Nepaug Bible Church - http://www.nepaugchurch.org - Pastor's Evening Sermon Notes - http://www.nepaugchurch.org/ev/ev20060122.htm

UNDERSTANDING GOD'S WORK AT THE CROSS OF JESUS CHRIST
Part II: Understanding The Atonement Of Jesus Christ
(2 Corinthians 5:21 et al.)
  1. Introduction
    1. Throughout Church History, "a wide divergence of opinion" has occurred on the meaning of Christ's death due mainly to an errant effort to be concerned about the sinner's need for righteousness over the concern for a righteous God's demands upon the sinner, John F. Walvoord, Jesus Christ Our Lord, p. 157.
    2. This tendency has recently infiltrated Evangelical circles with huge repercussions (as follows):
      1. In 1990, Robert Brow wrote an article, "Evangelical Megashift" (2/19/90) in Christianity Today that touted "a wrathless deity and an unnecessary cross. Gone are substitutionary atonement and forensic understanding of justification." Evangelicals like Clark Pinnock today now deny Christ died to suffer the punishment of God's wrath, J. H. Armstrong, gen. ed., The Coming Evang. Crisis, 96, p. 34, 132f.
      2. Yet, if one rejects the view of the need for Christ to be man's substitute for the penalty of sin, EITHER sin becomes not punishable and an eternal hell a useless doctrine OR Christ's salvation never fully removes God's wrath, and sinful man becomes always vulnerable to a weak or fickle salvation by God!
    3. To defend the validity of our eternal salvation from sin that is in Christ, we view the atonement of Christ:
  2. Understanding The Atonement Of Jesus Christ, 2 Corinthians 5:21 et al. (Ibid., p. 157-163)
    1. Ten major errant views of the atonement of Christ have developed, views that try to get the sinner to become righteous in errant ways that avoid making Christ a penal substitute on the cross for man :
      1. The Payment-to-Satan Theory: Origen and Augustine held Christ's death paid Satan a ransom to deliver man from claims Satan might have rather than dying as man's penal substitute, Ibid., p. 157f.
      2. The Recapitulation Theory: Irenaeus taught Christ's life and death "recapitulates all phases of human life . . . [to do] properly what Adam failed to do" versus dying as man's penal substitute, Ibid., p. 158.
      3. The Commercial or Satisfaction Theory: Anselm suggested Christ died to vindicate God's honor that was injured by man's sin, not that He died as a penal substitute for the punishment of sin, Ibid.
      4. The Moral Influence Theory: Neo-orthodoxy (Karl Barth and Liberal Theology) hold "God does not necessarily require the death of Christ as an expiation for sin, but has rather chosen this means to manifest His love and to show His fellowship with them in their sufferings," Ibid., p. 158-159.
      5. The Thomas Aquinas Theory: Aquinas, representing the norm of Roman Catholic belief, held God did not need "to offer atonement and could have allowed man to go unredeemed," Ibid.; however, he recognized God held the cross satisfied God, Ibid., p. 159-160.
      6. The Duns Scotus Theory: Scotus felt Christ's atonement was not needed to meet the demands of God's nature! (Ibid., p. 160)
      7. The Example Theory: This view asserts Christ's death exemplified how man was to heed God even to the point of dying, not that Christ died as man's penal substitute, Ibid., p. 160-161.
      8. The Mystical Experience Theory: This view holds Christ's death exerts a mystical influence upon the sinner rather than addressing any penalty for sin to meet a righteous God's demands, Ibid., p. 161.
      9. The Grotius Governmental Theory: This view held by Hugo Grotius suggests Christ's death satisfied the will of God that He die; thus, the penalty of God's law is set aside as Christ is said to have fulfilled God's governmental will in going to the cross, Ibid., p. 161-162.
      10. The Vicarious Confession Theory: This view holds that Christ substitutionally [merely] repented of man's sin on the cross as man was unable adequately to make such a repentance, Ibid., p. 162.
    2. In contrast to these, Scripture teaches the Substitutionary Atonement: Christ bore the full penalty and thus paid the full punishment of man's sin forever to satisfy a wrathful God's demands against sinners; sinful men may thus receive the imputed righteousness of Christ by faith in Christ as God's gift, a gift that supplies believers eternally secure salvation from hell as God's wrath has been fully, eternally satisfied, Ibid., p. 157 (Romans 3:21-28. 2 Cor. 5:21, John 1:29, Galatians 3:13, Hebrews 9:28 and 1 Peter 2:24).
Lesson Application: Christ's death satisfied a RIGHTEOUS God's demands that the PENALTY be PAID for man's sin, and that as man's SUBSTITUTE: only then can God justly pronounce those who trust in Christ justified that they might be saved from hell and SUBSTITUTIONALLY receive Christ's imputed righteousness to enter heaven. Thus, we hold to the Substitutionary Atonement of Christ!