Atonement

[BrotherJoseph]

Despite all the differences between the RCC and Protestant evangelicals, including conservative Baptists, there is one area of basic agreement, and that is on the atonement. The RCC holds to Satisfaction, and the PSA of evangelical Protestantism, and Baptists, is really just an extension or expansion of the Satisfaction theory. How do Baptists and other evangelicals here feel about that, knowing that on the basic, central issue of atonement and salvation, you agree with the RCC? Doesn't that trouble anyone? That's not the only area of agreement, either. The doctrine of man and sin is also shared with the RCC, which is Augustinian in origin. But for now let's focus on the atonement.

Brother Rebel,

Good thread topic, however I would differ with your assertion that all Baptists agree with the Catholic church's doctrine of the atonement. I am a Primitive Baptist. Both Primitive Baptists and Particular Baptists believe the atonement actually accomplished several things, not potentially accomplished several things, and that these things accomplished are only for the elect. On the other hand, Catholics, many free will Baptists, and many denominations believe the atonement only make these things possible for every human being to later obtain in their lifetime after their births through faith and or works , thus they believe at the time of the atonement nothing was actually accomplished, but rather it simply made things possible.


What are these things I refer to that scripture makes clear was actually, not potentially, accomplished at and by the atonement?-
"For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified" (Hebrews 10:14)
"For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life" (Romans 5:10)
"Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him." (Romans 5:9)
"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:" (Galatians 3:13)
"In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace" (Ephesians 1:7)
"By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." (Hebrews 10:10)
"Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed" (1 Peter 2:24)


Thus according to the scriptures above, the atonement accomplished for the people of God perfection forever (our position before God), reconciliation, justification, redeemed us, sanctified us (i.e. set us apart) before God, and healed us. This certainly differs from the view taken by Catholics, most Baptists, and most other denominations for that matter.

God bless,

Brother Joe

 

[BobRyan]

God calls those things that are not - as though they were - Rom 4

"He has seated us with Him in the heavenly places" Eph 2
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

Heb 12
"22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels,
23to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect,"

===========================

And so seeing the future as if present - we still have the continued ongoing process of sanctification -



"Pursue ...sanctification without which no one will see the Lord" Heb 12:14

Heb 10:14 ESV "14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified."

Rom 6:19 "I am speaking in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness, resulting in further lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification."

Rom 6:22 "But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life."

2 Thess 2:13
But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

 

[BobRyan]

Personally, I don't think that Jesus paid the debt for our individual sins as much as He was a propitiation for the sins of the world (the human race) and it is on that basis that our sins are forgiven (the basis of Christ's Atonement). I think that using the ledger system of debt paid/owed beyond illustration is flawed.

Is says He took the stroke for us - to whom the stroke was due.

The exact substitutionary atoning sacrifice - the implication being that when you sin you are adding to that burden, the total weight.

And so as Heb 10 points out crucify afresh --- in that you are adding to the weight that God foresaw would be the total penalty/price to be paid.

Where is the flaw? It is God who is tortured to that degree.

God's model is "atoning sacrifice" (so then.. "God so loved that HE gave") where the deity is the one being tortured so as to offer forgiveness. That is the opposite of propitiating the pagan deity to entreat his favor.

 

[Rebel]

Please correct me if I misrepresent your view, but I assume you to object to the notion that Penal Substitution fits within the context of a just God, as justice is not served by punishing the righteous for the crimes of the unrighteous. If God is Love and God is merciful, then this type of substitution does not make very much sense. Christ therefore made amends for the human race by conquering evil, but the atonement was not necessarily diverting God’s wrath but showing God’s love and mercy. But as always, please correct any misunderstanding I have regarding your position.

I think you have stated it well, overall.

 

[Revmitchell]

Please correct me if I misrepresent your view, but I assume you to object to the notion that Penal Substitution fits within the context of a just God, as justice is not served by punishing the righteous for the crimes of the unrighteous. If God is Love and God is merciful, then this type of substitution does not make very much sense. Christ therefore made amends for the human race by conquering evil, but the atonement was not necessarily diverting God’s wrath but showing God’s love and mercy. But as always, please correct any misunderstanding I have regarding your position.

Then you have to consider hell and the cross and it blows that who idea right out of the water.

 

[JonC]

Is says He took the stroke for us - to whom the stroke was due.
The exact substitutionary atoning sacrifice - the implication being that when you sin you are adding to that burden, the total weight.
And so as Heb 10 points out crucify afresh --- in that you are adding to the weight that God foresaw would be the total penalty/price to be paid.
Where is the flaw? It is God who is tortured to that degree.
God's model is "atoning sacrifice" (so then.. "God so loved that HE gave") where the deity is the one being tortured so as to offer forgiveness. That is the opposite of propitiating the pagan deity to entreat his favor.

I hold a Penal Substitutionary view, I just don’t hold it as encompassing the Atonement in its entirety. Typically I default to Penal Substitution, which if not kept in check is a flaw derived from my own presuppositions. But I agree with you that those who oppose the view for the reason that it has God unjustly punishing his righteous Son for the wicked misses the point that it is God who lay down his own life freely and in love. There is also a governmental aspect to my understanding of the Atonement - I believe that the Atonement genuinely places Christ as the New Adam. I am also less inclined to believe that salvation is more about man than God...but that's another topic.

I believe that He has taken on the wrath that we are due, but that Christ died for our Sin rather than our individual sins (which are outgrowths of that Sin….our rebellious nature). But you are right that I do not hold the position that each sin adds to the burden, the total weight. I am more inclined to side with Rebel that this grew from a legalistic and Catholic system which was carried over at the Reformation. The notion seems closer to penance to me than grace (the difference only being who pays the price). But as always I welcome critique and will change my position if convinced by Scripture (we differ in interpreting Hebrews 10).

 

[BrotherJoseph]

God calls those things that are not - as though they were - Rom 4

"He has seated us with Him in the heavenly places" Eph 2
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

Heb 12
"22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels,
23to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect,"

===========================

And so seeing the future as if present - we still have the continued ongoing process of sanctification -



"Pursue ...sanctification without which no one will see the Lord" Heb 12:14

Heb 10:14 ESV "14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified."

Rom 6:19 "I am speaking in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness, resulting in further lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification."

Rom 6:22 "But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life."

2 Thess 2:13
But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

Brother Bob,

Sanctification in the New Testament has two meanings. One is "set apart". By this God has sanctified or "set apart" his elect. This is why the word "sanctified" is used in the past tense an an accomplished act as a result of the atonement in Hebrews 10:29 "the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified". And again in Hebrews 13:12, "Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate" The usage of the word sanctification meaning "set apart" is also seen in 1 Peter 3:15 when a believer is told to " sanctify the Lord God in your hearts" Obviously this verse must mean to "set apart" as a child of God can never make the Lord God Holy in their hears as He is already and always has been Holy.

The other meaning of the word sanctification is the lifelong ongoing process of us becoming more like Christ in our experience here on earth in both our lives and our consciences. This is a work wholly of the Spirit working in the life of the believer. This meaning is in shown in the verse "And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly..." (1 Thes 5:23).

God bless,

Brother Joe

 

[BobRyan]

I agree that the set apart aspect is from the moment that one accepts Christ.

Rom 10
if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not be disappointed.”'

And I also agree that the other context for "Sanctification" is the work of a lifetime.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

I hold a Penal Substitutionary view, I just don’t hold it as encompassing the Atonement in its entirety.

Reminds me of a multilevel chess board.

One move works on so many levels.

I would never argue that infinite God only moves on one level - his actions have impact on many different levels - demonstrating the Love of God, the justice and righteousness of God -- all in the one act on the Cross.

But I agree with you that those who oppose the view for the reason that it has God unjustly punishing his righteous Son for the wicked misses the point that it is God who lay down his own life freely and in love.

Indeed - what Father would not gladly lay down his own life rather than have to endure the suffering of watching his own child suffer that way.

IT was torture for both of them. (More precisely the three persons of the Godhead I should say)

There is also a governmental aspect to my understanding of the Atonement - I believe that the Atonement genuinely places Christ as the New Adam. I am also less inclined to believe that salvation is more about man than God...but that's another topic.

God ordained free will - a robot-system would not have had to cost God anything at all. He paid a high price for that sovereign choice.

But you are right that I do not hold the position that each sin adds to the burden, the total weight. I am more inclined to side with Rebel that this grew from a legalistic and Catholic system which was carried over at the Reformation. The notion seems closer to penance to me than grace

Penance is not the point of hell or as Rev 20 calls it "the lake of fire... the 2nd death".

The wicked are not "in a kind mood" while being tortured with fire and brimstone. There is no penance in that. It is as Rev 14:10 says "torment".

Substitionary atonment is a big claim - if one is claiming to step in and take torment -- torment in fire and brimstone - owed by the sinner so that the sinner can go free.

If he steps and 'takes a feather bath' to spare the sinner from real torment - then claims that he "took the stripes for us to whom the stroke was due" Is 53- he has over marketed - over-stated his deed.

That is why it does not work any other way once he claims he is engaged in substitutionary atonement.

He did not have to make that claim - but then He chose to do it anyway so now he has to live up to his claim.

Or admit that He claimed to be doing too much... more than He was willing to actually do.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Lev 16 describes the Atonement doctrine as including BOTH the work of Christ as the "Lamb of God" and also the work of Christ as High Priest.

That is a not so-subtle detail that many overlook.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[JonC]

I would never argue that infinite God only moves on one level - his actions have impact on many different levels - demonstrating the Love of God, the justice and righteousness of God -- all in the one act on the Cross.

I liked your illustration of a multi-level chess board. I meant to tell you that before, and am glad you brought it up here. It is an important concept that I fear is often missed in these discussions.

I will offer these observations on your reply.

First, as far as I know there is no theological system that is a “robot-system.” I realize that some misunderstand Calvinism, “hyper-Calvinism,” Primitive Baptists, .... whatever...., as such…And although I have my issues with those theological systems they are not what their opponents often make them to be. I am not sure how this fits in our conversation, but I wanted to ease any misunderstanding before it diverted off topic. I know those who link that system with robotic obedience/disobedience are insincere or speak out of ignorance. I know those who accuse free-will advocates as putting man in the place of God are guilty of the same. While I am confident I will make mistakes in our dialogue (and am as confident you or someone will reel me in), I assure you that I am not so ignorant as to misrepresent either system in such a manner.

Second, you are right that penance is “not the point of hell” or the “lake of fire…the 2nd death.” I apologize if I have misstated my position to indicate that this was my view. Many seem to view Penal Substitution as if Christ were doing penance for our crimes - a stripe for a sin, so to speak. My argument is that when we sin we do not “add to the burden” or the “total weight.” Christ is the Propitiation for all sin, a once and for all Atonement.
This is the area where I believe Rebel’s observations correct. Many seem (to me) to have taken the Catholic and Reformation idea that there is a literal ledger book or debt system that needs to be met in order for God’s wrath to be appeased. But throughout Scripture there seems to be a greater Sin that is dealt with, a Sin of which our individual sins are only manifestations. You are right that the wrath of God is linked to separation (and Hell) and that this was the Sin for which Christ Atoned (and from which all others spring). People don't go to Hell for sins that they have committed. They go to Hell on the basis of their position "in Christ." Jesus atoned for our Sin (which incorporates the sins that follow), and it is only in that manner that He can be considered the Second Adam.