Зображення сторінки
PDF
ePub

theories are no longer satisfactory to the deepest and most devout thought of the church. The new theories, while they are welcomed for the new truth they contain, or the neglected truth they bring to light, do not command general acceptance. In fact, so far as this doctrine is concerned, we are passing through a theological interregnum.

No mistake, however, could be greater than to infer from this state of things any indifference to the doctrine of the atonement. The fact is precisely the opposite. The lack of a satisfactory theory is due to the profound realization which prevails of the importance of the subject and the equally profound unwillingness to deal with it superficially. It has been given to our age as to no other to perceive the largeness of this doctrine, its manifold connection with the other Christian truths, the difficulties of Scripture interpretation involved in it, its mysteriousness on the side turned towards the inner relations of the divine nature, and the deep-lying ethical questions at stake. We have come to see that the doctrine is a complex of many elements, which must be carefully analyzed, brought into relation with each other, and given each its appropriate place and prominence, before the final statement can be reached, and that only thus can we avoid that defective understanding of fundamental conceptions which is the fault of the older theories, and that onesidedness which is the even more glaring fault of their modern rivals. Accordingly, the work of the present is chiefly preliminary. Its importance can be measured only in the light of the final result. When it is completed, as in due time it will be, the new and better theory we have been waiting for so long will be revealed and will express to our age its true belief concerning this momentous subject.

The present article is intended as a contribution to this preliminary work. Its object is to furnish some "aids to reflection" touching the fundamental conceptions involved in the doctrine of the atonement. It is written with a profound sense of the importance of clear thought upon this subject, and with an undoubting belief that here, as elsewhere in the domain of Christian truth, we may, when led by the Spirit of truth, attain such clearness of mental vision as will enable us to bring the teachings of revelation into harmonious and consistent forms of reason.

I. We need at the outset to have distinctly before us the position of the atonement in the Christian system. In many of the modern discussions of the subject this seems obscured. The older theologians were more precise.

The object of Christ's mission was the redemption or salvation of men: that is, their restoration to complete conformity to the divine image defaced by sin and their advancement to the perfection of the divine sonship in the heavenly state. It aimed at nothing less than complete deliverance from sin and attainment of the goal of the divine purpose concerning man. To accomplish this result, Christ's work as Mediator and Redeemer is performed. His incarnation, his earthly experience, his perfect sonship in humanity, his revelation of the Father's love and will, his sufferings and death, his resurrection and ascension, his exalted activity through the Holy Spirit, all belong to his mediatorial work. Traditional theology finds a place for all these particulars - if not with complete definiteness of conception and statement, at least with sufficient accuracy-under its threefold distribution of the mediatorial office into the functions of Prophet, Priest, and King. And any theological system which will do justice to the Scriptural facts must treat the subject as broadly.

The

Now in this mediatorial work of Christ the atonement is a single element. It is, indeed, the central and cardinal fact, with which all the other facts are most closely connected. Nevertheless in the Scriptures it is distinctly marked off from the rest. The subject-matter of the atonement is the death of Christ. apostles, when they treat of it, invariably designate it by some term that confines it to this element in the Saviour's work. The blood, the cross of Christ, the giving up of his life, form their theme, when they tell of what Christ has done to secure the forgiveness of human sin. To confound this fact with the other elements of the Mediator's work, intimately connected with them though it may be, makes clear thought upon the subject impossible. Doubtless the Saviour's life, tested by temptation, made perfect in the school of suffering, in its unbroken filial union with the Father itself a revelation of God, was the indispensable condition of the atonement, without which there could have been no atonement. But it was not the atonement itself. Doubtless in that life the human race, before separated from God by sin, was in principle reconciled with Him, a holy scion grafted into the sinful stock, so that in virtue of the union the stock itself might be called holy. But this was not the atonement. Or, to look further on to the later stages of Christ's work, doubtless the resurrection was essential as a vindication of the reality of the atonement, to such a degree that it takes a place in the apostolical utterances almost as prominent as the death. But it was not the atonement.

In similar terms we may speak of the work of grace initiated and carried forward in the heart by the risen Lord, who performs his gracious will through the agency of the Holy Spirit; it is based upon the atonement. But the tyro in Scripture truth knows the difference between atonement on the one hand and regeneration and sanctification on the other.

The problem of the atonement is the problem of Christ's death. That the sinless One died for our sins, giving his life a ransom for many, is the truth which every theory of the atonement has to explain. There can be no agreement upon the subject, and no successful dealing with its difficulties, unless this fact is clearly recognized.

II. Not less essential is it that the objects of the atonement should be definitely stated and distinguished. This is the more important because the Scriptures, using popular language and aiming at practical religious results rather than at theological precision, leave the matter somewhat uncertain. There need, however, be no difficulty upon the subject, if only we give careful attention to the distinctions underlying the New Testament teachings. The atonement may be viewed as a means to complete redemption as an end, or it may be viewed independently as an element in the work of Christ. Regarded in the first and more general aspect, the atonement has the same objects as redemption itself, namely, the complete restoration of man to holiness and his attainment of the goal of perfected manhood. To this result all the acts of God's grace in Christ tend. It is the "far-off, divine event to which the whole creation moves," the perfection of the believer, God's kingdom in mankind. But we may also regard the atonement in its immediate purpose, and here we find its object always declared to be the forgiveness of sins. This object is presented under different aspects and designated by different terms. If we look at it from the legal point of view, with reference to the righteousness which God requires, it is justification. If we turn our thought to the relations between God and men which have been disturbed by sin, we call it reconciliation or peace with God. If we consider it in the light of the new relation into which it introduces the sinner, it is adoption, or the state of sonship, in which the believer is the heir of God and joint-heir with our Lord Jesus Christ. Or if, instead of contemplating the object of the atonement in the individual, we turn our attention to its effect upon mankind in general, the object appears as a new relation of the world itself to God, a state of presumptive recon

ciliation, at once the beginning, the prophecy, and the pledge of a redeemed world. To recapitulate: forgiveness of sins, reconciliation, justification, sonship for the individual, a world potentially reconciled to God, these are the different aspects under which the object of the atonement is revealed.

[ocr errors]

We must, then, distinguish a direct and proximate object from an indirect and ultimate object. The atonement, when appropriated by faith, secures the former by its own efficiency; the latter follows, not directly, but through the mediation of the Holy Spirit. Redemption is a process which can be carried on only in a state of harmony with God. Atonement is the means by which this state of harmony is secured. The true relation of the two appears when we say that the ultimate end of the atonement is redemption, while its proximate end is reconciliation in order to redemption.

Through a failure to observe these obvious distinctions, a vast amount of vagueness has been introduced into the modern discussions of the doctrine. At one time, the ultimate object is emphasized, to the neglect or even the entire suppression of the proximate. Again, the proximate object is made the be-all and the end-all, until it is made to appear that the chief end of man is to have his sins forgiven. The result is confusion and misunderstanding. Both these ends are of vital importance; but each in its place, reconciliation as the precondition, redemption as the blessed consummation.

III. We have thus far considered the proximate object of the atonement upon its positive side. But it can also be stated negatively. In the language of popular theology the object of the atonement is often said to be "salvation," or, more particularly, "salvation from punishment." Both of these terms-salvation and punishment-seem to call for more careful analysis and definition.

The word salvation is preeminently a Scriptural expression. The definition given it in theological discussions should therefore correspond to its Scriptural meanings. Now in the New Testament we find the term used chiefly in two senses, and only rarely in a third. It is employed, in the first place, to describe that deliverance from the presence and power of sin which is synonymous with complete redemption. In this sense it is identical with the ultimate object of the atonement. It is also used in the meaning of deliverance from the doom which awaits the unrighteous at the last judgment. In this sense it corresponds to neither the ulti

mate nor the proximate object of the atonement, though it may be said to be a necessary concomitant of the former and a necessary consequence of the latter. There is left the third meaning, which is that of deliverance from the guilt of sin, that is, that relation of the unforgiven sinner towards God in which the divine displeasure rests upon him. It is evident that in this sense salvation is identical with the proximate object of the atonement. It is the negative statement of what is positively described by such terms as forgiveness and reconciliation. But now the fact appears that this is not the ordinary Scriptural sense of the word. The forgiven sinner is, in Scriptural language, justified but not yet saved. The proximate effect of the atonement is given in Paul's words, "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." It will not express the same truth, if in place of the word "justified" we insert "saved." The unpleasant sense of a misapplied term which jars upon us when we hear some Christian of greater zeal than discrimination declare himself "a saved man" is justified by Scriptural usage. It is evident, therefore, that to use the word "salvation" in this sense in our discussions of the atonement is to open the grave ambiguities and misunderstandings.

way for

It is even more needful that we should come to a distinct understanding respecting the term "punishment." For we have to do here not merely with the different uses of a Scriptural expression, but with the contents of one of the most important ethical conceptions with which theology is concerned. We ask, then, in the next place, what are the constituent elements of punishment? We begin with what is external, namely, those consequences of sin which in the divine constitution of the world are connected with it by natural law. The worlds of freedom and necessity are so adjusted to each other that moral disturbance in the former brings to the author of it physical disturbance and pain out of the latter. In this category of external punishments are included those bodily sufferings which follow in the track of sin, as well as the mental and moral degeneration which it produces, and finally physical death, the universal punishment. And here we are to bear in mind the fact that men are bound together in the organic unity of the race, so that many of these consequences reach much farther than the guilty individual. There are common sufferings in which all share. There is a common death which all are called to endure. In Adam all die. Innocent and guilty alike, the babe without the knowledge of good and evil and the hardened sinner,

[blocks in formation]
« НазадПродовжити »