Analyzing the Atonement: Final Thoughts

As we close off this series, I would recommend people go back through any of the previous posts that may have been missed.  This may or may not be helpful in trying to unwrap the convoluted post that follows. Unlike many, or perhaps like too many, of my other posts, I will simply be making a set of disjointed statements. These statements aren't meant to be exhaustive and intentionally leave some things waiting to be addressed.

1. I actively desire to retain historical perspective on the atonement. This means that I want to retain the valid truths without corrupting modern vernacular.
2. The Scriptures clearly direct us to think about the atonement in a Recapitulation sense (Rom 5). At the very least this must be confirmed in reference to the Federal Headship of Christ.
3. Not all are "born" into the federal headship of Jesus Christ. Instead baptism acts as a sign of being incorporated (Rom 6).
4. Thus the Recapitulation View seems to me to best affirm the "born again" motif and language used in the New Testament.
5. The parable of the sower and soil seems to me an interesting lesson for the lack of completion of some who enter into Christ in the recapitulation sense. 
6. That not all endure and become the mature, and truly delivered, man (Eph 4:13) makes sense of many of the warning passages throughout Scripture about endurance and possible vanity of work. 
7. In a similar sense, the Scriptures clearly direct us to think about the atonement in a Ransom sense. In the most direct way this is applied to the ekklesia or God's communal people, the church.
8. Israel was ransomed many times in her history. This establishes a typological example for one aspect of the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. The new Israel, the church, has been ransomed from sin and death. 
9. Not all who were ransomed truly were freed from their desire to submit to sin. So also, the Scripture can talk of people being "saved into the church" or "delivered" without affirming their complete freedom from sin (2 Pet 2:20).
10. The Scriptures clearly speak about "saved" in a sense that retain eternal destruction (Jude 1:5).
11. Christ's work is both deliverance and perseverance of believers. The Scriptures seem to teach temporary deliverance of people who return to Egypt and their sin. 
12. Anselm's substitution theory is the only sure foundation of orthodox opinion on the atonement. 
13. I do not believe Anselm's view provides room for an unlimited view on the atonement. If no remaining debt is owed God, then the wrath of God cannot come upon any man.
14. Though I don't believe the Penal view is a measure of orthodoxy, many rejections of it result in non-orthodox opinions.
15. The decreetally elect experience this substitution atonement. 
16. The covenantally elect experience ransom and recapitulation atonement. 
17. As a pastoral and theological concern, I believe the word "atonement" should only be used strictly in the substitution sense on the basis of the Lev 16 and the removal of sin. 
18. There are some who Christ "died for" that will not be saved. There are none who Christ "made atonement" for that will be lost.

Editor's Note: This blog post was written in 2013 and would receive significant revision in both personal understanding and representation. Any e-mails should be directed to TorreyGazette@gmail.com.