|
|
Atonement
In Lewis Sperry Chafer's Systematic Theology, he notes some of the
complexities concerning the doctrine of atonement.
In the Old Testament
The word "atonement" is found in the Scriptures only in the Old
Testament (in English translations), except where Romans 5:2 is
incorrectly translated. In Romans 5:2, it is a translation of
two Hebrew words, and one of them, "kiiphar," is used about seventy
times in the Scriptures. Its meaning is "to cover."
This distinct and limited meaning of the Hebrew word should not be
interpreted with New Testament ideas, which contemplate a finished or
completed work. In the Old Testament, the one who had sinned
was himself fully forgiven and released, but its basis was only
typical--not actual. God forgave and restored where sin was
only covered by animal sacrifices, but the true basis upon which
forgiveness could ever be granted was the intention on God's part to
later deal with the sin that He had forgiven; i.e., righteously and
effectively through the sacrificial death of His Son on the
cross. That efficacious death was a type of the required
animal sacrifice. Romans 3:25 says, "God presented Christ as
a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood--to be
received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his
righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins
committed beforehand unpunished."
Christ bore the sins which were committed before, and these sins had
already been forgiven on the typical ground that they were
covered. This is one of the major accomplishments of Christ's
death. It is as though unnumbered promissory notes had been
handed to Christ for Him to pay. If the notes are paid as
promised, God is proved to have been righteous in the forgiving of sin
with no other demands having been made upon the sinner than that an
offering be brought which, regardless of how much it was understood by
that sinner, was in God's sight an anticipation and recognition of His
final meeting of every holy demand against sin by the efficacious blood
of Christ. In other words, God passed over the sins, not
judging them finally at the time they were forgiven. Such a
course, it is obvious, would be a very unrighteous dealing if those
sins were not in due time to be brought into judgment. All
sins of the Mosaic age were thus shown to have been "covered" but not
"taken away." In contrast to this temporary expedient, all
sin which God forgives has been and is now "taken away."
This vital contrast appears in two New Testament passages.
Hebrews 10:4, 11-14 says, "It is impossible for the blood of bulls and
goats to take away sins... Day after day every priest stands
and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same
sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this
priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at
the right hand of God, and since that time he waits for his enemies to
be made his footstool. For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever
those who are being made holy."
John 1: 29, "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the
world!" This great declaration from John was a doctrinal
innovation of immeasurable proportions. The same contrast
between the divine dealings with sin in the past dispensation and in
the present dispensation is indicated again at Acts 17:30, which says,
"In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all
people everywhere to repent."
In the New Testament
The word "atonement" is not really found in the New Testament, although
some English translations incorrectly translate the word in Romans 5:11
as "atonement." The meaning of atonement is "at-one-ment";
those once estranged are brought into agreement. The New
Testament word for this is reconciliation. The word
"atonement" as such is confined to the old order and is not used by the
Holy Spirit respecting any feature of the new order in
Christianity.
In Theology
Modern theologians use the word "atonement" as a term to represent all
that Christ did on the cross. In Chafer's Systematic
Theology, he explains fourteen great achievements by Christ in His
death on the cross. These achievements reach beyond all
present time into other ages, and past human situations into angelic
spheres. It is not possible for a single word to express all
that Christ's death on the cross accomplished. This is
especially true for the word "atonement" since it doesn't even appear
in the New Testament, and it is used in the Old Testament to represent
one idea that is completely foreign to and superseded in the New
Testament.
This discussion may be summarized with a quote from an article on
atonement in the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia:
In the English New Testament the word "atonement" is found only at
Romans 5: 11 and the American Revised Version changes this to
"reconciliation." While in strict etymology this word need signify only
the active or conscious exercise of unity of life or harmony of
relations, the causative idea probably belongs to the original use of
the term, as it certainly is present in all current Christian use of
the term. As employed in Christian theology, both practical and
technical, the term includes with more or less distinctness: the
fact of union with God, and this always looked upon as a broken
union to be restored or an ideal union to be realized, the
procuring cause of atonement, variously defined, the crucial act
wherein the union is effected, the work of God and the response of the
soul in which the union becomes actual. Inasmuch as the reconciliation
between man and God is always conceived of as effected through Jesus
Christ (2 Cor. 5:18-21) the expression, "the Atonement of Christ," is
one of the most frequent in Christian theology. Questions and
controversies have turned mainly on the procuring cause of atonement,
above, and at this point have arisen the various "theories of the
Atonement."
Owen Weber 2012 |