:26 often have this character. But, Peters argued, not all interpretations do.
Peters concluded, in his typical chatty tone, that St. Paul’s characterization of Jesus as the “final sacrifice” and Girard’s characterization of Jesus as the “final scapegoat” are the same.
What does that mean?