236 – Insufficient and Erroneous Views of Atonement

SEMESTER 3

236 – Insufficient and Erroneous Views of Atonement

BIBLE INSTITUTE OF CORRESPONDENCE

COURSE: SOTERIOLOGY III LESSON # 36
INSUFFICIENT AND ERRONEOUS VIEWS OF ATONEMENT

INTRODUCTION:

1. Different theologians list varying numbers of theories of the atone­ment.
2. The reason they differ is not that some of them are ignorant of various theories, but that some separate theories, while others combine. For instance: Boyce lists 9 divisions, whereas Simmons covers all of these 9 doctrines in 5 or 6 categories.
3. In this lesson, I want us to consider some views that are insufficient or erroneous, and see why they cannot rightly be accepted.

I. THE GOVERNMENTAL VIEW – HOLDS THAT:

1. The purpose of atonement was to prevent pardon from en­couraging sin.
2. The bearing of punishment is not mandatory.
3. The repentance of the sinner is sufficient grounds for divine forgive­ness.
4. That God punished Christ only to show His hatred for sin and regard for His divine law.

II. THE EXAMPLE VIEW – HOLDS THAT:

1. Like the governmental view, Christ’s death was not substitutionary.
2. The only hindrance to forgiveness is continued practice of sin.
3. Reformation is an adequate remedy and can be initiated by man’s own will.
4. To encourage us in this, Christ martyred Himself as an example of subjection to God’s will.
5. Thus, our faith is not to be focused upon Christ as our substitute, but as our example.

III. THE MORAL INFLUENCE VIEW – HOLDS THAT:

1. Sin brings no guilt that must be punished or removed.
2. It is not the guilt that needs removing, but the practice.
3. Christ’s death was essentially a demonstration of love, designed to soften man’s heart.
4. It did not remove obstacles of God’s forgiveness, but demonstrated that there were none.

IV. THE GRADUALLY EXTRICATED DEPRAVITY VIEW – HOLDS THAT:

1. Christ took upon Himself the nature of man, not as he was created, but his fallen nature.
2. Then through His divine nature, or the power of the Spirit, kept His corrupt nature from surfacing.
3. Not only so, but gradually subdued His human nature, until finally in death, He conquered it, and reunited it to God.
4. Thus, men are saved, not by an objective propitiation, but by, (through faith) becoming partakers of this “new nature.”

Note: Both the moral view and the gradually extricated depravity view are indirect quotations from A. H. Strong.

V. OTHER VIEWS

1. T. P. Simmons lists (though does not detail) two other less popular erroneous views.

i. The accidental view: i.e., that it was an unforeseen event. This is so absurd, that it neither qualifies as a theory of atonement, nor merits discussion.
ii. The commercial view is a part of the biblical view of atone­ment, yet is error, because of its incompleteness.

2. All views which are essentially correct, though not necessarily in every detail, carry within them one basic theme, i.e., personal substitution.
3. The correct view does indeed recognize and affirm the truth held in the four preceding views, but has as its center personal substitution.