Lazar Puhalo And The Atonement
To reject the biblical doctrine of the atonement is to misunderstand the Gospel. Terms like "rationalism" or "scholasticism" are labels; and as one professor of logic said, "When you settle for labels, it shows you are not willing to think." Contrariwise, this is about intelligent theologians who disagree with your interpretation, and for good reasons. The following is not an exhaustive treatment covering this topic.
Lazar Puhalo claims that the doctrine of the atonement is pagan. Such is not the case. Whenever I hear there is something pagan in Christianity, the liberal history of religions school of Anti-Semitic German theologians of the early 20th century comes to mind. Due to Anti-Semitism, these theologians sought to view Christ against the background of paganism, not Old Testament Judaism. Lazar needs to understand that the doctrine of the atonement must be understood against the backdrop of the Old Testament animal sacrificial system, and that this doctrine is most certainly biblical, not pagan. In response to the pagan parallel view of the atonement, the N.T. scholar, D.A. Carson writes:
"in animistic cultures, the aim of many of the sacrifices offered to various spirits and deities is to win their approval--in short, to propitiate them...So you offer the spirits the prescribed sacrifices and thereby try to win their favor...In this model, human beings are the subjects, and they propitiate the gods, who are the objects of this action." But in Christianity, "God himself is the subject, the one who loves the world so as to send his Son (John 3:16). He initiates the action; he sends his own Son to be the sacrifice." (Carson, Basics For Believers, pp. 42, 43).
The definition and concept of "atonement" and Christ's atonement must be understood by the Old Testament sacrificial system. The Hebrew word in the Old Testament for atonement is "Kaphar," and it means to cover, but has a broader meaning of expiation, condoning, wiping away, placating, or cancelling.
The Greek term is hiloskomai, and means to propitiate, to expiate, or to conciliate. It's used twice, once in Luke 18:13 when the penitent sinner asked God to "be merciful" to him; and in Hebrews 2:17:
"Therefore he had to be made like his brethren in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make expiation for the sins of the people." (Heb. 2:17, RSV).
Leviticus 4:20:
"And the priest shall make atonement for them, and they shall be forgiven."
Lev. 17:11:
"For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul."
Atonement involved a blood sacrifice (Heb. 9:22).
Isaiah 53:5-6 speaks explicitly about substitutionary suffering in several places. Jesus claimed to be the fulfillment of Isaiah 53, which portrays a substitutionary sacrifice.
Jesus portrayed his death as a ransom (Gk: lutron), which usually meant in the Greek Old Testament "a deliverance from bondage in exchange for the payment of compensation or the offering of a substitute." (See Hatch and Henry A. Redpath, A Concordance of the Septuagint, 1.890-91).
"For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (ESV, Mark 10:45).
The Writer of Hebrews declared that Christ "died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant." (See Heb. 9:7, 14-15).
"And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once and for all...one sacrifice for sins...one sacrifice." (See Heb. 10:5-7, 10-14).
Christ's death was on another's behalf. The Greek word "for" (huper) often implies substitution:
"And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you." (Luke 22:19-20).
In John 10:15, the word "for" implies substitution. "I lay down my life for the sheep."
Many other Bible passages also use the word "for" in a substitutionary sense. (See Ro. 5:8; Gal. 3:13; 1Tim. 2:6; Titus 2:14; Heb. 2:9; 1Peter 2:21; 3:18; 4:1).
When speaking of Christ's death "for" (Gk: anti, meaning "instead of") us, substitution is explicit. See for example Mark 10:45, quoted above.
The New Testament Greek scholar, A.T. Robertson said that "there is the notion of exchange also in the use of anti." He rebuked those who denied this: "those who refuse to admit that Jesus held this notion of substitutionary death...[take] an easy way to get rid of passages that contradict ones theological opinions." (WPNT, 1.163).
The word "anti" in the sense of substitution is also used in Rom. 12:17; Heb. 12:2; 1Peter 3:9).
The word "expiation" (atoning sacrifice), used of Christ's death implies a substitutionary sacrifice. 1 John 2:2 says:
""He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." (NIV). The KJV uses the word "propitiation."
Christ's death implies a substitutionary death. St. Paul declared: "God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood." (Rom. 3:25).
The Old Testament portrays the same idea (Zech. 7:2; 8:22; Mal.1:9).
Many N.T. passages speak about God's wrath agains sin which implies that it must be appeased by substitutionary sacrifice. (See Rom. 1:18; 2:5, 8; 5:9; 9:22; 12:19; 13:4-5; Eph. 2:3; 5:6; Col. 3:6; 1Thess. 1:10; 2:16; 5:9).
Jesus died for us: "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." (2Cor. 5:21).
"Christ died for sins, once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God." (1 Peter 3:18).
The new view that wants to ban propitiation simply does not take sin and wrath seriously.
The entire conception of God begins to drift from biblical theism to thoroughly unbiblical deism.
The doctrine of the atonement can be found in Polycarp, Irenaeus and Augustine. (See EPP in Roberts and Donaldson, ANF, 1:8; AH in ibid., 1.3.18.7; AH in ibid., 1.5.1.36).
Lazar Puhalo claims that the doctrine of the atonement is pagan. Such is not the case. Whenever I hear there is something pagan in Christianity, the liberal history of religions school of Anti-Semitic German theologians of the early 20th century comes to mind. Due to Anti-Semitism, these theologians sought to view Christ against the background of paganism, not Old Testament Judaism. Lazar needs to understand that the doctrine of the atonement must be understood against the backdrop of the Old Testament animal sacrificial system, and that this doctrine is most certainly biblical, not pagan. In response to the pagan parallel view of the atonement, the N.T. scholar, D.A. Carson writes:
"in animistic cultures, the aim of many of the sacrifices offered to various spirits and deities is to win their approval--in short, to propitiate them...So you offer the spirits the prescribed sacrifices and thereby try to win their favor...In this model, human beings are the subjects, and they propitiate the gods, who are the objects of this action." But in Christianity, "God himself is the subject, the one who loves the world so as to send his Son (John 3:16). He initiates the action; he sends his own Son to be the sacrifice." (Carson, Basics For Believers, pp. 42, 43).
The definition and concept of "atonement" and Christ's atonement must be understood by the Old Testament sacrificial system. The Hebrew word in the Old Testament for atonement is "Kaphar," and it means to cover, but has a broader meaning of expiation, condoning, wiping away, placating, or cancelling.
The Greek term is hiloskomai, and means to propitiate, to expiate, or to conciliate. It's used twice, once in Luke 18:13 when the penitent sinner asked God to "be merciful" to him; and in Hebrews 2:17:
"Therefore he had to be made like his brethren in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make expiation for the sins of the people." (Heb. 2:17, RSV).
Leviticus 4:20:
"And the priest shall make atonement for them, and they shall be forgiven."
Lev. 17:11:
"For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul."
Atonement involved a blood sacrifice (Heb. 9:22).
Isaiah 53:5-6 speaks explicitly about substitutionary suffering in several places. Jesus claimed to be the fulfillment of Isaiah 53, which portrays a substitutionary sacrifice.
Jesus portrayed his death as a ransom (Gk: lutron), which usually meant in the Greek Old Testament "a deliverance from bondage in exchange for the payment of compensation or the offering of a substitute." (See Hatch and Henry A. Redpath, A Concordance of the Septuagint, 1.890-91).
"For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” (ESV, Mark 10:45).
The Writer of Hebrews declared that Christ "died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant." (See Heb. 9:7, 14-15).
"And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once and for all...one sacrifice for sins...one sacrifice." (See Heb. 10:5-7, 10-14).
Christ's death was on another's behalf. The Greek word "for" (huper) often implies substitution:
"And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you." (Luke 22:19-20).
In John 10:15, the word "for" implies substitution. "I lay down my life for the sheep."
Many other Bible passages also use the word "for" in a substitutionary sense. (See Ro. 5:8; Gal. 3:13; 1Tim. 2:6; Titus 2:14; Heb. 2:9; 1Peter 2:21; 3:18; 4:1).
When speaking of Christ's death "for" (Gk: anti, meaning "instead of") us, substitution is explicit. See for example Mark 10:45, quoted above.
The New Testament Greek scholar, A.T. Robertson said that "there is the notion of exchange also in the use of anti." He rebuked those who denied this: "those who refuse to admit that Jesus held this notion of substitutionary death...[take] an easy way to get rid of passages that contradict ones theological opinions." (WPNT, 1.163).
The word "anti" in the sense of substitution is also used in Rom. 12:17; Heb. 12:2; 1Peter 3:9).
The word "expiation" (atoning sacrifice), used of Christ's death implies a substitutionary sacrifice. 1 John 2:2 says:
""He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." (NIV). The KJV uses the word "propitiation."
Christ's death implies a substitutionary death. St. Paul declared: "God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood." (Rom. 3:25).
The Old Testament portrays the same idea (Zech. 7:2; 8:22; Mal.1:9).
Many N.T. passages speak about God's wrath agains sin which implies that it must be appeased by substitutionary sacrifice. (See Rom. 1:18; 2:5, 8; 5:9; 9:22; 12:19; 13:4-5; Eph. 2:3; 5:6; Col. 3:6; 1Thess. 1:10; 2:16; 5:9).
Jesus died for us: "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." (2Cor. 5:21).
"Christ died for sins, once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God." (1 Peter 3:18).
The new view that wants to ban propitiation simply does not take sin and wrath seriously.
The entire conception of God begins to drift from biblical theism to thoroughly unbiblical deism.
The doctrine of the atonement can be found in Polycarp, Irenaeus and Augustine. (See EPP in Roberts and Donaldson, ANF, 1:8; AH in ibid., 1.3.18.7; AH in ibid., 1.5.1.36).
Comments
Post a Comment