A recent dispute over the meaning of the atonement has sparked an outbreak of charges, and countercharges, among Protestant leaders. This particular dispute, not unlike so many in Christian history, arose from a line in a popular song. At issue are various theories of the atonement, not the simple confession made by all Christians from the earliest Christian era. We hear this simple faith confessed in the Apostle’s Creed:
I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth.
And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died and was buried.
That’s it – pretty simple and straightforward: Jesus Christ suffered under Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried. It would be some time later, indeed centuries later in many cases, before major debates arose about the meaning of these simple words.
Today the atonement is often a matter for intense debate, especially among conservative Protestants. More than fifteen centuries of time have allowed Christian thinkers to offer various doctrinal interpretations of what “Christ’s death” meant. These are all attempts to explain the meaning and necessity of his death. This newest debate is another in a long line of such debates. Sadly, name calling and schism are again the tragic result.
I believe the term atonement, at least in Christian circles, is generally understood to refer to the reconciliation of God and human beings brought about by the redemptive life and death of Jesus. The word “atonement” is actually quite rare in the New Testament, occurring only once in the King James Version in Romans 5:11. Most translations do not translate Romans 5:11 this way. There appear to be good reasons for this choice. The word atonement might be rare but the concept behind it is not. It seems clear enough that what God did in Christ’s death enabled sinners to approach him and enter into his blessings and gracious forgiveness.
Interestingly, the NRSV, has 80 occurrences of the word “atonement.” Most of these occur in Leviticus and Numbers, where they are clearly connected with the sacrifices that God commanded of Israel to cover their sin.
The New Testament itself includes only two uses of the actual word atonement. Here are the two verses, as they appear in context the NRSV:
21 But now, irrespective of law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, 22the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ* for all who believe. For there is no distinction, 23since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; 24they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement*
The second use of atonement occurs n Hebrews 2:17:
14 Since, therefore, the children share flesh and blood, he himself likewise shared the same things, so that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by the fear of death. 16For it is clear that he did not come to help angels, but the descendants of Abraham. 17Therefore he had to become like his brothers and sisters* in every respect, so that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make a sacrifice of atonement for the sins of the people. 18Because he himself was tested by what he suffered, he is able to help those who are being tested (Hebrews 2:14-18).
This limited use of the actual word “atonement” should not lead us to the overly simplistic conclusion, as I’ve already noted, that the idea behind the word is completely absent. References to the “mercy seat,” and related terms, all suggest the same thing as the word “atonement.”
Related Posts
Comments
My Latest Book!
Use Promo code UNITY for 40% discount!
Lee Banseok liked this on Facebook.
Sarah Gillert liked this on Facebook.
“crucified, died and was buried” That’s enough for me. Although I’ve only briefly looked at the atonement debate, I’ve observed at least one problem that causes friction is that the debate seems isolated from the other major themes of the bible.
Brian Karcher liked this on Facebook.
Brian..I second that…amin
Follow the posts this week and then next week I will offer a richer, more biblically nuanced, view I hope and think. I am indebted to many so this is not original but hopefully fresh to readers.
I’m sure you are familar with the following quote from C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christiantiy, which I believe effectively expresses your conviction, “The central Christian belief is that Christ’s death has somehow put us right with God and given us a fresh start. Theories as to how it did this are another matter. A good many different theories have been held as to how it works; what all Christians are agreed on is that it does work.” If all involved in the debates on the nature of the atonement were as irenic as Lewis, the Church would express a wild and wide orthodoxy that I believe would be a more compelling witness in the world.
Something to think about John. Using modern tech, you can moderate this debate between the few major players, video it, add commentary, then publish it on your blog. You have earned your voice in the Protestant world, and have a desire for bridge-building, so it would be a constructive use of time, and a healthy resource for all educational institutions in the world.
@JohnA1949 @Ligonier R.C. streaming resources on the #Atonement free today. http://t.co/8RjHw2Prhy
Clay Knick liked this on Facebook.
Look forward to this serious John. My own thinking has been evolving. Some things are clear to me now that were not before. Changes in emphasis more than changes in the overall set of doctrines. But I can use all the help I can get to understand this all the more.
2 Corinthians 5:21 is most revealing, reflective and refreshing, and most meaningful and moving to me as to what God lovingly, mercifully and graciously did for me and on by behalf through Christ.
Daniel McDonald liked this on Facebook.
Denise Murphy Plichta liked this on Facebook.
Ben Toh liked this on Facebook.
At the same time, though, we have a certain understanding of what the sacrificial system was intended to do, which feeds into our understanding of God’s holiness, which in turn feeds back into our understanding of atonement. If our understanding is wrong, as a number of scholars are now suggesting, appeals to the term atonement won’t carry the debate forward.
Nick Morgan liked this on Facebook.
Atonement is a biblical teaching so we must do something with it, not remove the term.
The term, so far as I’m aware, was invented by Wycliffe in an effort to translate a difficult word out of the originals. The word is simply “at-one-ment.” Regardless, though, the issue is with what we understand the word to refer to. I’m fine with the term itself, but I am not sure our understanding of the OT sacrificial system and God’s holiness is accurate, and this is going to effect how we “hear” the word atonement.
Keep reading my blogs and you will see we agree. I thought this was the case so I’ll leave it there and please come back if I am wrong or even right, so far as you read my statements. 🙂
My thinking on this subject isn’t exactly settled yet, so I’m definitely interested in seeing how you explore it.
Several resources, 1 Protestant and 5 Catholic, all freely accesible online, which I have found most helpful in studying the doctrine of the Atonement:
** denotes major works
** “The Nature of the Atonement”, Campbell, 1873
http://books.google.com/books?id=QEhCVdWagL0C
** “The Catholic Doctrine of the Atonement”, Oxenham, 1869
http://books.google.com/books?id=0p4Lz3xq-qAC
** “Themes of the Incarnation”, Feingold, 2010 (lecture series, audio recordings)
http://www.hebrewcatholic.net/06-themes-of-the-incarnation/
“A Biblical Theology of Redemption in a Covenant Framework”, Most, 1967
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/most/getwork.cfm?worknum=205
“Doctrine of the Atonement”, old Catholic Encyclopedia, ca. 1915
http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Doctrine_of_the_Atonement
“Redemption”, old Catholic Encyclopedia, ca. 1915
http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Redemption
The doctrine of the Atonement is a rich subject, and not a simple matter of interpreting a few Scriptural passages in some consistent manner.
My favorite summation:
IC|XC
NI|KA
A christogram read as: “Jesus Christ is victorious”, or “Jesus Christ Victor”, or “Jesus Christ Conquers”, or similar.
In what respects is He victorious? Blessed be God, Jesus was and is victorious over the devil, sin and death. In this triple victory is summarized every aspect of the glorious redemption won for us by Christ Our Lord.