Substitutionary atonement - what does the Bible state?

The word substitute means one person acting on behalf of another. In this country we have substitute teachers; and the practice of substitution is very common in sports. While the word substitute is not found in Scripture, it is definitely a Biblical truth and a central pillar of the gospel message. The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus lived and died in our place. Note these clear texts [Isa. 53:4-6, 11; 2 Cor. 5:21; Gal. 3:13; Heb. 2:9; 9:28; 1 Pet. 3:18].

Since the Scriptures so clearly teach that Christ lived and died as our substitute, why is there so much opposition against it, especially within the Christian Church? The problem is that, unlike the teaching profession or sports, the Biblical doctrine of substitution creates a legal or ethical problem. According to the book of the law, no innocent person is allowed to be punished for the guilt of another [read Deut. 24:16; note also Ezk. 18:20.]

Since Christ committed no sin, the big question is: how could God punish Him on the cross for our sins? Is He not going against His own law? In other words, how can God justify sinners on the basis of what Christ did and still maintain His integrity to His own law which condemns us to death?

 

This was the main issue fought over the doctrine of justification by faith, in the Counter Reformation. Roman Catholic scholars, like Osiender and Newman, accused the Reformers of legal fiction. If God can justify sinners without first making them righteous, they argued, than He Himself is guilty of breaking His own law. Today, the Muslim scholars are putting forth the same argument and accusing Christianity of being the most unethical religion in the world.

How do we solve this ethical problem? Make no mistake, the Reformers were Biblically right in teaching the doctrine of substitution, but where they failed was to show how Christ qualified to be our substitute. Before Christ could be our Saviour He first had to be qualified to be our substitute. And the reason why the Reformers failed here was because they failed to identify the humanity of Christ with the fallen sinful humanity He came to redeem.

Thus they taught what is commonly known today as Vicarious Substitution. This simply means that Christ took our place, lived and died instead of us, without first identifying Himself with our humanity that needed redeeming. The word “vicarious” means being sympathetic towards another’s need without actually experiencing their situation.

 

This is how the vicarious substitution of Christ is generally explained: Christ came to this earth to save mankind from sin, but sin is a dual problem. In the first place, sin is what we are by nature; it is a condition we are born with [Eph. 2:3b]. Secondly, sin is behaviour; it is the transgression of the law [1 Jn. 3:4]. How did Christ save us from this two-fold sin problem? The answer they give is, by His sinless human nature He substituted our sinful nature, and by His perfect performance, i.e., His life and death, He substituted our sinful performance. Thus He became our perfect substitute.

This sounds wonderful, but is this what the Scripture teaches? Nowhere will you find in the Bible this idea of vicarious substitution. On the contrary, the Bible is clear that, in order for Christ to qualify to be our substitute, He had to become one of us in every away except participate in our sin. Please note how two of the gospel writers describe Christ’s genealogy [read Matt. 1:1; the first and last verse of Lk. 3:23-38; and Rom. 1:4.]