The study of redemptive truth is very important, having to do, as it does, with the eternal destiny of the soul of man; because of its importance, both to the glory of God, and to the hope of man, it has long been the object of the malignant endeavors of Satan, with the result that it is often glossed over with carnal and erroneous ideas. In no division of redemptive truth is this truer than in regard to the atonement. The atonement of Christ has long been a subject of intense interest in Christian ranks, and this is as it should be, for dealing as it does with the redemptive work of Christ, the eternal destiny of the soul rests upon a correct understanding of it. This is a complex subject and one upon which it is easy to be confused by human theories and human reasoning, or to omit one of the major aspects of it. It has been well said that:
(1) That the whole human race was actually and truly in Adam seminally, and was represented by him federally, when he was placed in the garden of Eden.
(2) That Adam did willfully, knowingly and rebelliously take of the forbidden fruit in the garden, and that his act was not inconsequential, but was outright rebellion against God’s clearly revealed will, and was, in effects man’s declaration of independence from God.
(3) That this act was fraught with the most fearful consequences in that it brought a state of apostasy upon the whole human races so that from that time forth, every son of Adam would be born into the world with an aversion toward God and a will bent toward sin.
(4) That this condition, being wrought into the very natural constitution of man, cannot be modified nor remedied by any internal will, wisdom or work of man himself.
(5) That this state of depravity is total reaching to all faculties of man bringing them all under the domination of sin so that "there is none that doeth good, no, not one" (Rom. 3:10,12). By total depravity it is not meant that any person is as bad as he can be, but only that there is nothing good in him by nature.
(6) That therefore man’s will, intellect and emotions are all in a state of sinful bondage from which they cannot be freed, nor made to operate in a spiritual manner except by the exercise of Divine grace.
(7) That therefore the only possible remedy for this fearful state of man lies in a Divinely thought, Divinely wrought and Divinely bought plan for the removal of man’s sinfulness and his recreation in holiness. This Divine plan we know by the name of atonement.
There are many facets and aspects of the atonement; some of the terms used are synonymous with the word "atonement" while others are expressive of a distinct side of the redemptive work of Christ. For example: considered as to the results Godward, there may be used the words "appeasing," "expiation," "propitiation," "reconciliation," or "satisfaction." Considered from the human side of the results, there may be the words "salvation" or "forgiveness." Considered from the legal side there may be the words "justification" or "pardon." Considered as a commercial transaction, the words "ransom" or "redemption" may be used. It will be impractical to go into a study of each of these words, but we trust that in the course of this study, all these will be seen to fit into their proper place.
"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. And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement" (Rom. 5:10,11).
This is the only place in the New Testament where the English word atonement is to be found, and even here the Greek word so translated is the noun form of the verb which is rendered "reconciled" twice in verse 10, so that perhaps the better rendering here would have been "reconciliation." In the Old Testament, the English word atonement appears over seventy times, and is the translation of the Hebrew word kaphar. This same Hebrew word is also rendered "reconcile" "reconciliation" "be merciful" "purge" "pacify" "appease" and "pardon" which gives us a general idea of what is meant by the word. Its first appearance in the Bible is in Genesis 6:14, where it is translated "shalt pitch it within and without," which shows the meaning of the word to be "to cover over."
By the use of the word premised in the title of this section, we intend to lay down the basic meaning of the atonement, or to define it for proper under standing comes only with proper definition of the terns used. We note therefore—
Our English word atonement is a compound word formed of the words "at-onement," or the state of being at one, in unity, or at peace with some one. It is suggestive of a former state of enmity between two people, but which enmity has been removed so that they are now reconciled. In theological writings this word is used with a great deal more latitude than this,, but for our purposes in this study, it will be sufficient to use the term in the Biblical sense of reconciliation. T.P. Simmons says of the Greek word rendered "reconciliation" (katallage):
The doctrine of the atonement has its roots in the Old Testament where it is set forth typically so often, and while we plan to devote a whole section to the atonement as prefigured in the Levitical sacrifices, it will be well to note in passing how the word is there used.
As already mentioned the Hebrew word kaphar first appears in Genesis 6:l4 where it is used in a purely physical sense, and has the meaning of "to cover over." The next appearance of this word is in Genesis 32:20: "And say ye moreover, Behold, thy servant Jacob is behind us. For he said, I will appease him with the present that goeth before me, and afterward I will see his face; peradventure he will accept of me." This further shows the meaning of this word that it has to do with the appeasement or reconciliation of one who has been offended. The appearances of this word are quite numerous in Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers, but we cite Exodus 30:16 to further reveal the meaning of the word: "And thou shalt take the atonement money of the children of Israel, and shalt appoint it for the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; that it may be a memorial unto the children of Israel before the Lord, to make an atonement for your souls."
While we recognize that this had to do with a typical atonement, yet it must also be recognized that the purpose of the type pointed to the purpose of the true atonement, and so this is significant here. Its purpose was "to make an atonement" for the soul, and so if it did not fulfill this purpose, it was no atonement. Thus it is said of the true atonement of Christ in Hebrews 2:17: "Wherefore in all things it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people."
The text with which we began this section reveals much more about what the atonement is and what it does. Note the following things from this passage: (1) It relates to some who had formerly been enemies, but who are now reconciled. (2) The reconciliation is accomplished "by the death of his Son," and not by anything that man could do, for it was accomplished while they were yet enemies to God. (3) The result of this reconciliation is that those who are reconciled to God shall be saved by the life of Christ; i.e., they shall have His righteous life imputed to them. (4.) Not only is this reconciliation accomplished by the death of Christ, but it is also received through Christ, so that man is not active anywhere in the atonement, but it is wholly the work of God. This is borne out in 2 Corinthians 5:18-19: "And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; to wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation." The only place man is active in this matter is in service after he is saved. From these passages, it is clear that the atonement is God’s redemptive work in behalf of sinful man. J. M. Pendleton therefore defines the atonement as follows:
By this is meant the different redemptive acts that enter in to, and comprise the atonement. We know, of course, that the gospel has as its bases three facts: (1) Jesus’ sinless life by which He constantly honored God and His Law, and manifested thereby that the Law had no claims upon Him to require His death for sin. (2) His death on the cross notwithstanding His sinless life, by which He suffered the penalty of sin in the place of the guilty sinner. (3) His resurrection unto life again after three days and three nights in the tomb, after which He ascended back to Heaven there to make an offering of His own blood upon the true altar in heaven, and to present His own spotless righteousness to God in lieu of the sinner’s unrighteousness. However, though these are a part of the atonement they are not the elements that we refer to primarily, but are included in these elements
It is well to state at this point that these elements are often spoken of as the "satisfaction of Christ," which is a term of similar import to the word "atonement," but is perhaps not quite so restrictive in meaning as it is. It might be a better word to use for this study were it not for the fact that so many people misunderstand the meaning of the word, and think that it means rather the self-complacency of Christ.
The first element of the atonement which we would consider is the propitiation, of which we read: "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world" (1 John 2:2). "Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins" (1 John 4:10). In both these instances the Greek word is hilasmos. "Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God" (Rom. 3:25). "And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercy-seat; of which we cannot now speak particularly" (Heb. 9:5). In these two texts the word "propitiation" and "mercyseat" are both the renderings of the Greek word hilasterion, a word of similar import to hilasmosabove.
The last text is significant in this matter because it shows that the mercyseat in the Tabernacle and Temple had the typical significance of foreshadowing Christ’s redemptive work in one phase of it. But as there was more to the tabernacle than just the mercyseat, so there is more to Christ’s redemptive work than just the propitiation. If we compare these four texts, we get a better understanding of what is meant, by this word. Note: (1) That these all had to do with sin. (2) That the propitiation is God’s provision for sin. (3) That this is provided because of God’s love for us. (4) That this was to be a propitiation only through faith in his blood, so that it has no application to any but believers. We will have more to say about the phrase "and not ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world" (1 John 2:2), under the third division of this study. (5) That this propitiation is God’s declaration of Christ’s righteousness for the remission of sins that are past. (6) The propitiation is not an act of debt to many but is come only in the forbearance of God. Alvah Hovey observes of the word "propitiate:"
But another element in the atonement or satisfaction of Christ is the "reconciliation," which is a translation of the Greek word katallag?. It appears only four times in the New Testament, viz., Rom. 5:11; 11:15; 2 Cor. 5:18,19. The verb form is katallass?, which appears only in Romans 5:10 (twice); 1 Corinthians 7:11; 2 Corinthians 5:18, 19,20. This word suggests the result of Christ’s redeeming work as it relates to both God and man; they are "reconciled." Some have denied that God needed to be "reconciled," and that this reconciliation has to do only with man. A. W. Pink has well said of this:
"Redemption" is another of the elements of the atonement; the word "redeem" has much the same significance as the word "deliver," but is more specific because it sets forth the precise mode of deliverance. The more common Hebrew words for "redeem" are goel, geullah, and padah (and their derivatives); the Greek words used are agoraz?, exagoraz?, lutro?, apolutr?sis (and their derivatives).
The basic idea of all these words is "to purchase," "to buy back from the slave market," "to redeem by paying a price," "to free by paying a ransom." The more common Greek noun is apolutr?sis, which appears ten times in the New Testament, of which the following are instances: "In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace" (Eph. 1:7). "And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance" (Heb. 9:15). The word "redemption" contains three key ideas as to what takes place in a person who is redeemed. (1) Redemption is a ransom. This is the root meaning of some of the words translated "redeem" (1 Tim. 2:6). (2) Redemption is a rescue (Titus 2:14; Gal. 1:4). In the latter passage, the word rendered "deliver" is elsewhere translated "rescue." (3) Redemption is a release. This idea is inherent in the root meaning of the Greek words lutron, lutro?, lutr?sis. This element of the atonement speaks of the result of it as it respects sin. John Gill says of redemption:
The correct view of the extent of the atonement is necessarily determined by whether we have a correct view of the meaning of the atonement, for if one believes that the atonement is a sacrifice that has been made for every member of Adam’s fallen race, then on the very meaning of the word reconciliation, he must believe that all will ultimately be saved, or else he will be hard put to escape from the arguments of the universalists.
Let us not be misunderstood at this point; we certainly believe that an adequate sacrifice has been offered by Christ to pay for the redemption of every sinner that has or ever shall repent and trust in Christ. Nor do we believe that any sinner shall ever desire to be saved, but be unable because sufficient blood was not shed for his redemption. But with most sound Baptists of the past, we believe that the atonement was particular; that is, that the blood of Christ was shed with particular individuals in mind who would be the recipients of the redemptive work of Christ. David Benedict, the old Baptist historian, the reliability of whose history has never been questioned by most Baptists, writing in 1813 says:
Our Lord Himself said, "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out" (John 6:37). And again, "As thou halt given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou has given him" (John 17:2). And there are many other passages which also show that there was a covenant of grace made in which a definite number were given to Christ to be redeemed, all of which He will in time call, justify and glorify, and none of which will be finally lost. These two texts clearly set forth what the old theologians called irresistible grace—for all who are given to Christ "shall come to him" —and particular redemption—for Christ gives life only to those whom the Father has given to Him in the covenant of redemption.
It is at this point, however, that we run headlong into the strongest prejudice, and this writer confesses that he was once foremost in prejudice on this point until God in His grace revealed the truth to him. Many people say, of the extent of the atonement: "Well, I believe in ‘Whosoever will," to which we say a hearty "Amen," yet this does not touch the main question here, for the Scripture represents the natural man as being unable to will that which is good for the following reasons: (1) He is in bondage to Satan (2 Tim. 2:25-26), from which only God in His grace can rescue him. (2) He is totally depraved, and cannot do any good (Rom. 3:9-12). (3) Spiritual things are foolish to him, and so he rejects them in toto until grace changes his attitude (1 Cor. 2:14). (4) He cannot be subject to the law of God, nor can he please God while his fleshly nature controls him (Rom. 8:7-8). Not only so, but (5) The Scripture declares that even the most religious people on earth by nature "Do not will to come to me, that ye might have life" (John 5:40,literal rendering), and so man has no desire to be saved.
But it will be objected that the atonement is for all the world, and so must mean every human being. We readily grant that the Scripture speaks of "reconciling the world," but to hold that the word "world" means "every human creature" in every case is to betray ignorance or prejudicial blindness. This writer once heard another preacher, in attempting to overthrow the doctrine of the limited atonement, say "The word ‘world’ means world," which statement means as near nothing as it can, for one never defines the meaning of a word with the same word. This reconciliation of the world is accomplished by "not imputing their trespasses unto them" (2 Cor. 5:19), so that whatever this world is, it is one that is accepted in God’s sight, for no sins are charged against it. Can this "world" be any other than the "world" of God’s elect?
The word "world" (Grk. kosmos) is used in at least thirteen different significations in the New Testament, and therefore the context must determine in each case what the word refers to. See Appendix II: "Studies On The Word ‘World’". All of these things make it folly of the worst kind to hold that the word "world" where it relates to the atonement, must refer to all mankind; and this becomes even more so when we consider that "atonement" means reconciliation, yet only a Universalist will claim that all mankind will eventually be reconciled to God. Even if there were no other facts to consider but the meaning of "atonement" (which is not the case) yet that alone would restrict the atonement to the saved alone, for how can one be reconciled to God and not be saved; or how can one be saved and not be reconciled to God?
If we go back to the Old Testament, where the doctrine of the atonement has its roots, we find this same truth, for there we never find an atonement that does not actually atone. Frequently, we find the statement "And the priest shall make an atonement for him, and it shall be forgiven him." See Lev. 4:20,26,31,35; 5:10,13,18; 6:7, etc. Indeed, there does not seem to be a single instance where an atonement is made but that there is forgiveness, so that Scripture facts compel us to believe that when atonement is made, it is also applied, and forgiveness ensures, and if there is no forgiveness, then obviously there has been no atonement for that individual. Alexander Carson well says:
Looked at from the standpoint of its being a propitiation, the atonement must be limited to believers, for if God is propitiated for all men without exception, then, there can be no reason for their going to hell, for His wrath is appeased toward them, which is the meaning of the word "propitiation." See also Chapter Thirteen, Point II, on the extent of salvation. The same thing is true if it is viewed from the aspect of it being reconciliation. If there is any sin yet charged against any man, he has not experienced the atonement, which takes away all sin, and he is yet lost and on his way to hell. If an atonement has been made for him personally, then God is propitiated and he is reconciled to God, or at least shall be at some time in the course of life. There is no alternative to these two facts; to be consistent, one must choose one or the other of the alternatives.
By Davis W. Huckabee, Pastor,