238 – The Hypothetical Value of Christ’s Blood

SEMESTER 3

238 – The Hypothetical Value of Christ’s Blood

BIBLE INSTITUTE OF CORRESPONDENCE

COURSE: SOTERIOLOGY III LESSON # 38
THE HYPOTHETICAL VALUE OF CHRIST’S BLOOD

INTRODUCTION:

1. In the previous lesson I dealt with the schools of thought concerning the objects of the atonement.
2. I neither denied nor affirmed either position in that lesson, I merely tried to state them.
3. I will incorporate these theories and my answers to them in future lessons.
4. In this lesson, I want to deal with the hypothetical value of Christ’s blood.
5. First, I want to make a couple of brief observations about the schools of thought in the previous lesson.

I. OBSERVATIONS CONCERNING LESSON #37

1. There is a variation among men in the definitions given to general and particular atonement.
2. Many men would be categorized as a limited atonement man by some and a general atonement man by others.
3. Because of this, we are wise not to “tag” other men, or to accept another man’s tag for ourselves.

II. DEFINING THE TERM “HYPOTHETICAL VALUE”

1. This is simply my way of identifying the speculative discussions of the sufficiency of Christ’s blood.
2. That is, what could Christ’s blood have done if the unsaved had come to Christ?
3. I am not sure this discussion is warranted but since it is prevalent I shall try to briefly address it.

III. THE LIMITED VALUE POSITION

1. This theory holds that the maximum hypothetical value of the blood of Christ is precisely equal to that which He did on the cross.
2. That is to say, that not only was His death designed to do no more, but it was not capable of doing more.
Reference: A Systematic Study of Bible Doctrine, by T. P. Simmons: Here Mr. Simmons defends the limited value position where he says on page 255, “A thousand sinners in hell, all deserving the same degree of punishment, will suffer a thousand times as much as anyone of them will suffer individually… Now will justice be satisfied in Christ for the entire thousand if Christ suffers only as much as one sinner will suffer?” And he con­cludes that it will not.
3. I think this conclusion is erroneous even though I put great stock in Bro. Simmons.

i. Because the theory assumes that human guilt is ac­cumulative, i.e., that two sinners of equal deeds compositely are twice as guilty as one. I doubt this.
ii. It assumes that Christ saves these people as a group with composite guilt. I hold that His substitution was absolutely personal.
iii. It assumes that salvation is by Christ’s suffering. I rather think the value is revealed to be in His blood.

IV. THE BIBLICAL REVELATION OF THE HYPOTHETICAL VALUE OF CHRIST’S BLOOD

1. I doubt that scripture relates the hypothetical value of the blood, to its actual effect.
2. Yet, I expect there is a biblical revelation (indirectly if not directly) to that blood’s potential value.
3. I feel this lies in the revelation of the person and work of Christ.

i. It was dependent upon His identity as the Lamb, without spot or blemish. (Heb. 10:1-10; Jn. 1:29; Rev. 5:6-12)
ii. The qualification of this type was perfection pointing to the perfect holiness of Christ.
iii. It is the value of the blood, as to quality, not quantity, that is the issue, thus I would hold that its value is absolutely infinite.

4. This position has been held by the majority of the scholars of bygone days who held to a particular redemption, such as Strong, Boyce, Fuller, Spurgeon, etc.

V. A WARNING CONCLUSION

1. Remember that the above discussion is theory of potential, not comment on result.
2. Men on both sides of this issue hold to particular redemption, and agree that:

i. Christ’s blood was sufficient for all the elect, all believers, and whosoever will.
ii. They believe that none of those will be saved, without the gospel, faith and repentance.
iii. They all agree that no man will perish as an efficient result of any limit in the value of Christ’s blood.