Salvation and Atonement: Part 2

• 18 min. read • grade level: 8

Remarks on an Article in the Swedish Magazine "Pietisten," for September, 1881

But, says Dr. W.: God's wrath is not appeased through the death of Christ. (§ 728.) True, as to any outflow of it against the impenitent. Yet by sacrifice God's wrath can be turned from objects of it, as Job's friends proved, and as the godly in Israel will by-and-by declare, " Thine anger is turned away, and Thou comfortedst me." (Isa. 12:1¹And in that day thou shalt say, O Lord, I will praise thee: though thou wast angry with me, thine anger is turned away, and thou comfortedst me. (Isaiah 12:1).) Deliverance from the wrath to come (1 Thess. 1:10¹⁰And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come. (1 Thessalonians 1:10)) shows that God's wrath will yet be poured out; the death of Christ has not dried it up. But that wrath is turned away from those who believe on Him. For believing on Him now answers to the bringing the offering of the Lord under the law. The man who brought it when needful was preserved from the threatened visitation of divine judgment. The one who now believes on the Lord Jesus Christ shall not come into judgment.

Nor is this all that is effected by sacrifice, for God's holiness is met and maintained by it. Now that had to be cared for, as well as His righteousness to be vindicated. The Lord would purge His camp of old from the presence of every leper, and of every one that had an issue, or who was defiled by the dead, that they should not defile their camps in the midst whereof He dwelt. (Num. 5:3,4³Both male and female shall ye put out, without the camp shall ye put them; that they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof I dwell. ⁴And the children of Israel did so, and put them out without the camp: as the Lord spake unto Moses, so did the children of Israel. (Numbers 5:3‑4).) Besides this, He provided that by sacrifice the person should be cleansed from the defilement attaching to him. Turning to Lev. 15 we read of certain defilements, and of the sacrifices to be brought in consequence (Lev. 15:14, 15, 29, 30¹⁴And on the eighth day he shall take to him two turtledoves, or two young pigeons, and come before the Lord unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and give them unto the priest: ¹⁵And the priest shall offer them, the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for him before the Lord for his issue. (Leviticus 15:14‑15)
²⁹And on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons, and bring them unto the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. ³⁰And the priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the Lord for the issue of her uncleanness. (Leviticus 15:29‑30)) to make atonement for the person, God by this providing that death should not be meted out to him. "Thus," we read, "shall ye separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness, that they die not in their uncleanness, when they defile my tabernacle that is among them." (Lev. 15:31³¹Thus shall ye separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness; that they die not in their uncleanness, when they defile my tabernacle that is among them. (Leviticus 15:31).) Similarly we read in Num. 19:20,²⁰But the man that shall be unclean, and shall not purify himself, that soul shall be cut off from among the congregation, because he hath defiled the sanctuary of the Lord: the water of separation hath not been sprinkled upon him; he is unclean. (Numbers 19:20) "But the man that shall be unclean, and shall not purify himself, that soul shall be cut off from among the congregation, because he hath defiled the sanctuary of the Lord: the water of separation hath not been sprinkled upon him, he is unclean." The man or the woman could not help being defiled by the issue. (Lev. 15) The man, too, might only have been doing his duty in touching a dead body. He clearly was not breaking any law, if he carried out the body of one who had died in the tent; but he would have defiled the sanctuary of the Lord, if he had not made use of the appointed ritual, to which the holiness of God necessitated his conformity on pain of death. Thus the uncleanness was met by sacrifice directly as in Lev. 15, or indirectly as in Num. 19. Death had to take place in either case for the defiled one to be made clean, otherwise the defilement could not be put away. And because by his presence, if he availed not himself of God's gracious provision, he defiled the sanctuary, death was the portion, to be meted out to him. In these cases it is plainly seen that God's holiness had to be thought of as well as the sinner's forgiveness, and by the death of a sacrificial victim only could divine holiness be fully cared for, and perfectly maintained. For atonement, be it remembered, was required because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, as well as because of their transgressions in all their sins. (Lev. 16:16¹⁶And he shall make an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins: and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the congregation, that remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness. (Leviticus 16:16).)

Clearly then there were other issues to be met by atonement than "the cleansing man from sin, and placing him again in a right relationship to God." (§ 716.) To confine the scope of atonement to the sinners wants as these words of Dr. Waldenstrom clearly do, is to present a very defective view of what is effected by it. The man who refused to use the water of separation defiled God's sanctuary. The person unclean by an issue, would, if he were disobedient to the divine word, defile God's tabernacle. In God's eye then there was another question raised besides the person's uncleanness, and that question was nothing less than His own holiness. His tabernacle, His sanctuary was defiled, if the person refused to conform to the ritual appointed for him. Now that ritual was based on death. The person who was rendered unclean, brought a sin offering and a burnt offering to make atonement for himself in Lev. 15 The one defiled by the dead, profited by the water of separation, prepared by being mixed with the ashes of the burnt heifer. (Num. 19) Death, as seen in Lev. 15, the bearing divine judgment, as well as the dealing with the blood were all requisite for the unclean persons not to defile the sanctuary of Jehovah. Not, be it remembered, that the one unclean defiled the sanctuary by his presence within it, for unless he was one of the tribe of Levi he could never set his foot inside it; yet the sanctuary would be defiled, if one such person was allowed in the camp.

God, then, has provided atonement by which His holiness and righteousness are maintained, and the sins of the guilty can be put away. But what moved Him to do this? He has told us. It was love, "Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins." (1 John 4:10¹⁰Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. (1 John 4:10).)" Again, "God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, bath quickened us together with Christ." (Eph. 2:4, 5⁴But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, ⁵Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) (Ephesians 2:4‑5).) He loved because He loved, as He told Israel. (Deut. 7:7, 8⁷The Lord did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: ⁸But because the Lord loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the Lord brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. (Deuteronomy 7:7‑8).) His love, it is true, did not need any forsoning (§ 718), for He is love. But He did not love because it is righteous to love, as Dr. W. states. (§ 720.) "It is righteous," he writes, "both for God and man to love sinners, to have compassion, and to save sinners. It was righteous that God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son for its salvation." This is all confusion. It is righteous for a man to love his neighbor as himself, for God commanded it. It is fit that God's children should love their enemies (Matt. 5:44, 45⁴⁴But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; ⁴⁵That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. (Matthew 5:44‑45)), because they are born of God. But God loves because He is love. Love is the activity of the divine nature. God is seen to be righteous in loving. The blood on the mercy seat proclaims that. But it cannot be said that it is righteous in God to love the wicked. What righteousness would that be to love a child of the devil, or the son of perdition? "With such a love (John 3:16¹⁶For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)) He has loved Cain as well as the Virgin Mary, Judas as well as John." (§ 718.) This is a mistake, arising from the application of a general statement to every individual. The passage itself makes it plain, " God so loved the world.... that whosoever believeth." It is not said that He loved each one in the world, but that He so loved the world as to give His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth, &c. Here the individual comes in. Of no one are we authorized to say God loves him, till he has shown himself to be God's child by believing on His Son. Into whose heart is God's love shed abroad? The covetous, the liar, the blood-thirsty and deceitful man the Lord abhorreth. (Psa. 10:3; 5:6³For the wicked boasteth of his heart's desire, and blesseth the covetous, whom the Lord abhorreth. (Psalm 10:3)
⁶Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing: the Lord will abhor the bloody and deceitful man. (Psalm 5:6).) Does God love such? Again, we read, "I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau." (Mal. 1:2, 3²I have loved you, saith the Lord. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the Lord: yet I loved Jacob, ³And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness. (Malachi 1:2‑3).) Here at any rate is one mentioned whom God did not love. Was it righteous, we ask, for God to send His Son to die? Under what obligation did God lie, that He had to send His beloved Son to die for sinners? Scripture tells us it was love that made Him do it. (1 John 4:10¹⁰Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. (1 John 4:10).)

But first on that day (Lev. 16) God was thought of, and His nature, and His throne cared for. Propitiation by blood was made in the sanctuary, ere the high priest sent away the scapegoat, on which were placed all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins. The value of propitiation by blood, and the nature of it, the New Testament teaches us. "God sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins." (1 John 4:10¹⁰Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. (1 John 4:10).) "He is the propitiation for our sins." So the saint who has failed can always turn to God, and know that his standing before the throne remains ever the same. "But not for ours only," adds John, "but also for the whole world." (1 John 2:2²And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 John 2:2).) For on the ground of the value in God's eyes of that blood God is seen to be perfectly righteous in acting in grace towards any one and every one, who is willing to share in the proffered salvation. The making propitiation was an act Godward, and required the high priest to effect it. (Heb. 2:17¹⁷Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. (Hebrews 2:17).) Results which flow from it are declared in Rom. 3. Of the one then who has made it, of its abiding value, and how far God's grace can reach in consequence, and who provided for it, of all this we read in the writings of John. Of the official position of the one who has made it, and of beneficial results which flow to us from it, Paul has taught us.

Turning to substitution, an integral part of atonement, though the term is not met with in the Bible, the truth expressed by it is plainly declared, nor is the thought of it confined to the Mosaic ritual. Abraham and Isaac both experienced the benefits of it, when the father was able to offer up the ram provided by God instead of Isaac his son. (Gen. 22:13¹³And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son. (Genesis 22:13)) The Israelites, too, must have understood what is meant by the term, when the Levites were taken by God to keep Aaron's charge and the charge of the whole congregation before the tabernacle of the congregation, to do the service of the tabernacle instead of all the first-born males of the other tribes. (Num. 3) Of substitution David spoke in the bitterness of his grief for Absalom, lamenting that he had not been able to die instead of his rebellious son. (2 Sam. 18:33³³And the king was much moved, and went up to the chamber over the gate, and wept: and as he went, thus he said, O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! would God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my son! (2 Samuel 18:33)) Of substitution really effected for guilty ones Isaiah prophesied in terms now familiar to so many: "He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed." "And the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." "He shall bear their iniquities." “And he bare the sins of many." (Isa. 53:5, 6, 11, 12⁵But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. ⁶All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53:5‑6)
¹¹He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. ¹²Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. (Isaiah 53:11‑12).) That, and more than that, which David could not do for Absalom, the remnant of Israel will find has been done for them. Of this the Lord spake in Matt. 20:28²⁸Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. (Matthew 20:28); Mark 10:45⁴⁵For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. (Mark 10:45). And of it Paul speaks when he writes, "Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many" (Heb. 9:28²⁸So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. (Hebrews 9:28)); and Peter likewise, "who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree" (1 Peter 2:24²⁴Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. (1 Peter 2:24)); and "Christ hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God." (1 Peter 3:18¹⁸For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: (1 Peter 3:18)).

Now of this the scape-goat was typical. For Aaron was to lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, which he was then to send away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness. And the goat bore on itself all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited. No plainer type of substitution could we have than this. The sins transferred to the goat, it carried them away, never to return. If the goat did not return, the sins laid on it could not again be brought up against the guilty. They were gone, not as blotted out, but as carried away on the head of the appointed victim.

But substitution is not confined to sin-bearing, though the scape-goat is the plainest type that we have of it, it includes also the bearing divine judgment, which the Lord. Jesus Christ has borne in the greatness of His grace (Psa. 22:1¹<<To the chief Musician upon Aijeleth Shahar, A Psalm of David.>> My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring? (Psalm 22:1)), that those who believe on Him should not come into judgment. (John 5:24²⁴Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (John 5:24).) Now this was typified on the day of atonement by the burnt offering, which was wholly consumed on the brazen altar, and by the appointed part of the sin offering that was burnt upon it, and unless this part of the day's ritual was carried out atonement was not completed. (Lev. 16:24²⁴And he shall wash his flesh with water in the holy place, and put on his garments, and come forth, and offer his burnt offering, and the burnt offering of the people, and make an atonement for himself, and for the people. (Leviticus 16:24).) Whatever was consumed on the altar was burnt up by the fire thereon, which came down from heaven on the eighth day of Aaron's consecration, and for the keeping alight of which provision was made under the law. (Lev. 6:13¹³The fire shall ever be burning upon the altar; it shall never go out. (Leviticus 6:13)) Thus the bearing divine judgment in the place of God's people was symbolized, as often as any sacrifice or a portion of it was burnt on the brazen altar by the priest-typical of that which the Lord endured that we should never pass through it.

But it is expressly denied that the offerings under the law set forth a bearing of divine judgment in the guilty one's place (§ 756); for unbloody sacrifice, as a flour offering, could at times be brought for a sin. It is, of course, true that every offering put on the altar could not symbolize death, but there was not one burnt on it which the bearing divine judgment was not directly typified. Death and judgment are quite distinct, though of course generally connected. We say generally, because the beast and false prophet will pass at once into their final condition of judgment without first dying. (Rev. 19:20²⁰And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. (Revelation 19:20).) Death was not always typified, but the bearing of divine judgment was portrayed in whatever was put on God's altar. So the flour offering of Lev. 5:12¹²Then shall he bring it to the priest, and the priest shall take his handful of it, even a memorial thereof, and burn it on the altar, according to the offerings made by fire unto the Lord: it is a sin offering. (Leviticus 5:12) was not rightly dealt with till part had been burnt on the altar. The endurance by the Lord Jesus Christ of divine judgment for sinners, God had always typified before Him. How precious was that in His eyes! No meat offering could be dealt with at the altar without the endurance of divine judgment being distinctly traced out in type. We cannot make acceptable mention before God of the spotless life of His Son, if we do not own that He suffered for us, bore our judgment. The burning then of the offering wholly or in part on the altar, effectually answers the objections in sections 756, 757 to a substitutionary bearing of divine judgment. What Dr. Waldenstrom denies was just that which was never omitted in type in any offering that was put on the altar. Nor is his remark of any value that offerings for atonement did not express a substitutionary bearing of judgment, since they could only be offered for such sins as had not the penalty of death attached to them (§ 757); because in cases of defilement, for which a sacrifice was provided to make atonement, thus showing that death could in certain cases be averted (but if averted by sacrifice it must in default of it have been inflicted), the Lord distinctly declared He made that provision, that they should not die in their uncleanness, when they defiled His tabernacle. (Lev. 15:31³¹Thus shall ye separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness; that they die not in their uncleanness, when they defile my tabernacle that is among them. (Leviticus 15:31).) What would have been meted out to the one who refused compliance with the ritual to make atonement for his uncleanness? Again, in Num. 19, whilst the water of separation, if used, would preserve the defiled one from death, it is distinctly stated that, if such an one neglected to use it, death was the only lot to which he could look forward. The penalty of death was not needful to be inflicted for the uncleanness; but should the person refuse compliance with the divine command, judicial dealing was his desert. Offerings then, as we have pointed out, provided for cases in which the death of the unclean one was not primarily called for, did indicate in type divine judgment borne on his behalf by another-his substitute, which kept him from bearing it. And if uncleanness might necessitate the death of the individual, what shall we say of transgressions or sins? In truth Dr. Waldenstrom leaves out in his reasoning an important factor in the case, viz., the nature of God, which must be cared for in all its holiness and righteousness, even at the cost of divine judgment being borne either by the substitute or by the individual concerned. Indeed, how little is the nature and the need of the atoning death of the Lord Jesus Christ understood, even by those who really believe in it!

And what shall we think of a statement, "that scripture never speaks of its being righteous to punish the innocent in the place of the guilty"? (§ 755.) One could scarcely suppose a Christian so preoccupied with his thesis as to forget that the Lord Jesus offered up Himself. (Heb.7:27.) He gave Himself for our sins. (Gal. 1:4; 2:20⁴Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father: (Galatians 1:4)
²⁰I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. (Galatians 2:20); Matt. 20:28²⁸Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. (Matthew 20:28); 1 Tim. 2:6⁶Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. (1 Timothy 2:6); Heb. 9:28²⁸So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. (Hebrews 9:28).) Nor will Dr. W 's remark on Isa. 53:4, 5⁴Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. ⁵But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. (Isaiah 53:4‑5) help him. The prophet Isaiah, it is true, sets it forth as an error that the Jews counted the Lord to be merely smitten of God. But why? Because the act of smiting was not a substitutionary one, nor has it to do with atonement, though it took place when He made atonement. They viewed Him as smitten for His own sins, whereas in truth, as the prophet shows, "He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities." The prophet distinctly asserts the substitutionary character of His death.

Further as to the laying on of hands (§ 758), it did not express, it is true, the transference of the punishment to the animal, but it did express identification of the offerer with the victim. If it was an offering of sweet savor, the offerer was accepted, being identified with the sweet savor of the sacrifice. If it was for sin, the offering was identified with the sinner, and so could stand in his place, and be treated as he deserved. All this is very simple. But the teaching of scripture will not be understood till it is seen what is really comprised in the term-atonement; and that a great deal more is really comprised in it than simply purging the sinner from his sins. Nor shall we grasp the teaching about it by simply analyzing the word. We must see what scripture tells us of all that to which the term atonement is applied. The priest it was who made it, by which propitiation as well as substitution was effected. Not that He did it as God's substitute, as Dr. W. states. (§ 764.) It was part of the duty of his office. (Heb. 2) Was the Lord as High Priest God's substitute? Yet not to appease God. Here Dr. W. is right, and we cannot too stoutly maintain that. But God, because of what He is, required the blood of atonement to enable Him in righteousness to accept guilty ones before Him. Atonement, then, is much more than cleansing. Propitiation was needful for God to cleanse guilty ones.

It is true atonement is by blood, but that necessitated death-for blood is the life of the flesh. But the dealing with the live goat was also an integral part of atonement, the two goats being but one sin offering; so all that was done with both, was together what was comprised under the one word atonement. If the reader seizes this thought, he will see that it is not the derivation of the word atonement that will teach him its full meaning; but the application of that term to the different acts of Aaron on that eventful and solemn day. Attention to this will clear up a great deal, and keep each one from being carried away by his own thoughts. C. E. S.

Click here to show subject links in the text for more information.