and the judicial atonement of Phinehas, who executed righteous judgment, and so turned away wrath. In neither case did mere confession surface to take away sin. On Campbell?s view see further, on page 760.
Moberly, Atonement and Personality, 98, has the great merit of pointing out that Christ shares our sufferings in virtue of the fact that our personality has its ground in him but he has failed to indicate that this sharing of our penalty was necessitated by God?s righteousness. He tells us that ?Christ sanctified the present and cancels the past. He offers to God a living holiness in human conditions and character; he makes the awful sacrifice in humanity of a perfect contrition. The one is the offering of obedience, the other the offering of atonement; the one the offering of the life, the other the offering of the death.? This modification of Campbell?s view can be rationally maintained only by connecting with it a prior declaration that the fundamental attribute of God is holiness. Holiness is self-affirming righteousness and that this righteousness necessarily expresses itself in the punishment of sin. Christ?s relation to the race as its upholder and life made him the bearer of its guilt and justly responsible for its sin. Scripture declares the ultimate aim of the atonement to be that God ?might himself be just? ( <450326>Romans 3:26) and no theory of the atonement will meet the demands of either reason or conscience that does not ground its necessity in God?s righteousness, rather than in his love.
E. Y. Mullins: ?If Christ?s union with humanity made it possible for him to be ?the representative Penitent? and to be the Amen of humanity to God?s just condemnation of sin, his union with God made it also possible for him to be the representative of the Judge, and to be the Amen of the divine nature to suffering, as the expression of condemnation.? Denney, Studies in Theology, 102, 103 ? ?The serious element in sin is not man?s dislike, suspicion, alienation from God, nor the debilitating, corrupting effects of vice in human nature but rather, God?s condemnation of man. This Christ endured and died that the condemnation might be removed. ?Bearing shame and scoffing rude, In my place condemned he stood; Sealed my pardon with his blood; Hallelujah!??
Bushnell regards <400817>Matthew 8:17 ? ?Himself took our iniquities, and bare our diseases? ? as indicating the nature of Christ?s atoning work. The meaning then would be, that he sympathized so fully with all human ills that he made them his own. Hovey, however, has given a more complete and correct explanation. The words mean rather: ?His deep sympathy with these effects of sin so moved him, that it typified his final bearing of the sins themselves, or constituted a preliminary and partial
<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->
Was this article helpful?