Difference between revisions of "Atonement"

<p> That the Bible's central message is atonement, that is, that God has provided a way for humankind to come back into harmonious relation with him, is everywhere apparent in Scripture. From the first stories in Genesis to the last visions of Revelation, God seeks to reconcile his people to himself. Atonement, however, cannot be usefully discussed in this way, and translators have settled on it, and its cognate expressions, as a translation for a relatively circumscribed number of nouns and verbs in the Bible. </p> <p> <i> The Old [[Testament]] </i> In the Old Testament atonement, and related phrases, such as sacrifice of atonement, most often translates the [[Hebrew]] piel verb <i> kipur </i> [כִּפֻּרִים] and two related nouns, one, <i> kippurim, </i> found always in the plural and signifying the noun equivalent of <i> kipur </i> [כִּפֻּרִים], and the other, <i> kapporeth </i> [כַּפֹּרֶת], meaning the so-called mercy-seat or the place where the sacrifice of atonement happens. These occur with meanings related to atonement around 140 times, almost always in the context of the cults, as a sacrifice for sins and to provide reconciliation to God. </p> <p> The breadth of the use of the concept in the Old Testament is striking. Atonement is provided for inanimate objects such as a mildewing house, the altar in the temple, the sanctuary (i.e., the Holy of Holies within the [[Tent]] of Meeting), the holy place, and the tent of meeting/temple itself. In one place atonement is also provided for an animal, the scapegoat used in the atonement rituals found in &nbsp;Leviticus 16 . [[Sacrifice]] accomplishes atonement "for sins" in many places, though these passages always mean atonement for people "because of" their sins rather than atonement "on behalf of" sins, as if sins were being personified and therefore in need of redemption. Of course, the majority of all the references are to atonement on behalf of people, either individually or as members of the community of Israel. </p> <p> Atonement for inanimate objects is found twelve places in the Old Testament: &nbsp;Exodus 29:36-37; &nbsp;30:10; &nbsp;Leviticus 8:15; &nbsp;14:53; &nbsp;16:10,16 , &nbsp;18,20; &nbsp;Ezekiel 43:20,26; &nbsp;45:20 . Eleven of these passages refer to cleansing either the tent/temple, one of its rooms, or the altar inside it. The lone exception refers to the cleansing of a contaminated house. In one of the stranger passages of the Law, God instructs Moses and [[Aaron]] about the purification rites they are to apply to a house that has "a spreading mildew" and declares that, if a house responds to the treatment, then it can be declared clean (&nbsp;Leviticus 14:33-53 ). The priest cleanses the house by sacrificing a bird, and dipping cedar wood, hyssop, scarlet yarn, and a live bird in the blood of the dead bird, then sprinkling the blood on the house seven times. He then is to release the live bird into the open fields outside the town. "In this way he will make atonement for the house, and it will be clean" (&nbsp;Leviticus 14:53 ). </p> <p> The entire passage significantly echoes the preceding passage in which a human being undergoes the same investigations and purifications for infectious skin diseases, and it anticipates the important regulations of &nbsp;Leviticus 16 concerning the Day of Atonement, the most important sacrifice of all, when sacrifice is made for the cleansing of the sins of all the people. The point is apparently that the surface of the skin can demonstrate a deeper sickness underneath as can the surface of a house; both need to be cleansed of that deeper sickness as does the human heart of its sin. </p> <p> Far more important are the references to the atonement of the Tent of Meeting, the temple, the holy place, the sanctuary, and the altar. These take place in the contexts of the ordination of priests (&nbsp;Exodus 29:35-37; &nbsp;Leviticus 8:15 ), God's instructions for the building of the eschatological temple in the later chapters of Ezekiel (43:20,26; 45:20), and the Day of Atonement itself (&nbsp;Leviticus 16:16,18,20 ). The need for cleansing the buildings, the altar and the sanctuaries is due to the fact that these are the meeting places of the divine, Holy One with his people. The holiness and purity of God are so emphasized that not only does he and the one who approaches him have to be pure, but even the means of their communication and relationship must be covered by the blood of an atoning sacrifice because of its contamination by sin. </p> <p> It is perhaps important that this cleansing of inanimate objects, with the lone exception of the house (which seems to serve as an analog to human cleansing), is limited to the house of God and its parts. There is no sense that the world is God's place of meeting and in need of a cleansing sacrifice of atonement, but rather that the special cultic and covenantal relationship that God has with his people is what is in need of purification. This is not to deny that the world has been infected by sin, just that the particular relationship of redemption that God has with his covenant people is not extended to the whole world, but simply to the people of Israel, and even that is vicarious, that is, through the priests and their cultic duties. </p> <p> Primary among the objects of atonement in the Old Testament are the people of God, but the means of atonement can vary. Goats, sheep, and birds are listed among the acceptable animals to be sacrificed, but there were also grain, oil, and drink offerings. [[Ransom]] money can provide atonement for the lives of the people; God commands at least one census to be made of the people at which each participant pays the same amount to buy his life and the lives of his family from God, who promises no plague will harm them when they do pay (&nbsp;Exodus 30:11-16 ). Significantly, the money is to be used to support the services of the Tent of Meeting, hence tying it to the sacrifice of blood for atonement, if only in a tangential way. The other nonanimal sacrifices are often equally tied to atonement by blood. </p> <p> [[Certainly]] the most frequently mentioned means of atonement in the Old Testament were the blood sacrifices, dominating the use of the term by constant reference in the books of Leviticus and Numbers. Atonement needed to be made for everything from heinous crimes like idolatry (&nbsp;Numbers 16:47 ) to mistakes of intent, when the only sin was ignorance or error, not willful disobedience (&nbsp;Numbers 15:22-29 ). </p> <p> Perhaps the heart of the Old Testament teaching on atonement is found in &nbsp;Leviticus 16 , where the regulations for the Day of Atonement occur. Five characteristics relating to the ritual of the Day of Atonement are worthy of note because they are generally true of atonement as it is found throughout Scripture: (1) the sovereignty of God in atonement; (2) the purpose and result of making atonement; (3) the two goats emphasize two different things, and the burning another, about the removal of sin; (4) that Aaron had to make special sacrifice for himself; (5) the comprehensive quality of the act. </p> <p> Atonement is clearly the action of God and not of man throughout the Bible, but especially in &nbsp;Leviticus 16 . Aaron's two sons, [[Nadab]] and Abihu, had been recently put to death by the Lord for disobeying his command by offering "unauthorized fire" before the Lord (&nbsp;Leviticus 10:1-3 ). Here God gives Aaron precise instructions concerning how he wants the sacrifices to be made, down to the clothes Aaron is to wear, the bathing rituals in which he is to engage, and the types of sacrificial animals he is to bring. His sovereignty is further emphasized by the fact that the lot is used to choose which goat will be sacrificed and which goat will serve as the scapegoat. </p> <p> The purpose for the ritual is made very clear in several places. It is to cleanse you "from all your sins" (&nbsp;Leviticus 16:30 ). Other passages make it clear that such cleansing results in saving the life of the participant (cf., e.g., &nbsp;Leviticus 17:11 ). The restoring of pure relationship is an important result, too, since the atonement is for all "uncleanness and rebellion of the Israelites, whatever their sins have been" (&nbsp;Leviticus 16:16 ). Thus Israel is reunited in purity to its God by the atoning sacrifice for sins. </p> <p> The symbolic import of the sacrifices is so detailed that three different actions were necessary to display everything that God apparently intended us to understand about the way he was to deal with sin. The sacrificial death of the first goat showed clearly that the offense of sin requires the punishment of death (&nbsp;Ezekiel 18:4 ). The sending of the second goat into the wilderness with the sins laid on the top of its head emphasizes that sin will be removed from the person and the community "as far as the east is from the west" (&nbsp;Psalm 103:12 ). The burning of the sacrifice so that it is consumed shows the power of God over sin, completely destroying it so that it can bother the supplicant no more. </p> <p> [[Particularly]] important for the full biblical picture of atonement as it is found in Christ is the sacrifice Aaron makes for himself and his family (&nbsp;Leviticus 16:11-14 ). Everyone, even the high priest, is guilty and needs atonement that can only be provided by God himself. The author of Hebrews emphasizes this point to make clear his doctrine of the purity of Christ as both the true and perfect sacrifice and the true and perfect priest who performs the ritual of atonement (8:3-6; 9:6-15). The Old Testament sacrifices are shown to be but shadows of the real sacrifice of Christ on the cross by the fact of Aaron's sinfulness; an imperfect high priest cannot offer a true sacrifice, just as the blood of bulls and goats could never truly pay for the offense of human sin or substitute for the shedding of human blood. </p> <p> Lastly, atonement covers all the sins—intentional, unintentional, heinous, trivialof those for whom it is intended. No one was to enter the Tent of [[Meeting]] until the ritual was over because what was taking place there was for the whole of the community of Israel (&nbsp;Leviticus 16:17 ), presumably because any interference with the sovereign action of God's cleansing might bring an impurity into the equation that would nullify the purificatory act. The comprehensive nature of the sacrifice of atonement prefigures the comprehensiveness of the shedding of Christ's blood on the cross, but it limits its effects in the same way the Old Testament limits the effects of its sacrifice on the day of atonementto the people whom God has elected to call his own and them alone. </p> <p> <i> The New Testament </i> The so-called ransom saying, found in the [[Gospel]] of Mark (10:45; cf. the parallel saying at &nbsp; Matthew 20:28 ), has been much disputed as to its authenticity, but its theological content is clear. [[Speaking]] in the context of the apostles' dispute over which of them is the greatest, Jesus relates his mission to two things: serving all and giving his life as a ransom for many. Like many of the teachings of Jesus, the saying dramatically extends the answer to an immediate question or problem (that of the selfishness and pride of the apostles) to include something that no one would have linked to that problem (the ransom nature of the cross). The saying of course primarily relates the death of Christ to the metaphor of service; giving his life is the greatest example of servanthood that can be imagined. The fact that his death is also a ransom links the idea of atonement to the servant spirit of the Christ, probably in the light of the famous servant song of &nbsp;Isaiah 53 . </p> <p> The second Gospel passage relating to atonement appears in the eucharistic words of Jesus recorded in all three Gospels (&nbsp;Matthew 26:26-29; = &nbsp;Mark 14:22-25; = &nbsp;Luke 22:15-20 ). At &nbsp;Luke 22:19-20 , Jesus asserts that both the bread and the wine symbolize the fact that his death would be "for you" ( <i> huper humon </i> [ &nbsp; Matthew 26:28 ). </p> <p> To discuss Paul on atonement is, again, to make a choice between a thorough discussion of Paul's soteriology and limiting oneself to a discussion of the meaning of <i> hilasterion </i> [Ἱλαστήριον] in &nbsp;Romans 3:25 . Space does not even allow for a full evaluation of the latter in this article. The preponderance of the evidence weighs in favor of a translation that recognizes the background of &nbsp;Leviticus 16 in the crucial passage. Some now argue that Paul intends a quite specific reference to the mercy seat of the [[Ark]] of the Covenant and that <i> hilasterion </i> [Ἱλαστήριον] should be translated "mercy seat." </p> <p> In any case the passage occurs in a clear context of God's righteous, wrathful judgment against the sins of humankind (&nbsp;Romans 1:18-3:31; cf. esp. 1:18; 2:5) and declares God's merciful action of atonement on behalf of his people. He takes an action that is rightly called "substitutionary, " putting his Son in our place and so remaining just but also demonstrating his mercy (3:25-26). This shuts out any possibility for humankind to boast of its having saved itself (3:27). Thus the themes of sovereignty, mercy, and comprehensiveness that we saw present in &nbsp;Leviticus 16 are paramount in the mind of Paul too. </p> <p> The same applies to the rest of the references to <i> hilasterion </i> and its cognates ( <i> hilaskomai </i> [ &nbsp; Hebrews 2:10-17 ). Similarly, in &nbsp;1 John 2:2 Jesus' sacrifice of atonement ( <i> hilasmos </i> [ &nbsp; 1 John 2:1 ) who can accomplish this. God's sovereignty and love in atonement are clearly seen in &nbsp;1 John 4:10 and cap the New Testament teaching on this essential doctrine: our love for God is not the issue, but rather his for us and it is this love that has both motivated and produced the sacrifice of atonement ( <i> hilasmos </i> [ &nbsp; 1 John 4:10 ). </p> <p> Andrew H. Trotter, Jr. </p> <p> <i> See also </i> [[Crucifixion Cross]]; [[Death Of Christ]] </p> <p> <i> Bibliography </i> . C. Brown, H.-G. Link, and H. Vorlä der, <i> NIDNTT, </i> 3:145-76; W. Elwell, <i> EDT, </i> pp. 98-100; J. B. Green, <i> DPL, </i> pp. 201-9; idem, <i> EDT, </i> pp. 146-63; J. M. Gundry-Volf, <i> DPL, </i> pp. 279-84; M. Hengel, <i> The Atonement: The Origins of Doctrine in the New Testament </i> ; A. McGrath, <i> DPL, </i> pp. 192-97; L. Morris, <i> The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross </i> ; idem, <i> EDT, </i> pp. 97,100-102; S. Page, <i> EDT, </i> pp. 660-62; V. Taylor, <i> The Atonement in New Testament Teaching </i> ; R. Wallace, <i> The Atoning Death of Christ </i> ; H.-R. Weber, <i> The Cross: Tradition and [[Interpretation]] </i> . </p>

<p> the satisfaction offered to divine justice by the death of Christ for the sins of mankind, by virtue of which all true penitents who believe in Christ are personally reconciled to God, are freed from the penalty of their sins, and entitled to eternal life. The atonement for sin made by the death of Christ, is represented in the Christian system as the means by which mankind may be delivered from the awful catastrophe of eternal death; from judicial inflictions of the displeasure of a Governor, whose authority has been contemned, and whose will has been resisted, which shall know no mitigation in their degree, nor bound to their duration. </p> <p> This end it professes to accomplish by means which, with respect to the [[Supreme]] [[Governor]] himself, preserve his character from mistake, and maintain the authority of his government; and with respect to man, give him the strongest possible reason for hope, and render more favourable the condition of his earthly probation. These are considerations which so manifestly show, from its own internal constitution, the superlative importance and excellence of Christianity, that it would be exceedingly criminal to overlook them. </p> <p> How sin may be forgiven without leading to such misconceptions of the divine character as would encourage disobedience, and thereby weaken the influence of the divine government, must be considered as a problem of very difficult solution. A government which admitted no forgiveness, would sink the guilty to despair; a government which never punishes offence, is a contradiction,—it cannot exist. Not to punish the guilty, is to dissolve authority; to punish without mercy, is to destroy, and where all are guilty, to make the destruction universal. That we cannot sin with impunity, is a matter determined. The Ruler of the world is not careless of the conduct of his creatures; for that penal consequences are attached to the offence, is not a subject of argument, but is matter of fact evident by daily observation of the events and circumstances of the present life. It is a principle therefore already laid down, that the authority of God must be preserved; but it ought to be remarked, that in that kind of administration which restrains evil by penalty, and encourages obedience by favour and hope, we and all moral creatures are the interested parties, and not the divine Governor himself, whom, because of his independent and all- sufficient nature, our transgressions cannot injure. The reasons, therefore, which compel him to maintain his authority do not terminate in himself. If he treats offenders with severity, it is for our sake, and for the sake of the moral order of the universe, to which sin, if encouraged by a negligent administration, or by an entire or frequent impunity, would be the source of endless disorder and misery; and if the granting of pardon to offence be strongly and even severely guarded, so that no less a satisfaction could be accepted than the death of God's own Son, we are to refer this to the moral necessity of the case as arising out of the general welfare of accountable creatures, liable to the deep evil of sin, and not to any reluctance on the part of our Maker to forgive, much less to any thing vindictive in his nature,—charges which have been most inconsiderately and unfairly said to be implied in the doctrine of Christ's vicarious sufferings. If it then be true, that the release of offending man from future punishment, and his restoration to the divine favour, ought, for the interests of mankind themselves, and for the instruction and caution of other beings, to be so bestowed, that no license shall be given to offence;— </p> <p> that God himself, whilst he manifests his compassion, should not appear less just, less holy, than he really is;—that his authority should be felt to be as compelling, and that disobedience should as truly, though not unconditionally, subject us to the deserved penalty, as though no hope of forgiveness had been exhibited;—we ask, On what scheme, save that which is developed in the New Testament, are these necessary conditions provided for? [[Necessary]] they are, unless we contend for a license and an impunity which shall annul all good government in the universe, a point for which no reasonable man will contend; and if so, then we must allow that there is strong internal evidence of the truth of the doctrine of Scripture, when it makes the offer of pardon consequent only upon the securities we have before mentioned. If it be said, that sin may be pardoned in the exercise of the divine prerogative, the reply is, that if this prerogative were exercised toward a part of mankind only, the passing by of the rest would be with difficulty reconciled to the divine character; and if the benefit were extended to all, government would be at an end. This scheme of bringing men within the exercise of a merciful prerogative, does not therefore meet the obvious difficulty of the case; nor is it improved by confining the act of grace only to repentant criminals. For in the immediate view of danger, what offender, surrounded with the wreck of former enjoyments, feeling the vanity of guilty pleasures, now past for ever, and beholding the approach of the delayed penal visitation, but would repent? Were the principle of granting pardon to repentance to regulate human governments, every criminal would escape, and judicial forms would become a subject for ridicule. Nor is it recognised by the divine Being in his conduct to men in the present state, although in this world punishments are not final and absolute. [[Repentance]] does not restore health injured by intemperance; property, wasted by profusion; or character, once stained by dishonourable practices. If repentance alone could secure pardon, then all must be pardoned, and government dissolved, as in the case of forgiveness by the exercise of mere prerogative; but if an arbitrary selection be made, then different and discordant principles of government are introduced into the divine administration, which is a derogatory supposition. </p> <p> The question proposed abstractedly, How may mercy be extended to offending creatures, the subjects of the divine government, without encouraging vice, by lowering the righteous and holy character of God, and the authority of his government, in the maintenance of which the whole universe of beings are interested? is, therefore, at once one of the most important and one of the most difficult that can employ the human mind. None of the theories which have been opposed, to [[Christianity]] affords a satisfactory solution of the problem. They assume principles either destructive of moral government, or which cannot, in the circumstances of man, be acted upon. The only answer is found in the Holy Scriptures. They alone show, and, indeed, they alone profess to show, how God may be "just," and yet the "justifier" of the ungodly. Other schemes show how he may be merciful; but the difficulty does not lie there. The Gospel meets it, by declaring "the righteousness of God," at the same time that it proclaims his mercy. The voluntary sufferings of the Divine Son of God "for us," that is, in our room and stead, magnify the justice of God; display his hatred to sin; proclaim "the exceeding sinfulness" of transgression, by the deep and painful manner in which they were inflicted upon the Substitute; warn the persevering offender of the terribleness, as well as the certainty, of his punishment; and open the gates of salvation to every penitent. It is a part of the same divine plan also to engage the influence of the Holy Spirit, to awaken penitence in man, and to lead the wanderer back to himself; to renew our fallen nature in righteousness, at the moment we are justified through faith, and to place us in circumstances in which we may henceforth "walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." All the ends of government are here answered—no license is given to offence,—the moral law is unrepealed,—a day of judgment is still appointed,—future and eternal punishments still display their awful sanctions,—a new and singular display of the awful purity of the divine character is afforded,—yet pardon is offered to all who seek it; and the whole world may be saved. </p> <p> With such evidence of suitableness to the case of mankind, under such lofty views of connection with the principles and ends of moral government, does the doctrine of the atonement present itself. But other important considerations are not wanting to mark the united wisdom and goodness of that method of extending mercy to the guilty which Christianity teaches us to have been actually and exclusively adopted. It is rendered, indeed, "worthy of all acceptation," by the circumstance of its meeting the difficulties we have just dwelt upon,—difficulties which could not otherwise have failed to make a gloomy impression upon every offender awakened to a sense of his spiritual danger; but it must be very inattentively considered, if it does not farther commend itself to us, by not only removing the apprehensions we might feel as to the severity of the divine Lawgiver, but as exalting him in our esteem as "the righteous Lord, who loveth righteousness," who surrendered his beloved Son to suffering and death, that the influence of moral goodness might not be weakened in the hearts of his creatures; and as a God of love, affording in this instance a view of the tenderness and benignity of his nature infinitely more impressive and affecting than any abstract description could convey, or than any act of creating and providential power and grace could exhibit, and, therefore, most suitable to subdue that enmity which had unnaturally grown up in the hearts of his creatures, and which, when corrupt, they so easily transfer from a law which restrains their inclination to the [[Lawgiver]] himself. If it be important to us to know the extent and reality of our danger, by the death of Christ it is displayed, not in description, but in the most impressive action; if it be important that we should have an assurance of the divine placability toward us, it here receives a demonstration incapable of being heightened; if gratitude be the most powerful motive of future obedience, and one which renders command on the one part, and active service on the other, "not grievous but joyous," the recollection of such obligations as those which the "love of Christ" has laid us under, is a perpetual spring to this energetic affection, and will be the means of raising it to higher and more delightful activity for ever. All that can most powerfully illustrate the united tenderness and awful majesty of God, and the odiousness of sin; all that can win back the heart of man to his Maker and Lord, and render future obedience a matter of affection and delight as well as duty; all that can extinguish the angry and malignant passions of man to man; all that can inspire a mutual benevolence, and dispose to a self-denying charity for the benefit of others; all that can arouse by hope, or tranquillize by faith; is to be found in the vicarious death of Christ, and the principles and purposes for which it was endured. </p> <p> The first declaration, on this subject, after the appearance of Christ, is that of John the Baptist, when he saw Jesus coming unto him, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world;" where it is obvious, that when John called our Lord, "the Lamb of God," he spoke of him under a sacrificial character, and of the effect of that sacrifice as an atonement for the sins of mankind. This was said of our Lord, even before he entered on his public office; but if any doubt should exist respecting the meaning of the Baptist's expression, it is removed by other passages, in which a similar allusion is adopted, and in which it is specifically applied to the death of Christ, as an atonement for sin. In the Acts of the Apostles, the following words of Isaiah are, by [[Philip]] the evangelist, distinctly applied to Christ, and to his death: "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth. in his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth." This particular part of the prophecy being applied to our Lord's death, the whole must relate to the same subject; for it is undoubtedly one entire prophecy, and the other expressions in it are still stronger: "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: the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." In the First Epistle of Peter, is also a strong and very apposite text, in which the application of the term "lamb" to our Lord, and the sense in which it is applied, can admit of no doubt: "Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot," &nbsp;1 Peter 1:18-19 . It is therefore evident that the [[Prophet]] Isaiah, six hundred years before the birth of Jesus; that John the Baptist, on the commencement of his ministry; and that St. Peter, his friend, companion, and Apostle, subsequent to the transaction; speak of Christ's death as an atonement for sin, under the figure of a lamb sacrificed. </p> <p> The passages that follow, plainly and distinctly declare the atoning efficacy of Christ's death: "Now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." "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." &nbsp;Hebrews 9:26; &nbsp;Hebrews 9:28 . "This man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sin, for ever sat down on the right hand of God; for by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified," &nbsp;Hebrews 10:12 . It is observable, that nothing similar is said of the death of any other person, and that no such efficacy is imputed to any other martyrdom. "While we were yet sinners Christ died for us; much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him: for if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life," &nbsp;Romans 5:8-10 . The words, "reconciled to God by the death of his Son," show that his death had an efficacy in our reconciliation; but reconciliation is only preparatory to salvation. "He has reconciled us to his Father in his cross, and in the body of his flesh through death," </p> <p> &nbsp;Colossians 1:20; &nbsp;Colossians 1:22 . What is said of reconciliation in these texts, is in some others spoken of sanctification which is also preparatory to salvation. "We are sanctified,"—how? "by the offering of the body of Christ once for all," &nbsp;Hebrews 10:10 . In the same epistle, the blood of Jesus is called "the blood of the covenant by which we are sanctified." In these and many other passages that occur in different parts of the New Testament, it is therefore asserted that the death of Christ had an efficacy in the procuring of human salvation. Such expressions are used concerning no other person, and the death of no other person; and it is therefore evident that Christ's death included something more than a confirmation of his preaching; something more than a pattern of a holy and patient martyrdom; something more than a necessary antecedent to his resurrection, by which he gave a grand and clear proof of our resurrection from the dead. Christ's death was all these, but it was something more. It was an atonement for the sins of mankind; and in this way only it became the accomplishment of our eternal redemption. See DAY OF EXPIATION . </p>

<p> Old Testament Primarily in the Old Testament, atonement refers to the process God established whereby humans could make an offering to God to restore fellowship with God. Such offerings, including both live and dead animals, incense, and money, were required to remove the bad effects of human sin. </p> <p> The only fast day stipulated in the [[Mosaic]] law was the annual day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), observed on the tenth day of Tishri (September-October) at the conclusion of ten days of penitence. The day of Atonement was the only day of the year that the priest entered the holy of holies to make sin offerings for himself, his family, and the “assembly of Israel.” After making these offerings, the nation's sins were symbolically laid on the scapegoat “Azazel” that was released into the wilderness to die. </p> <p> While atonement in the Old Testament most frequently refers to humans offering sacrifices to God for their wrongdoing, several references are made to God making atonement. In &nbsp;Psalm 78:38 , the Hebrew for “atoned for” is used where the KJV translates “forgave” as is also true in &nbsp;Deuteronomy 21:8 . Because God “atones for” or “covers” human sin, atonement is best understood as expiation, that is removing the barrier that sin creates rather than propitiation or appeasing an angry God, though both views of atonement continue to be taught by [[Bible]] students. </p> <p> New Testament The New Testament rarely uses a word for atonement. The basic Greek word is <i> katallasso </i> , usually translated “to reconcile,” and the corresponding noun, <i> katallage </i> , meaning “reconciliation.” The basic meaning is to establish friendship. This is used in human relationships in &nbsp;1 Corinthians 7:11 , referring to the restoration of relationship between an estranged husband and wife. Paul used the term in reference to Christ's work of salvation in &nbsp;Romans 5:10-11; &nbsp;Romans 11:15; &nbsp;2 Corinthians 5:18-20 . The Greek term <i> hilaskomai </i> , “to forgive” or “show mercy” along with the nouns <i> hilasmos </i> , “means of forgiveness,” and <i> hilasterion </i> , “means or place of forgiveness” are the important words in the discussion of expiation and propitiation. They occur in &nbsp;Luke 18:13; &nbsp;Romans 3:25; &nbsp;Hebrews 2:17; &nbsp;Hebrews 9:5; &nbsp;1 John 2:2; &nbsp;1 John 4:10 . </p> <p> Atonement and the Cross The focal point of God's atoning work is Christ's death on the cross. Paul wrote that “when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son” (&nbsp;Romans 5:10 ). These words not only define the meaning of atonement, they reveal the heart of the gospel as well. </p> <p> The primacy of the cross is emphasized throughout the New Testament. At the beginning of His ministry, Jesus was identified as “the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world” (&nbsp;John 1:29 ). The purpose of His coming was “to give his life a ransom for many” (&nbsp;Mark 10:45 ). He explained His death in terms of the “blood of the new testament, which is shed for many” (&nbsp;Mark 14:24 ). </p> <p> The relation of the cross to forgiveness of sins was implicit in the earliest Christian preaching (&nbsp;Acts 2:21; &nbsp;Acts 3:6 ,Acts 3:6,&nbsp;3:19; &nbsp;Acts 4:13; &nbsp;Acts 5:31; &nbsp;Acts 8:35; &nbsp;Acts 10:43 ). Paul proclaimed that “Christ died for our sins”(&nbsp;1 Corinthians 15:3 ), that He was a “propitiation” (&nbsp;Romans 3:25 KJV; “sacrifice of atonement,” NRSV, NIV; “expiation,” RSV), that He became “a curse for us” (&nbsp; Galatians 3:13 ), and that those “who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ” (&nbsp;Ephesians 2:13 ). Furthermore, “Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many” (&nbsp;Hebrews 9:28 ) and has become “a new and living way” (&nbsp;Hebrews 10:20 ) into God's presence. He is the one who “bare our sins in his own body on the tree” (&nbsp;1 Peter 2:24 ). </p> <p> Though atonement is focused in the cross, the New Testament makes clear that Christ's death is the climax of His perfect obedience. He “became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross” (&nbsp;Philippians 2:8 ). “Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which He suffered” (&nbsp;Hebrews 5:8 ). &nbsp;Romans 5:12-19 contrasts Christ's obedience with Adam's disobedience. His sinless obedience qualified Him to be the perfect Sacrifice for sin (&nbsp; Hebrews 6:8-10 ). </p> <p> Furthermore, the New Testament interprets the cross in light of the resurrection. “At-one-ment” is the achievement of Christ crucified and risen. So important is this emphasis that Paul affirms, “And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins” (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 15:17 ). </p> <p> The [[Necessity]] of Atonement The necessity for Christ's atoning work is occasioned by the breach in the relationship between the [[Creator]] and the creature. This breach is the result of humanity's sinful rebellion. “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear” (&nbsp;Isaiah 59:2 ). Thus, in their unreconciled state people are God's “enemies” (&nbsp;Romans 5:10 ), have “enmity against God” (&nbsp;Romans 8:7 ), and have “no hope” (&nbsp;Ephesians 2:12 ). There is no difference between Jew and [[Gentile]] in this respect, “for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (&nbsp;Romans 3:23 ). </p> <p> The Origin of Atonement The atonement for sin provided by Christ's death had its origin in divine love. No other reason can explain why “God reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ” (&nbsp;2 Corinthians 5:18 ). The anthem that continuously peals from the Bible is that “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son” (&nbsp;John 3:16; see &nbsp;1 John 4:9-10 ). This does not mean that God loves us because Christ died for us. Rather, Christ died for us because God loves us. Thus, “God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (&nbsp;Romans 5:8 ). Because atonement issues from love, it is always seen as a divine gift, never as human achievement. </p> <p> Yet, divine love is not sentimental or merely emotional. It is a righteous love which blazes out against all that opposes God's will. The New Testament affirms that “God is love” (&nbsp;1 John 4:8 ); it also affirms that “our God is a consuming fire” (&nbsp;Hebrews 12:29 ). Thus, the cross is simultaneously a manifestation of God's will to save and of His wrath against sin. </p> <p> Atonement: [[Representation]] and [[Substitution]] In His atoning work Christ is both representative and substitute. As representative, Christ acted on behalf of His race. An example of representation is Paul's contrast between [[Adam]] and Christ (&nbsp;Romans 5:12-21; &nbsp;1 Corinthians 15:45-49 ). Adam and Christ represent two heads of two races of people. Adam is the head of the race of fallen persons. Sin and death came into the world through him. Because of our fallenness, all people belong to Adam's race, the old humanity. </p> <p> Christ, the last Adam, represents a new race of people. These are the people who have been saved from sin. Where Adam failed, Christ succeeded. Those who belong to Christ through faith belong to the new humanity He created (&nbsp;2 Corinthians 5:17; &nbsp;Ephesians 2:14-22 ). </p> <p> As substitute, Christ acted <i> in our place </i> . [[Whereas]] representation emphasizes Christ's relation to the race, substitution stresses His relation to the individual. He experienced as substitute the suffering and death each person deserved. Substitution is implied in such references as &nbsp;2 Corinthians 5:21; &nbsp;Galatians 3:13; &nbsp;1 Peter 2:24 . </p> <p> In thinking of Christ as substitute, however, His oneness with the Father must be emphasized. Christ is not a third party who comes between God and humanity to absorb all the punishment God can inflict. Substitution means that in Christ, God Himself bears the consequences of human sin. God reconciles people at great cost to Himself, not at cost to a third party. </p> <p> [[Images]] of Atonement To describe the meaning of atonement New Testament writers used images drawn from different areas of experience. Each image says something important about the cross. No one image, however, is adequate by itself. Each image needs the others to produce the whole picture. </p> <p> 1. Atonement and ransom. Ransom is an image drawn from ancient economic life. The picture is a slave market or prison. People are in bondage and cannot free themselves. Someone comes and pays the price (provides the ransom) to redeem those in captivity. </p> <p> The New Testament emphasizes both the fact of deliverance and the ransom price. Jesus said that He came “to give his life a ransom for many” (&nbsp;Mark 10:45 ). Paul wrote, “ye are not your own; For ye are bought with a price” (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 6:19-20; compare &nbsp;1 Corinthians 7:23 ). Peter declared that “ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, But with the precious blood of Christ” (&nbsp;1 Peter 1:18-19 ). The main idea in this imagery is rescue from bondage through the costly self-giving of Jesus. </p> <p> 2. Atonement and victory. In this imagery, Satan, the head of evil forces and archenemy of God, has humanity in his power. Christ is the [[Warrior]] of God who enters the battle, defeats the devil, and rescues humanity. </p> <p> This conflict motif pervades the gospels (&nbsp;Matthew 4:1-11; &nbsp;Matthew 12:28; &nbsp;Mark 3:27; &nbsp;John 12:31 ). The warfare between Jesus and Satan was real. Yet, divine victory was so certain that Jesus could say in anticipation, “I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven” (&nbsp;Luke 10:18 ). </p> <p> [[Victory]] imagery is also prominent in the epistles. “For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil” (&nbsp;1 John 3:8 ). Christ came so “that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (&nbsp;Hebrews 2:14-15 ). That Christ triumphed is clear: “And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it” (&nbsp;Colossians 2:15 ). </p> <p> 3. Atonement and sacrifice. Not surprisingly, the atoning power of Christ's death is often expressed in terms drawn from Old Testament sacrificial practices. Thus, Christ's death is called a “sacrifice for sins” (&nbsp;Hebrews 10:12 ) and a “sacrifice to God” (&nbsp;Ephesians 5:2 ). Christ is variously identified with the [[Passover]] lamb (&nbsp;1 Corinthians 5:7 ), the sacrifice which initiates the new covenant (&nbsp;Luke 22:20 ), and the sin offering (&nbsp;Hebrews 9:14 ,Hebrews 9:14,&nbsp;9:25-28 ). </p> <p> Sacrificial imagery is another way of expressing the costliness of Christ's atoning work. It is a continual reminder that divine love has assumed the shape of the cross (&nbsp;Galatians 2:20 ). Furthermore, sacrifice witnesses to the effectiveness of Christ's death. Through it, sin is forgiven (&nbsp;Ephesians 1:7 ), and the conscience is cleansed (&nbsp;Hebrews 9:14 ). </p> <p> 4. Atonement and glory. In much of the New Testament the glorification of Jesus is associated with His resurrection and ascension. John's Gospel shifts perspective. The whole life and work of Jesus is a revelation of divine glory. This glorification climaxes in Jesus' death on the cross (&nbsp;John 12:23-24; &nbsp;John 13:31-32 ). </p> <p> Consistent with this theme is the emphasis on the cross as “lifting up.” This verb has the double meaning of “to lift up on a cross” and “to exalt.” The meanings are combined in John's Gospel. “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.' This he said, signifying what death he should die.” (&nbsp;John 12:32-33; compare &nbsp;John 3:14; &nbsp;John 8:28 ). The meaning is not that Jesus was glorified as a reward for His death. Rather it means that divine glory was revealed in the death He died for sins. See [[Propitiation]]; Expiation; Redeem; and the Atonement chart that follows. </p> <p> Bert Dominy </p>

<p> (See RECONCILIATION.) Literally, the being at one, after having been at variance. Tyndale explains "One Mediator" (&nbsp;1 Timothy 2:5): "at one maker between God and man." To made atonement is to give or do that whereby alienation ceases and reconciliation ensues. "Reconciliation" is the equivalent term given for the same Hebrew word, kopher , in &nbsp;Daniel 9:24; &nbsp;Leviticus 8:15; &nbsp;Ezekiel 45:15. In the New Testament KJV once only "atonement" is used (&nbsp;Romans 5:11): "by whom (Christ) we have received the atonement" (katallage ), where the reconciliation or atonement must be on God's part toward us, for it could not well be said, "We have received the reconciliation on our part toward Him." </p> <p> [[Elsewhere]] the same Greek is translated "reconciliation" (&nbsp;2 Corinthians 5:18-19). A kindred term expressing a different aspect of the same truth is "propitiation" (hilasmos ) (&nbsp;1 John 2:2), the verb of which is in &nbsp;Hebrews 2:17 translated "to make reconciliation." Also "ransom," or payment for redeeming a captive (&nbsp;Job 33:24), kopher , "an atonement," &nbsp;Matthew 20:28. &nbsp;Hebrews 9:12; Christ, "having obtained eternal redemption for us" (lutrosis , the deliverance bought for us by His bloodshedding, the price: &nbsp;1 Peter 1:18). </p> <p> The verb kipper 'al , "to cover upon," expresses the removing utterly out of sight the guilt of person or thing by a ransom, satisfaction, or substituted victim. The use of the word and the noun kopher , throughout the Old Testament, proves that, as applied to the atonement or reconciliation between God and man, it implies not merely what is man's part in finding acceptance with God, but, in the first instance, what God's justice required on His part, and what His love provided, to justify His entering into reconciliation with man. In &nbsp;Leviticus 1:4; &nbsp;Leviticus 4:26; &nbsp;Leviticus 5:1; &nbsp;Leviticus 5:16-18; &nbsp;Leviticus 5:16; &nbsp;Leviticus 17:11, the truth is established that the guilt is transferred from the sinful upon the innocent substitute, in order to make amends to violated justice, and to cover (atone: kipper' al ) or put out of sight the guilt (compare &nbsp;Micah 7:19 end), and to save the sinner from the wages of sin which is death. </p> <p> On the great day of atonement the high priest made "atonement for the sanctuary, the tabernacle, and the altar" also, as well as for the priests and all the people; but it was the people's sin that defiled the places so as to make them unfit for the presence of the Holy One. Unless the atonement was made the soul "bore its iniquity," i.e. was under the penalty of death. The exceptions of atonement made with fine flour by one not able to afford the animal sacrifice (&nbsp;Leviticus 5:11), and by Aaron with incense on a sudden emergency (&nbsp;Numbers 16:47), confirm the rule. The blood was the medium of atonement, because it had the life or soul (nephesh ) in it. The soul of the offered victim atoned for the soul of the sinful offerer. </p> <p> The guiltless blood was given by God to be shed to atone for the forfeited blood of the guilty. The innocent victim pays the penalty of the offerer's sin, death (&nbsp;Romans 6:28). This atonement was merely typical in the Old Testament sacrifices; real in the one only New Testament sacrifice, Christ Jesus. Κaphar and kopher is in &nbsp;Genesis 6:14, "Thou shalt pitch the ark with pitch," the instrument of covering the saved from the destroying flood outside, as Jesus' blood interposes between believers and the flood of wrath that swallows up the lost. [[Jacob]] uses the same verb (&nbsp;Genesis 32:20), "I will appease [[Esau]] with the present," i.e., cover out of sight or turn away his wrath. </p> <p> The "mercy-seat" whereat God meets man (being reconciled through the blood there sprinkled, and so man can meet God) is called kapporeth , i.e. flee lid of the ark, covering the law inside, which is fulfilled in Messiah who is called by the corresponding Greek term, hilasterion , "the propitiatory" or mercy-seat, "whom God hath set forth to be a propitiatory through faith in His blood" (&nbsp;Romans 3:23). God Himself made a coat (singular in Heb.) of skin, and clothed Adam and his wife (&nbsp;Genesis 3:21). The animal cannot have been slain for food, for animal food was not permitted to man until after the flood (&nbsp;Genesis 9:3); nor for clothing, for the fleece would afford that, without the needless killing of the animal. It must have been for sacrifice, the institution of which is presumed in the preference given to Abel's sacrifice, above Cain's offering of firstfruits, in Genesis 4. </p> <p> Typically; God taught that the clothing for the soul must, be from the Victim whom God's love provided to cover our guilt forever out of sight (Psalms 32:D (not kaphar , but kasah ) (&nbsp;Romans 4:17; &nbsp;Isaiah 61:10), the same Hebrew (labash ) as in &nbsp;Genesis 3:21, "clothed." The universal prevalence of propitiatory sacrifices over the pagan world implies a primitive revelation of the need of expiatory atonement, and of the inefficacy of repentance alone to remove guilt. This is the more remarkable in Hindostan, where it is considered criminal to take away the life of any animal. God's righteous character and government interposed a barrier to sinful man's pardon and reception into favor. The sinner's mere desire for these blessings does not remove the barrier out of the way. Something needed to be done for him, not by him. </p> <p> It was for God, against whom man sinned, to appoint the means for removing the barrier. The sinless Jesus' sacrifice for, and instead of, us sinners was the mean so appointed. The sinner has simply by faith to embrace the means. And as the means, the vicarious atonement by Christ, is of God, it must be efficacious for salvation. Not that Jesus' death induced God to love us; but because God loved us He gave Jesus to reconcile the claims of justice and mercy, "that God might be just and at the same time the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus" (&nbsp;Romans 3:26; &nbsp;2 Corinthians 5:18-21). Jesus is, it is true, not said in Scripture to reconcile God to the sinner, because the reconciliation in the first instance emanated from God Himself. God reconciled us to Himself, i.e. restored us to His favor, by satisfying the claims of justice against us. </p> <p> Christ's atonement makes a change, not in God's character as if God's love was produced by it, but in our position judicially considered in the eye of the divine law. Christ's sacrifice was the provision of God's love, not its moving cause (&nbsp;Romans 8:32). Christ's blood was the ransom paid at the expense of God Himself, to reconcile the exercise of mercy and justice, not as separate, but as the eternally harmonious attributes in the same God. God reconciles the world unto Himself, in the first instance, by satisfying His own just enmity against sin (&nbsp;Psalms 7:11; &nbsp;Isaiah 12:1, compare &nbsp;1 Samuel 29:4; "reconcile himself unto his master," not remove his own anger against his master, but his master's anger against him). Men's reconciliation to God by laying aside their enmity is the after consequence of their believing that He has laid aside His judicial enmity against their sin. </p> <p> Penal and vicarious satisfaction for our guilt to God's law by Christ's sacrificial death is taught &nbsp;Matthew 20:28; "the Son of man came to give His life a ransom for (anti) many" (anti implies vicarious satisfaction in &nbsp;Matthew 5:28; &nbsp;Mark 10:45). &nbsp;1 Timothy 2:6; "who gave Himself a ransom for (antilutron , an equivalent payment in substitution for) all." &nbsp;Ephesians 5:25; &nbsp;1 Peter 2:24; &nbsp;1 Peter 3:15; "the Just for the unjust ... suffered for us." &nbsp;John 1:29; "the Lamb of God taketh away the sin of the world." &nbsp;1 Corinthians 5:7; &nbsp;1 Peter 1:19; &nbsp;John 10:15; &nbsp;Romans 4:25; "He was delivered on account of (dia ) our offenses, and raised again for the sake of (dia ) our justification." (&nbsp;Revelation 1:5; &nbsp;Hebrews 9:13-14.) [[Conscience]] feels instinctively the penal claims of violated divine justice, and can only find peace when by faith it has realized that those claims have been fully met by our sacrificed substitute (&nbsp;Hebrews 9:9; &nbsp;Hebrews 10:1-2; &nbsp;Hebrews 10:22; &nbsp;1 Peter 3:21). </p> <p> The conscience reflects the law and will of God, though that law condemns the man. Opponents of the doctrine of vicarious atonement say, "it exhibits God as less willing to forgive than His creatures are bound to be;" but man's justice, which is the faint reflex of God's, binds the judge, however lamenting the painful duty, to sentence the criminal to death as a satisfaction to outraged law. Also, "as taking delight in executing vengeance on sin, or yielding to the extremity of suffering what He withheld on considerations of mercy." But the claim of God's righteousness is not pressed apart from that of God's love; both move in beautiful unity; the atonement is at once the brightest exhibition of His love and of His justice; it does not render God merciful, but opens a channel whereby love can flow in perfect harmony with His righteous law, yea "magnifying the law and making it honorable" (&nbsp;Isaiah 42:21). </p> <p> At the same time it is a true remark of Macdonell (Donellan Lectures): "Christ's work of redemption springs from an intimate relationship to those whom He redeems. It is not only because He suffers what they ought to have suffered that mercy becomes possible; but because He who suffered bore some mysterious relation to the spirits of those for whom He suffered; so that every pang He felt, and every act He did. vibrated to the extremities of that body of which He is the head, and placed not their acts, but the actors. themselves, in a new relation to the divine government and to the fountain of holiness and life." It is only as Representative Head of humanity, that the Son of man, the second Adam, made full and adequate satisfaction for the whole race whose nature He took. He died sufficiently for all men; efficiently for the elect alone (&nbsp;Hebrews 2:9-15; &nbsp;1 John 2:2; &nbsp;Acts 20:28; &nbsp;2 Peter 2:1; &nbsp;1 Timothy 4:10). </p> <p> [[Anything]] short of an adequate satisfaction would be so far an abatement; of divine justice; and if part of the sin might be forgiven without the satisfaction, why not all? If God can dispense with the claims of justice in part, He can as well do it altogether. A partial satisfaction would be almost more dishonoring to God's righteousness than a gratuitous forgiveness without any satisfaction whatever. With God alone it rested to determine what is adequate satisfaction, and how it is to become available to each man, without injury to the cause of righteousness. </p> <p> God has determined it, that in Christ's infinite dignity of person and holiness above that of any creature, there is ensured the adequateness of the satisfaction, made by His obedience and suffering, to meet the claims of justice against those whose nature He voluntarily assumed; nay more, to set forth God's glory more brightly than ever; also God has revealed that by believing the sinner becomes one with the Redeemer, and so rightly shares in the redemption wrought by Him the Head of the redeemed. No motive has ever been found so powerful as the sinner's realization of the atonement, to create love in the human heart, constraining the accepted believer henceforth to shun all sin and press after all holiness in order to please God, who first loved him (&nbsp;Romans 8:1-3; &nbsp;2 Corinthians 5:14-15; &nbsp;1 John 4:19). </p>

<p> The word 'atonement' occurs but once in the N.T. and there it should be 'reconciliation,' and the verb in the preceding sentence is so translated: "If when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life . . . . through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the reconciliation," καταλλαγή &nbsp;Romans 5:10,11 . On the other hand, in &nbsp;Hebrews 2:17 the A.V. has "to make reconciliation for the sins of the people:" here it is propitiation,' ἱλάσκομαι. If the word atonement is not found in the N.T., atonement in its true meaning is spoken of continually, as 'ransom;' 'bearing our sins in his own body on the tree;' 'Christ our passover is sacrificed for us;' 'Christ . . . . being made a curse for us;' 'He suffered for sins, the just for the unjust;' and, to use the language of faith, 'with his stripes we are healed;' 'He was delivered for our offences;' 'He was manifested to take away our sins.' </p> <p> In the O.T. we have the word 'atonement' continually, but 'propitiation' not at all; 'expiation' twice in the margin, &nbsp;Numbers 35:33; &nbsp;Isaiah 47:11 . But the same word, <i> kaphar, </i> though generally translated by 'make atonement,' is employed for 'purging' and occasionally for 'cleansing,' 'reconciling,' 'purifying.' The word <i> kaphar is </i> literally 'to cover,' with various prepositions with it; the ordinary one is 'up' or 'upon.' Hence in 'atoned for him ' or 'his sin:' he or his sin is covered up: atonement is made for him or for his sin. Atonement was made <i> upon </i> the horns of the altar: the force is 'atonement for.' With the altar of incense atonement was not made <i> upon </i> it, but <i> for </i> it; so <i> for </i> the holy place, and <i> for </i> or about Aaron and his house: the preposition is <i> al. </i> </p> <p> The same is used with the two goats. The sins were seen on the sinless goat, and expiation was made in respect of those sins. The <i> how </i> is not said here, but it is by the two goats making really one, because the object was to show that the sins were really laid upon it (that is, on Christ), and the sins carried away out of sight, and never to be found. If we can get our ideas, as taught of God as to the truth, into the train of Jewish thought, there is no difficulty in the <i> al. </i> In either case the difficulty arises from the fact that in English <i> for </i> presents the interested person to the mind; <i> on </i> is merely the place where it was done, as <i> on </i> an altar; whereas the <i> al </i> refers to the clearing away by the <i> kaphar </i> what was upon the thing <i> al </i> which the atoning rite was performed. [[Clearly]] the goat was not the person interested, nor was it merely done upon it as the place. It was that on which the sins lay, and they must be cleared and done away. The expiation referred to them as thus laid on the goat. As has been said, the <i> how </i> is not stated here, but the all-important fact defined that they were all carried away from Israel and from before God. The needed blood or life was presented to God in the other, which did really put them away; but did much more, and that aspect is attached to them there. This double aspect of the atoning work is of the deepest importance and interest, the presenting of the blood to God on the mercy seat, and the bearing away the sins. The word <i> kaphar, </i> to make atonement, occurs in &nbsp;Exodus 29,30,32; &nbsp;Leviticus 1,4-10,12,14-17,19,23; &nbsp;Numbers 5,6,8,15,16,25,28,29,31; &nbsp;2 Samuel 21:3; &nbsp;1 Chronicles 6:49; &nbsp;2 Chronicles 29:24; &nbsp;Nehemiah 10:33 . </p> <p> A short notice of some other Hebrew words may help. We have <i> nasa, </i> 'to liftup,' and so to forgive, to lift up the sins away in the mind of the person offended, or to show favour in lifting up the countenance of the favoured person. &nbsp;Psalm 4:6 . We have also <i> kasah, </i> 'to cover,' as in &nbsp;Psalm 32 : 1, where sin is 'covered': sometimes used with <i> al, </i> as in &nbsp;Proverbs 10:12 , "love covereth all sins," forgives: they are out of sight and mind. The person is looked at with love, and not the faults with offence. </p> <p> But in such words there is not the idea of expiation, the side of the offender is contemplated, and he is looked at in grace, whatever the cause: it may be needed atonement, or simply, as in Proverbs, gracious kindness. We have also <i> salach, </i> 'pardon or forgiveness.' Thus it is used as the effect of <i> kaphar, </i> as in &nbsp;Leviticus 4:20 . But <i> kaphar </i> has always a distinct and important idea connected with it. It views the sin as toward God, and is ransom, when not used literally for sums of money; and <i> kapporeth </i> is the mercy seat. And though it involves forgiveness, purging from sin, it has always God in view, not merely that the sinner is relieved or forgiven: there is expiation and propitiation in it. And this is involved in the idea of purging sin, or making the purging of sin (ἱλάσκεσθαι, ἐξιλάσκεσθαι, ἱλασμὸν ποιεῖν); itis in God's sight as that by which He is offended, and what He rejects and judges. </p> <p> There was a <i> piaculum, </i> 'an expiatory sacrifice,' something satisfying for the individual involved in guilt, or what was offensive to God, what He could not tolerate from His very nature. This with the heathen, who attached human passions or demon-revenge to their gods, was of course perverted to meet those ideas. They deprecated the vengeance of a probably angry and self-vengeful being. But God has a nature which is offended by sin. It is a holy, not of course a passionate, one; but the majesty of holiness must be maintained. Sin ought not to be treated with indifference, and God's love provides the ransom. It is God's Lamb who undertakes and accomplishes the work. The perfect love of God and His righteousness, the moral order of the universe and of our souls through faith, is maintained by the work of the cross. Through the perfect love not only of God, the giver, but of Him, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, propitiation is made, expiation for sin, itsaspect being toward God, while the effect applies to us in cleansing and justifying, though it goes much farther. </p> <p> [[Expiation]] is more the satisfaction itself which is made, the <i> piaculum, </i> what takes the wrath, and is devoted, made the curse, and so substituted for the offender, so that he goes free. And here the noun <i> kopher </i> comes to let light in on the inquiry. It is translated 'ransom, <i> satisfaction, </i> ' and in &nbsp;1 Samuel 12:3 a 'bribe.' So in &nbsp; Exodus 21:30 a <i> kopher </i> (translated 'sum of money') is laid upon a man to save his life where his ox had killed his neighbour; but in &nbsp;Numbers 35:31 no <i> kopher </i> was to be taken for the life of a murderer; for (ver. 33) the land cannot be cleansed, <i> kaphar, </i> but by the blood of the man that shed blood as a murderer. This clearly shows what the force of <i> kopher </i> and of <i> kaphar </i> is. A satisfaction is offered suited to the eye and mind of him who is displeased and who judges; and through this there is purgation of the offence, cleansing, forgiveness, and favour, according to him who takes cognisance of the evil. </p> <p> A word may be added as to the comparison made between the two birds, &nbsp;Leviticus 14:4-7 , and the two goats, &nbsp;Leviticus 16:7-10 . The object of the birds was the cleansing of the leper; it was application to the defiled man, not the <i> kopher, </i> ransom, presented to God. It could not have been done but on the ground of the blood-shedding and satisfaction, but the immediate action was the purifying: hence there was water as well as blood. One bird was slain over running water in an earthen vessel, and the live bird and other objects dipped in it, and the man was then sprinkled, and the living bird let loose far from death, though once identified with it, and was free. The Spirit, in the power of the word, makes the death of Christ available in the power of His resurrection. There was no laying sins on the bird let free, as on the goat: it was identified with the slain one, and then let go. The living water in the earthen vessel is doubtless the power of the Spirit and word in human nature, characterising the form of the truth, though death and the blood must come in, and all nature, its pomp and vanity, be merged in it. The leper is cleansed and then can worship. This is not the atonement itself towards God, though founded on it, as marked by the death of the bird. It is the cleansing of man in death to the flesh, but in the power of resurrection known in Christ who once died to sin. </p> <p> So also the Red Heifer, &nbsp;Numbers 19:1-22 , was not initself an act of atonement, but of purification. The ground was there laid in the slayingand burning of the heifer. Sin was, so to speak, consumed in it, and the blood was sprinkled seven times before the tabernacle of the congregation. When Christ died sin was, as it were, all consumed for His people by the fire of judgement, and all the value of the blood was before God where He communicated with the people. All that was settled, but man had defiled himself in his journey through the wilderness, and must be cleansed. The witness that sin had been put away long ago by Christ undergoing what was the fruit of sin was brought by the living power of the Holy Spirit and the word, and so he was purified. But the act of purifying is not in itself atonement; for atonement the offering is presented to God. It is a <i> kopher </i> a ransom, a satisfaction, to meet the infinite, absolute perfection of God's nature and character, which indeed is there alone brought out. [[Thereby]] atonement is made and the very Day of Atonement is called <i> kippurim. </i> The priest made an atonement in respect of the sins; and it had the double aspect of presenting the blood before God within as meeting what He was, and bearing His people's sins and carrying them away never to be found. We must make the difference of an un-rent veil and repeated sacrifices, and a rent veil and a sacrifice offered once for all. This is taught in the Epistle to the Hebrews. </p> <p> There is still one case to be noticed, but it was merely a principle confirming the real character of the <i> kaphar, </i> making atonement. In &nbsp;Exodus 30:11-16 it was ordered that when the people were numbered, each, rich or poor, should give half a shekel as a <i> kopher </i> ransom, for his soul or life. This had nothing to do with sin, but with ransom, that there might be no plague — a recognition that they belonged to God all alike, and could have no human boast in numbers, as David afterwards brought the plague on Israel. This was offered to God as a sign of this, and shows what the force of <i> kaphar, </i> making atonement, is. </p> <p> We have no atonement in connection with the meat offering: we get the perfectness of Christ's person, and all the elements that constituted it so as man, and there tested by the fire of God, which was even to death, the death of the cross, and all a perfect sweet savour, and perfect in presenting it to God a sweet savour, but no <i> kopher, </i> ransom: for that we must have blood-shedding. </p> <p> The essence then of atonement is, firstly, a work or satisfaction presented to God according to, and perfectly glorifying, His nature and character about sin by sacrifice; and secondly, the bearing our sins; glorifying God even where sin was and in respect of sin (and thus His love is free to go out to all sinners); and giving the believer, him that comes to God by that blood-shedding, the certainty that his sins are all gone, and that God will remember them no more. </p>

<p> '''Atonement.''' (literally, a setting at one.) Satisfaction or reparation made for an injury, by doing or suffering that which will be received in satisfaction for an offence or injury. Specifically, in the Bible: The expiation of sin made by the obedience, personal sufferings, and death of Christ. Human language is imperfect, and human conceptions are often defective, when applied to the Most High. He is not touched with anger, resentment, etc., in the gross sense in which we commonly use the terms. We have, therefore, to take care that we do not represent him as hard to be mollified, with a thirst of vengeance to be slaked by the suffering of a victim. Nowhere does Scripture assert that the Father had a purpose of burning wrath against the world, which was changed by the interposition of the Son, on whom it lighted, so that, satiated by his punishment, he spared mankind. The Scripture rather teaches that "God so loved the world, that he gave Ms only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life." &nbsp;John 3:16. "God is love." &nbsp;1 John 4:16. But God cannot "behold evil" with complacency. &nbsp;Habakkuk 1:13. It is consequently [[Impossible]] that he can pass over it. Hence he threatens to visit it with a penalty: "the soul that sinneth it shall die." &nbsp;Ezekiel 18:4. </p> <p> His infinite holiness and justice, and the intrinsic demerit of sin, require this. The proper idea of an atonement is that which brings the forgiveness of transgressors into harmony with all the perfections of the Godhead. One of these perfections must not be exalted to the depression of another: all must be equally and fully honored. Redemption, devised in the counsels of the eternal Three, was carried forward by the Son of God, who became man, that in the nature that had sinned he might make satisfaction for sin. He made this satisfaction by his obedience unto death, perfectly fulfilling the divine law, for he "did no sin;" and enduring the penalty of it, for "his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." &nbsp;1 Peter 2:22; &nbsp;1 Peter 2:24. In such a sacrifice, God's judgment against the evil and desert of sin was most illustriously displayed. As no other sacrifice of like value could be found, proof was given to the universe that sin was the most disastrous evil, and that its "punishment was not the arbitrary act of an inexorable judge, but the unavoidable result of perfect holiness and justice, even in a Being of infinite mercy." The objections urged against the doctrine of the atonement, as if a vicarious sacrifice for sin were irrational, or placed the character of the [[Deity]] in an unamiable light, are not, when sifted, found to be very cogent It must always be remembered that Christ's atonement was not to induce God to show mercy, but to make the exercise of his love to sinners consistent with the honor of his law and the pure glory of his name. Sin is therein especially branded; and God's wisdom, righteousness, holiness, faithfulness, and mercy, are most eminently displayed. And, whereas it is said that he must forgive freely without requiring satisfaction, because he commands his creatures freely to forgive, it is forgotten that the cases are not parallel. [[Private]] offences are to be forgiven freely. But a ruler must execute his just laws. And so God is a great King, and as a king he administers public justice and will not arbitrarily clear the guilty. [[Doubtless]] there is much in his purposes and plans which we are incapable of rightly estimating. Enough is revealed to show us that "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them." &nbsp;2 Corinthians 5:19. But we should recollect that. "as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are" his "ways higher than" our "ways and" his "thoughts than" our "thoughts." &nbsp;Isaiah 55:9. </p> <p> The day of expiation, or atonement, was a yearly solemnity, observed with rest and fasting on the tenth day of Tishri, five days before the [[Feast]] of Tabernacles. &nbsp;Leviticus 23:27; &nbsp;Leviticus 25:9; &nbsp;Numbers 29:7. This would now be in the early part of October. The ceremonies of this day are described in &nbsp;Leviticus 16:1-34. On this day alone the high priest entered the Most Holy Place. &nbsp;Hebrews 9:7. The various rites required him to enter several times on this day robed in white: first with a golden censer and a vessel filled with incense; then with the blood of the bullock, which he had offered for his own sins and those of all the priests. The third time he entered with the blood of the ram which he had offered for the sins of the nation. The fourth time he entered to bring out the censer and vessel of Incense; and having returned, he washed his hands and performed the other services of the day. The ceremony of the scapegoat also took place on this day. Two goats were set apart, one of which was sacrificed to the Lord, while the other, the goat for complete separation, was chosen by lot to be set at liberty. &nbsp;Leviticus 16:20-22. These solemn rites pointed to Christ. &nbsp;Hebrews 9:11-15. As this day of expiation was the great fast-day of the Jewish church, so godly Borrow for sin characterizes the Christian's looking unto the Lamb of God, and "the rapture of pardon" is mingled with "penitent tears." </p>

<p> Atonement may be defined as that act of dealing with sin whereby sin’s penalty is paid and sinners are brought into a right relation with God. In the Old Testament the word is used mainly in connection with the offering of sacrifices for sin. The word does not occur in most versions of the New Testament, but it is used broadly in the language of theology in relation to the sacrificial death of Christ. </p> <p> One result of universal human sin is that all people are under God’s judgment. They are guilty, the penalty is death, and they cannot, by their own efforts, escape this penalty. They are cut off from God and there is no way they can bring themselves back to God (&nbsp;Psalms 14:3; &nbsp;Isaiah 59:2; &nbsp;Romans 1:18; &nbsp;Romans 3:20; &nbsp;Romans 3:23; &nbsp;Romans 6:23; see SIN). God, however, gives them a way by which they may obtain forgiveness and be brought back to God. This is through the blood of a sacrifice, where blood is symbolic of the life of the innocent victim laid down as substitute for the guilty sinner (&nbsp;Leviticus 17:11; &nbsp;Hebrews 9:22; &nbsp;1 John 4:10; see BLOOD). </p> <p> Atonement is therefore not something that people can achieve by their own efforts, but something that God provides. Whether in Old or New Testament times, forgiveness is solely by God’s grace and sinners receive it by faith (&nbsp;Psalms 32:5; &nbsp;Psalms 51:17; &nbsp;Micah 7:18; &nbsp;Ephesians 2:8). The Old Testament sacrifices were not a way of salvation. They were a means by which repentant sinners could demonstrate their faith in God and at the same time see what their atonement involved. The sacrifices showed them how it was possible for God to act rightly in punishing sin while forgiving repentant sinners. (See JUSTIFICATION; PROPITIATION; RECONCILIATION; REDEMPTION; SACRIFICE; SANCTIFICATION.) </p> <p> The sacrifices of the Old Testament pointed to the one great sacrifice that is the only basis on which God can forgive a person’s sins, the death of Christ. Through that death God is able justly to forgive the sins of all who turn to him in faith, no matter what era they might have lived in (&nbsp;Matthew 26:28; &nbsp;Romans 3:25-26; &nbsp;Romans 4:25; &nbsp;Hebrews 9:15; &nbsp;1 Peter 2:24). (See also DAY OF ATONEMENT.) </p>

<div> '''1: καταλλαγή ''' (Strong'S #2643 — Noun [[Feminine]] — katallage — kat-al-lag-ay' ) </div> <p> translated "atonement" in the AV of &nbsp;Romans 5:11 , signifies, not "atonement," but "reconciliation," as in the RV. See also &nbsp;Romans 11:15; &nbsp;2 Corinthians 5:18,19 . So with the corresponding verb katallasso, see under Reconcile. "Atonement" (the explanation of this English word as being "at-one-ment" is entirely fanciful) is frequently found in the OT. See, for instance, Leviticus, chapters 16 and 17. The corresponding NT words are hilasmos, "propitiation," &nbsp; 1 John 2:2; &nbsp;4:10 , and hilasterion, &nbsp;Romans 3:25; &nbsp;Hebrews 9:5 , "mercy-seat," the covering of the ark of the covenant. These describe the means (in and through the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ, in His death on the cross by the shedding of His blood in His vicarious sacrifice for sin) by which God shows mercy to sinners. See Propitiation. </p>

<p> ATO'NEMENT, n. </p> 1. [[Agreement]] concord reconciliation, after enmity or controversy. &nbsp;Romans 5 . <p> Between the [[Duke]] of Glo'ster and your brothers. </p> 2. Expiation satisfaction or reparation made by giving an equivalent for an injury, or by doing or suffering that which is received in satisfaction for an offense or injury with for. <p> And Moses said to Aaron, go to the altar, and offer thy sin-offering, and thy burnt-offering, and make an atonement for thyself and for the people. &nbsp;Leviticus 9 . </p> <p> When a man has been guilty of any vice, the best atonement he can make for it is, to warn others not to fall into the like. </p> <p> The Phocians behaved with so much gallantry, that they were thought to have made a sufficient atonement for their former offense. </p> 3. In theology, the expiation of sin made by the obedience and personal sufferings of Christ.

<p> The satisfaction offered to divine justice for the sins of mankind by the death of Jesus Christ; by virtue of which all true penitents believing in Christ are reconciled to God, are freed from the penalty of their sins, and entitled to eternal life. The atonement by Jesus Christ is the great distinguishing peculiarity of the gospel, and is presented in a great variety of terms and illustrations in both the Old Testament and the New. See REDEMPTION, SACRIFICES. </p> <p> The English word atonement originally denoted the reconciliation of parties previously at variance. It is used in the Old Testament to translate a Hebrew word which means a covering; implying that by a Divine propitiation the sinner is covered from the just anger of God. This is actually effected by the death of Christ; while the ceremonial offerings of the Jewish church only secured from impending temporal judgments, and typified the blood of Jesus Christ which "cleanseth us from all sin." </p>

<p> &nbsp;Exodus 29:36 (b) The word literally means "to cover up." The blood of the sacrifices in the Old Testament did cover up the sins of the believers, but not until CHRIST shed His [[Blood]] were the sins blotted out. (See also &nbsp;Romans 3:25). </p>