Jonathan Edwards on the Atonement

Understanding the Legacy of America's Greatest Theologian

Crawford

• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Year: 2017
• eBook ISBN: 9781532609985
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Religion

The gospel is the heart of the Christian faith, and the atonement is the heart of the gospel. In this work, Pastor Brandon Crawford offers a study of the doctrine of atonement as it was understood by America's greatest theologian--Jonathan Edwards--setting his doctrine in the context of both his historical predecessors and his broader theology. This book provides important insights into the mind of this intellectual giant and the critical role that Edwards played in the trajectory of New England theology in the decades following his death.

Part 1

The Doctrine of Atonement Prior to Jonathan Edwards

Chapter 1

Early and Medieval Perspectives

Speaking at Tyndale House in 1973, J. I. Packer noted that “every theological question has behind it a history of study.”31 This is particularly true of the doctrine of Christ’s atonement. Since the days of the apostles, Christ’s followers have been pondering the significance of his death, trying to apprehend precisely what that death accomplished and how its spiritual blessings are received. Wise men study this history and gain important insights from it. Sometimes, however, the work can be difficult.

Coming to terms with the early church’s understanding of the atonement can be particularly daunting, because so little was written on the subject during that era. In fact, all we really have from the church’s early centuries is a handful of passages scattered about in various letters and treatises, along with a statement or two in the early creeds—but even these do not delve into specifics. Historian Jaroslav Pelikan illustrates the challenge: “The creed adopted at Nicea [in a.d. 325] confessed that it had been ‘for the sake of us men and for the purpose of our salvation’ that Christ ‘came down [from heaven]’. . . . But neither it nor later dogmas specified in any detail just how the salvation which was the purpose of Christ’s coming was related to these events in his earthly and heavenly states.” As a result, the doctrine of Christ’s atonement remained, to a large extent, “dogmatically undefined.”32

This does not mean that the doctrine of atonement was unimportant to the early church, of course. One of the early church fathers, Tertullian, even went so far as to say that Christ’s atonement is the heart of the Christian faith.33 Early leaders simply did not have the time or opportunity for extended reflection on this doctrine, given the Trinitarian controversies of the day. What follows is a brief survey of those early Christian references to the doctrine, followed by the more substantive treatments from the church’s medieval era.

The Ante-Nicene Fathers

The age of the Ante-Nicene Fathers stretches from the close of the apostolic age to the adoption of the Nicene Creed in a.d. 325. Though no sustained treatments of the atonement are to be found during this period, several scattered references in the various letters and treatises of these church fathers are worthy of note.

Clement of Rome (d. a.d. 99)

Clement of Rome enjoys pride of place among the early church fathers.34 His First Epistle to the Corinthians, written around a.d. 95–97, is generally considered the oldest extant Christian writing outside of the New Testament. Though not a doctrinal epistle, it does contain several important references to Christ’s atonement. In the twenty-first chapter of the letter, after quoting the messianic prophecy of Isaiah 53, for example, Clement writes, “Let us reverence the Lord Jesus Christ, whose blood was given for us.”35 And a little later in the epistle, he adds this: “In love has the Lord taken us to Himself. On account of the Love he bore us, Jesus Christ our Lord gave his blood for us by the will of God; His flesh for our flesh, and His soul for our souls.”36 While there is certainly some ambiguity here, his statements do still indicate a fairly developed understanding of Christ’s atoning work. He understood Christ’s death as a loving sacrifice, foretold by prophecy, implemented by the will of God, and involving an act of substitution. Christ gave “his flesh for our flesh, his soul for our souls.”37

The Epistle of Barnabas (ca. a.d. 100)

Though purporting to come from the biblical Barnabas, internal evidence suggests that this epistle came from another man’s pen.38 Its contents are preoccupied with demonstrating the obsolescence of the Mosaic system, as well as proving that Christ and his New Testament church are the fulfillment of all Old Testament types and prophecies. Mingled with these themes, however, are a few significant references to Christ’s death. In one place, the author writes, “If therefore the Son of God, who is Lord, and who will judge the living and the dead, suffered, that His stroke might give us life, let us believe that the Son of God could not have suffered except for our sakes.” And a few sentences later, he adds this: “He also Himself was to offer in sacrifice for our sins the vessel of the Spirit, in order that the type established in Isaac when he was offered upon the altar might be fully accomplished.”39

At least two points are worthy of note here. First, the author understood Christ’s death as a sacrificial offering for human sin. As he explained, Christ died “for our sakes” and “in sacrifice for our sins.” Additionally, his words indicate that he believed Christ’s death was a sacrifice for actual sins, not just for sin in general, and that Christ’s death successfully removed the penalty of death for other human beings. This is evident in his statement that Christ’s death “gives us life.” In short, he too understood Christ’s atonement in substitutionary terms.

Ignatius (d. ca. a.d. 107)

Ignatius of Antioch, a disciple of the apostle John, wrote a series of church epistles on his way to Rome, where he would face martyrdom. One of these letters, his Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, contains a statement about Christ’s death that, while vague, indicates that he also understood the event as a substitutionary act that secured the salvation of men. He writes, “Now, He suffered all these things for our sakes, t...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Foreword
• Preface
• Introduction
• Part One: The Doctrine of Atonement Prior to Jonathan Edwards
• Part Two: The Doctrine of Atonement in the Works of Jonathan Edwards
• Conclusion
• Bibliography