As a Christian I confess that I "belong unto my faithful Savior Jesus Christ; who with His precious blood has fully satisfied for all my sins..." (Heidelberg Catechism, q. 1).

Satisfaction for sins — what a thought!

And especially when we know what sin really is! What is satisfaction? As the word is used here it means that Jesus Christ, through His atonement, provided the full payment for my sins so that I would be reconciled to God. Nothing more had to be done. He did it all.

What did Jesus do? He "met and answered all the demands of God's law and justice against the sinner" (C. Hodge, Systematic Theology, 11:482). This satisfaction is seen, then, in:

1. His perfect obe­dience in keeping the demands of God's law (Romans 5:18, 19; Galatians 3:13; 4:4, 5); and

2. the shedding of His blood thus satisfying the justice of God (Romans 5:9, 10).

Demands of God's Law⤒🔗

First, then, to understand how Christ is our Satisfaction we must see His work in relation to God's law.

The curse of the law is on all men because of sin (Galatians 3:10). "There is none that doeth good, no, not so much as one" (Romans 3:12; Psalm 14:1). Because of involvement in Adam's sin no man can do God's will — and he doesn't want to, either. Further, sin means guilt and the certainty of punishment because God demands nothing less than perfect obe­dience. This obedience to Him is seen in love, as we are told: love is the fulfillment of the law (Romans 13:10). Less than perfect obedience is rebellion against God, and this rebellion calls forth God's wrath.

Because God is just in demanding love and, there­fore, obedience, and because sinful men are hopelessly unable to do this, God sent His Son. This Son was to be completely obedient; that is, His life had to be characterized by the positive doing of God's will. Without this obedience to God's law He would not be able to satisfy God's justice. He had to be perfectly righteous. "One who himself is a sinner cannot satisfy for others" (Heidelberg Catechism, q. 16; see Hebrews 7:26, 27). Satisfying God's justice meant that He had to bear God's wrath against sin, thus paying the penalty due to us because of our guilt.

Christ's Obedience←⤒🔗

The key to understanding what Jesus did is found in His obedience. John Calvin wrote:

Now someone asks, How has Christ abolished sin, banished the separation between us and God, and acquired righteousness to render God favorable and kindly toward us? To this we can in general reply that he has achieved this for us by the whole course of his obedience.In­stitutes, II, xvi, 5

Obediently Christ fulfilled the law and obediently He satisfied God's justice (Psalm 40:7, 8; John 6:38; 4:34; 10:17, 18; Romans 5:19; Hebrews 5:8, 9). This obedience is often distinguished as active and passive obedience. However, both of these aspects are so intimately connected that you cannot have one without the other.

When we speak of Christ's active obedience we are speaking about Christ's obedience to God's law in order to please God and obtain eternal life (Mat­thew 5:17, 18; John 15:10; Hebrews 10:7-9). Obedient­ly He fulfilled the righteousness of the law for us (Romans 8:3, 4). What we would not do, He did! Through Christ's active obedience we are free from the law as a condition for life and are now adopted sons and heirs (Galatians 4:4, 5; Ephesians 1:3-13; Romans 10:3, 4; 8:3, 4).

Only by this active obedience would Christ's suf­fering be acceptable to God. Had He not been com­pletely willing to conform to God's will, He would have fallen short of God's demands and He could not have atoned for others. Had He merely passively suffered, no sacrifice would have been made. The damned in hell suffer, too, but theirs is no atoning suffering because they do not willingly suffer. He had to suffer obediently, and therefore actively. Voluntarily He experienced suffering, death and hell. He would lay down His own life. The death on the cross was Christ's supreme act of obedience (John 10:17, 18).

On the last day of his life, Dr. J. Gresham Machen dictated a telegram to his colleague Professor John Murray: "I'm so thankful for the active obedience of Christ; no hope without it." He had been discussing this subject with Murray and it had been the subject of one of the very last addresses he gave. At the mo­ment of death he gained comfort in Christ's active obedience. Because of it, he would be accepted as perfectly obedient and righteous. Professor Ned Stonehouse wrote: "An exultant note of triumph through the merit of his Saviour was thus sounded forth as he was about to enter the divine presence" (J. O. Machen, God Transcendent, 11).

When we speak of Christ's passive obedience we refer to His paying the penalty for sin by experienc­ing God's wrath in His sufferings and death (Isaiah 53:6; Romans 4:25; 1 John 2:2). By this He removed the debt of His people. These sufferings were laid on Him as our representative. To these, in His active obedience, Christ voluntarily subjected Himself (John 10:18). The death He died was thus a sacrificial death. This sacrificial death we call the atonement:

The Atonement←⤒🔗

Although the word "atonement" is a common one in the Christian's vocab­ulary, it appears only once in the King James Ve­rsion of the New Testament: Romans 5:11. However it does appear often in the Old Testament. In the New Testament it is a translation of a Greek word meaning "reconciliation," and in the Old Testament it has the meaning of "propitiation" (Leviticus 1:4; 16:6; etc.).

As the word is used in the Old Testament it im­plies that God has been offended because of sin and that something has to be done to satisfy God in order that this sin would be forgiven and communion with God would be restored.

As the word is used in the New Testament the act itself — the death of Christ — by which the satisfac­tion, or atonement, is made becomes, itself, the atonement. Therefore, when we speak about the atonement, we mean "not the reconciliation be­tween God and man, not the 'at-onement' between God and man, but specifically, the means by which that reconciliation is effected — namely, the death of Christ as something that was necessary in order that sinful men might be received into communion with God" (J. G. Machen, God Transcendent, 166).

We may, therefore, say that the teaching of Scrip­ture is that Christ's death, or atonement, is the way by which God's justice is satisfied. What took place on Calvary was foreshadowed in the sacrifices of the Tabernacle and the Temple. Jesus Christ was the last sacrifice. With His death there was no further need for the Old Testament typical offerings. What they pointed toward had taken place. Once for all, it was done. The atonement had been completed. This is emphasized in the Epistle to the Hebrews (7:27; 9:12, 26, 28; 10:10) and elsewhere, too (Romans 6:10; 1 Peter 3:18; John 17:4; 19:30).

Reconciliation←⤒🔗

And what did this atone­ment, this satisfaction, bring about? Reconciliation.

By dictionary definition, reconciliation is "the act of re-establishing friendship after estrangement." According to the word used for "reconciliation" in the New Testament, a payment of some kind is involved.

In 2 Corinthians 5:18, 19, we learn more: "But all things are of God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation; to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not reckoning unto them their trespasses..." We learn here that rec­onciliation is one-sided. There is no hint here of mutual reconciliation between God and man. In His everlasting love God removed the cause of estrange­ment.

How are we to understand reconciliation, then, as it relates to Christ's work?

Reconciliation is: 1. a covenant idea. Strangers cannot be reconciled. Only those who have some kind of a relationship, though it be ruptured, can be reconciled: husband and wife, mother and daughter, two friends. God's reconciliation is the result of God's covenant love toward us.

Love is an element in reconciliation that we can­not overlook. It is clearly taught in Scripture (John 3:16; Romans 5:8; 8:32; Ephesians 2:4, 5; 1 John 4:9, 10). The goal of this great covenant love is that we might be conformed to His image (Romans 8:29).

Further, reconciliation comes about because: 2. the covenantal relationship was violated. The cause of this broken relationship lies wholly with us. We are guilty.

Therefore, reconciliation is: 3. the work of God. God must do the restoring work. He must remove the cause of the estrangement between Himself and His own. When we would not obey, God sent His Son to be obedient in all things on our behalf, and to suf­fer the agonies of death and hell voluntarily. Thus, by satisfaction for sins through the work of Jesus Christ, God reconciled "the world unto himself." By this He changed the situation between Himself and His own. And because He has graciously done this through the work of His Son we know our Covenant God's love and favor.

What mercy! What love! What grace!    

Christ's Atoning Death←⤒🔗

Graciously, by means of atonement, God has changed the situation between Himself and His own. As Jesus Christ obeyed God even unto death, the cause of our estrangement was removed and we know our Covenant God's love and favor.

But the question is: Just exactly what took place as Jesus suffered and died on the cross? A variety of answers have been given to this question.

1. One of the more well-known answers is often called the Moral Influence Theory of the atonement. This view was first explained in a distinctive way by Abelard (d. 1142). He taught that God did not really need His justice satisfied. Therefore, Christ's death was not an offering brought to pay for sin. Rather, it simply spoke of God's love and was designed to soften hard hearts and lead them to repentance. Christ's death was accomplished to assure sinners that nothing will prevent God from pardoning sins. Loraine Boettner wrote:

The atonement is then conceived of as directed not toward God, with the purpose of maintain­ing His justice, but toward man, with the pur­pose of persuading him to right action. Christ's work on the cross is then made to be an impres­sive proclamation to the world that God is will­ing to forgive sin on the sole condition that men turn from it. His suffering and death is ex­plained as merely that of a martyr in the cause of righteousness. Studies in Theology, p. 339

To be sure, we are very uncomfortable with this answer. After all, missing is the idea that sin is guilt and worthy of punishment. In place of the Biblical teaching of total depravity is the essential goodness of man so that if only he sees how good and loving God is he will change.

2. Another answer is called the Example Theory. This answer was given by the Socinians who dis­agreed with the substitutionary atonement as taught by the Reformers. In many ways it is similar to the Moral Influence Theory but it adds that Christ, through His death, revealed the way of obe­dience. He is the example of obedience and His task was to inspire men to follow His example. Oh, to be sure, this answer includes the idea of payment: as a reward for Christ's obedience unto death He could give eternal life to believers. However, it is in reality man's obedience to the way of the Example, and not Christ's obedience that saves.

3. A third answer to the question of what Christ really did in the atonement is given in what is called the Governmental Theory. Hugo Grotius, famous for this answer, denied that God's justice had to be satisfied by Christ bearing punishment. Since God is Sovereign He can change His will. Exercising His mercy He can forgive sin and cancel the debt without payment. Why, then, the atonement? Rather than strictly execute the sentence against sinners, God would substitute Christ's death to show how highly He views the law. The atonement would show God's displeasure over sin and His determination to punish it, for He cannot show indifference toward sin. Hence, the atonement was an exhibition of justice. The atonement was designed purely to teach God's hatred for sin.
   
   But is God's will arbitrary? Is God only a God who threatens? Surely, this answer does not satisfy, either.

4. Still another answer is offered. This is called the Mystical Theory of the atonement. Again, Boett­ner wrote:

Redemption is regarded as having been ac­complished not by anything that Christ taught or did, but by the incarnation in which Deity was infused into or united with humanity.Studies in Theology, p. 346

The idea behind this answer is that in the incarna­tion Christ assumed the fallen human nature but kept it from sinning. In fact, He purified it. As men are saved they become partakers of this purified humanity. Others believe that the depravity of sin was gradually overcome during Christ's earthly life until at His death human nature was restored to its original glory. In this answer, Christ's suffering and death are not essential to His redemptive work. Sal­vation comes not by the substitutional sacrifice of Christ for us, but rather by His work in us, that is, by the incarnation of the man Jesus Christ in the church.

While in all these views a kernel of truth may be found, none of them really reflect the Biblical teach­ing. It is true that God's love plays an important, but often forgotten part in the atonement (John 3:16; Romans 5:8; 1 John 4:9, 10). But there is more — much more. It is true that Christ is represented as an example in Scripture (John 13:15). But He is never given as an example to the unbelieving as a pattern for their lives so that they will know sal­vation. It is true that God will not allow sin to go un­punished. However, the purpose of the atonement is not to make us aware that God rules, but rather, to satisfy God's justice. It is true that believers are united with Christ and partakers of a new nature. But this union does not come through the incarna­tion but by the Holy Spirit applying the results of Jesus' death.

What, Then, is the Significance of Christ's Death?←⤒🔗

1. It is a propitiatory sacrifice (Romans 3:25; Hebrews 2:17; 1 John 2:2; 4:10; the same Greek word is used for "mercy seat" in Hebrews 9:5). A propitiation is an offering by which wrath is turned away. Unfortunately, the Revised Standard Version has used the word "expiation." Now, to the casual reader to say this might seem like engaging in a quarrel over words. Even a quick trip to a dictionary will seem to say that we should not be bothered over these two words. However, there is a difference — a very important difference. According to The Oxford English Dictionary (considered by many scholars as the last word in word usage) "to expiate" means "to extinguish the guilt of, to pay the penalty of, to make reparation for, to extinguish by suffering to the full." In other words, "expiation" is the act of covering unto cancellation of a sin or crime. On the other hand, "to propitiate" means "to appease, con­ciliate (one offended)." "To appease" is "to pacify anger." To translate the word in these passages "ex­piation" is thus to say that Jesus' death was an offer­ing to cancel sin. Now, while that, indeed, was the result, that is not all that took place. To merely cover guilt by cancellation would not appease God's wrath. It would simply put the offender at peace. "Propitiation" is Godward. God is holy and full of burning opposition to our sin (Leviticus 10:6; Psalm 2:12; 94:1). His wrath must be appeased (Exodus 23:7; Romans 2:1-11). Therefore, Christ's death had to be a propitiatory sacrifice.

2. It is a substitutionary, or vicarious sacrifice. The word "vicarious" simply means the taking of another's place. Thus, Jesus Christ is our Vicar. He took our place; He died vicariously. In explaining this term Charles Hodge wrote:

By vicarious suffering or punishment is not meant merely sufferings endured for the bene­fit of others. The sufferings of martyrs, patriots, and philanthropists, although en­dured for the good of the Church, the country, or of mankind, are not vicarious. That word ... includes the idea of substitution. Vicarious suffering is suffering endured by one person in the stead of another, i.e., in his place. It necessarily supposes the exemption of the party in whose place the suffering is endured. ... Christ's sufferings were vicarious in the sense in which the death of one man is vi­carious who dies in the place of another to save him from a deserved penalty...Systematic Theology, II: p. 475f

When we say that Christ was our Substitute we mean that He took to Himself the obligation to satisfy God's justice which belonged to us. "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us ..." (Galatians 3:13; see also, Romans 5:6-8; 1 Corinthians 1:30; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Hebrews 9:28; 1 Peter 2:24; 3:18; etc.). How beautiful!

It was not simply the penalty of sin that Jesus bore. He bore our sins. He was not made sinful, but He was made sin and, therefore, brought into closest identification with our sins that it was possible for Him to come without thereby becoming Himself sinful. Any exposition of ours can only touch the fringe of this mystery. J. Murray, The Atonement, p. 30

3. Further, Christ's death is particular. By this we mean "not universal." Traditionally, Reformed people have spoken of a "limited atonement." What do we mean?
   
   Christ's death is limited in the number of people for whom it has effect. Christ died for those whom God gave Him (John 6:35-40; 10:11-18). Therefore, we can speak of Christ's death as particular. He died for specific people. Now, of course, when we speak of Christ's death here we are supposing the Biblical teaching that Jesus died to really save, not just to make salvation a possibility. And if Jesus died to save completely, then He could only have died as the Substitute for the elect. Else, some would have their sins paid for twice: once by Christ and then a second time by them eternally in hell.
   
   However, Christ's death is unlimited in its re­sults. For the Arminian Christ's death has results if men will believe. They must complete Christ's work. But Christ's work is not limited by men. He died un­to a complete salvation (Matthew 1:21).
   
   In other words, the atonement was not made for all men. Nevertheless, for those for whom it was made there is complete salvation.
   
   As soon as we say that Christ did not die for all men we are speaking heresy, according to some. Are we? Let's see what Scripture says. We read "...for it is he that shall save his people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21); "...the Son of man came ... to give his life a ransom for many" (Matthew 20:28); "...for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins" (Matthew 26:28); "…Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many..." (Hebrews 9:18); see also Isaiah 53:12; John 10:11; Ephesians 5:25-27; Romans 8:32-34; Revelation 5:9.
   
   It is true, of course, that there are some so-called universalistic texts which are used to "prove" that Christ died for all men. For instance, we read that Jesus is the Savior of the "world" (John 1:9, 29; 3:16, 17; 4:42; 1 Corinthians 5:19; 1 John 2:1; 2; 4:14, among others). Also, there are verses referring to "all" men (Romans 5:18, 19; 2 Corinthians 5:14, 15; 1 Timothy 2:4-6; Hebrews 2:9, among others). When, however, we see each text in its context we can see that no universalism is meant. Besides, "all" is not always "all." In many texts good sense will not allow that word to be used absolutely (Genesis 6:13; Mark 1:5; 1 Corinthians 6:12). In their helpful The Five Points of Calvinism, Defined, Defended, Documented (p. 46) Steele and Thomas answer those who emphasize the so-called universalistic texts:

One reason for the use of these expressions was to correct the false notion that salvation was for the Jews alone. Such phrases as "the world," "all nations," and "every creature" were used by the New Testament writers to emphati­cally correct this mistake. These expressions are intended to show that Christ died for all men without distinction (i.e., He died for Jews and Greeks alike) but they are not intended to indicate that Christ died for all men without ex­ception (i.e., He did not die for the purpose of saving each and every lost sinner).

Since Jesus came to die and thus satisfy God's righteousness, and since He came to die partic­ularly, that is, in place of those whom God had chosen unto Himself we who know this saving work can testify

Bearing shame and scoffing rude,
In my place condemned He stood;
Sealed my pardon with His blood:
Hallelujah what a Savior!