Research Paper:
Final Submission Assignment
De’Borah J. Fontenot
THEO 530: Systematic Theology II
May 2024
ii
Contents
Research Topic .............................................................................................................................. 1
Research Question ......................................................................................................................... 1
Thesis Statement ........................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1
The Definition of Atonement .............................................................................................. 1
The Divine Purpose of the Atonement................................................................................ 2
Overview of the Doctrine of Atonement ....................................................................................... 3
Jesus Christ as Mediator ..................................................................................................... 3
The Vicariousness of the Atonement .................................................................................. 4
The Efficacy of the Atonement ........................................................................................... 4
The Application of the Atonement ..................................................................................... 5
The Nature of the Atonement ........................................................................................................ 6
The Substitutionary Work ................................................................................................... 6
The Sacrificial Work ........................................................................................................... 7
Necessity of the Atonement .......................................................................................................... 8
The Depravity of Man ......................................................................................................... 8
The Divine Qualifications of Christ .................................................................................. 10
The Extent of the Atonement ...................................................................................................... 11
Universal Atonement (Unlimited) .................................................................................... 11
Particular Atonement (Limited) ........................................................................................ 13
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 14
Significance of the Atonement .......................................................................................... 14
Final Thoughts on the Atonement..................................................................................... 15
1
Research Topic
This paper will focus on the extent of the reconciliation of God and mankind through the
sacrificial death of Jesus Christ.
Research Question
Did Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross atone for the sins of the whole world or only for the
elect?
Thesis Statement
This paper will argue that Christ’s atonement is available to all who put their trust in him.
Introduction
The Definition of Atonement
The terminology of atonement has been inherited from the sacrificial system of ancient
Israel. It climaxes in the New Testament and is totally transformed into the idea of an atonement
where God alone bears the cost.
1
According to Douglas J. Moo, “Contemporary discussions of
atonement reveal uncertainty about just what ‘atonement’ refers to. Traditionally, the word has
been used to refer especially to the means by which God cares for the human sin
problem.”
2
This paper will focus on the extent of the reconciliation of God and mankind through
the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ. It is the atonement doctrine that becomes the transition point
from the objective doctrines of God, humanity, sin, and the person Jesus Christ; to the subjective
1
Baillie, God was in Christ, 175.
2
Moo, “Because of His Mercy,” 5.
2
doctrines. The meaning of the atonement has historically been controversial. There have been
different theories of the atonement covering different elements.
3
Both Luther and Calvin’s interpretation of the atonement can be understood as “turning
on the central and pivotal, conception of a happy exchange.” An exchange in which the
believer’s sins are laid upon Christ and Christ’s own innocence is communicated to the
believer. The Christian has been united so intimately with Christ that an exchange of qualities
has taken place.”
4
The Divine Purpose of the Atonement
The issue between unlimited and limited atonement centers in the purpose or design of
the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. The answer to the question, “For whom did Christ die?” or
the extent of the atonement can only be given by understanding the divine intentions of the
Father in the death of his Son. “The nature of the atonement settles its extent;” this issue is not
always understood. The choice between Calvinism and Arminianism is often the determining of
limited or unlimited atonement. It should be understood that one does not need to be an
Arminian simply because one objects limited atonement. Conversely, one is definitely not a
Calvinist, just because one accepts limited atonement. The goal of the child of God should not be
to adhere to a humanly-constructed system (for the sake of church relations or tradition).
5
Did Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross atone for the sins of the whole world? John 3:16 appears
to support this view, or did Christ’s sacrifice atone only for the elect? Ephesians 1:4-5 on the
3
Erickson, Christian Theology, 713.
4
Gerrish, “Atonement and Saving Faith,” 181.
5
Lightner, The Death Christ Died, 33-34.
3
other hand, appears to support the limited view. This paper will argue that Christ’s atonement is
available to all who put their trust in him.
Overview of the Doctrine of Atonement
Jesus Christ as Mediator
Sin brought about the separation of God and man. In order for man to be reconciled with
God, God’s goodness would have to be made known. It may be suggested by some that the more
highly humanity conceives of the goodness of God, the further one will find the distance between
oneself and God. Habakkuk 1:13 states, “Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not
look on iniquity…” If God and man are to be reconciled, a mediator is essential. Humanity has
always felt this way (as can be seen in Exodus 20:18-19). This feeling is common in the
priesthoods of nearly all nations. To some degree the priesthood might represent men to God, yet
one could not represent God to man. According to traditional forms, a multitude of sacrifices
were offered. However, the very multiplicity was proof that the priesthood was ineffective. The
Mediator had to be both one with man, and one with God – Jesus came as perfect God, and
perfect man. He was able to represent the Father to his brethren: reconciliation was made
possible by the incarnation.
6
According to François P. Moller, “This reconciliation (connection)
firstly happened through Christ’s incarnation. This was an event by which God in Christ
connected himself to a broken and sinful world in a very concrete and tangible way. It was an act
6
Smith, Atonement, 45–46.
4
of pollution and contamination in the most severe sense of the word.”
7
Reconciliation is
conceivable, as long as an individual can believe in the two natures of the one Christ.
8
The Vicariousness of the Atonement
Geyser-Fouchè and Munengwa state, “In Isaiah 52:13–53:12, the suffering of the
innocent servant is interpreted in terms of suffering because of others, in place of others and for
the benefit of others. This has been called vicarious suffering.”
9
Romans 5:8 says, “But God
commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (KJV).
The redeeming death of Jesus Christ has the effect of destroying death and depriving it of its
sting. The one death was exchanged for the death of many. As a result, a reign of new life was
ushered in! John 10:10 proclaims, “… I am come that they might have life, and that they might
have it more abundantly.” With the surrender of his own life, Jesus gave of the more abundant
life.
10
George Smeaton notes, “The vicarious sacrifice may be regarded as the death of death, and
the cause of life; and thus, by his own deep humiliation, Christ won a triumph over death for all
his followers. To obtain this however, He himself of necessity became the prey of death, and
bruised the serpents’ head, by being bruised in His Heel.”
11
The Efficacy of the Atonement
7
Moller, “Three Perspectives on the Sabbath,” 4.
8
Smith, Atonement, 46.
9
Geyser-Fouchè, and Munengwa, “The Concept of Vicarious Suffering in the Old Testament,” 1.
10
Smeaton, The Doctrine of the Atonement as Taught by Christ Himself, 314.
11
Ibid.
5
The efficacious character of the atonement can be seen in a considerable number of the
sayings of Christ. The efficacy of Jesus’ work is demonstrated quite plainly in such passages as
Hebrews 1:1-3; 2:9-18; 9:9-14. Christ’s efficacy is contingent upon the unique constitution of his
person. The emphasis of these verses rest on the perfection, finality, and transcendent efficacy of
Jesus’ sacrifice, which are warranted by the gravity of sin. If salvation is to be realized, sin must
be removed. The patterns of things in the heavenlies should be cleansed with blood of calves and
goats; yet the heavenly things themselves should be purified by the blood of Jesus Christ
(Hebrews 9:23). In essence, there is stated to be a necessity that can only be met by the precious
blood of Jesus. Jesus’ blood has the requisite virtue and efficacy because he is the Son of God;
the express image of his substance, the brightness of the Father’s glory (Hebrews 1:3).
12
Jesus himself became partaker of flesh and blood and was thus able (by one sacrifice) to
perfect all who are sanctified. Christ is the only person who could have dealt with sin; removing
it and making purification as would secure many sons to be brought to glory (and into access of
the divine presence of the Father). The efficacious blood of Jesus Christ was necessary to the
ends contemplated and secured.
13
The Application of the Atonement
Pink asserts, “There has been such a one-sided emphasis laid upon the death of the
Christ, that the relation of His resurrection, ascension and intercession to the salvation of his
people is now little understood even in orthodox circles.”
14
The redemptive work of Christ is a
priestly one, he intercedes on high for the Saints. At the cross, Jesus offered his sinless life of
12
Murray, Redemption Accomplished and Applied, 14.
13
Ibid., 14-15.
14
Pink, The Atonement, 133.
6
perfect obedience as a satisfaction for his failing people. What Jesus did on behalf of his people,
and the actual entering into the good of what he did, are two totally different things. What he
purchased still needs to be applied. By the wisdom of God, full provision was made for securing
the results of Jesus’ work. Isaiah 53:11 guarantees this. It is by Jesus’ present ministry in Heaven
and by the operation of the Holy Spirit on earth that this is attained.
15
In his providence, God has made abundant provision for the comfort and sustenance of man.
This provision exhibits the overflowing abundance of the Father’s love, goodness, grace, and
wisdom; as well as has in view the manifoldness of man’s need.
16
John Murry, accurately
maintains, “Salvation is of the Lord in its application as well as in its conception and
accomplishment.”
17
The Nature of the Atonement
The Substitutionary Work
Christ’s unique nature (his deity and humanity) enabled him to do for mankind what only
he could do. The eternal Second Person of the Trinity, became incarnate in order to accomplish
the task of saving mankind from sin. Jesus was especially fitted for the work he was sent to do.
18
Christ was able to redeem those under the law by becoming subject to it (Galatians 4:4-5). Christ
emptied himself of equality with God by taking on humanity (Philippians 2:6-7). He became
15
Ibid., 133–134.
16
Murray, Redemption Accomplished and Applied, 79.
17
Ibid., 887.
18
Erickson, Christian Theology, 696.
7
functionally subordinated to the Father for the purpose of revealing God and redeeming
mankind.
19
The Creator and giver of life became subject to death. Jesus’ ultimate step downward in
his humiliation was his death.
20
Christ died a substitutionary death on behalf of, and for the sake
of his people. There are several Scripture passages that validate the fact that Christ died in place
of humanity (2 Corinthians 5:21). The truth of Christ’s substitution can also be seen in John
1:29; Galatians 3:13; Hebrews 9:28; and 1 Peter 2:24. These passages convey the common idea
that Jesus bore the sins of humanity – they were transferred or laid on him.
21
Douglas J. Moo
asserts, “… Christ dying ‘for us’ has atoning significance: it is by dealing with our sins that
Christ’s death benefits us. In dying, Christ takes on himself ‘the consequences of our sin’”
22
The Sacrificial Work
In regards to the sacrificial work of Christ, Canceran comments, “Sacrifice is a way of
restitution to God for human sinfulness. Instead of humanity being sacrificed, Jesus is substituted
for humanity. In this substitution, human beings are spared from sacrifice but are indebted to
Jesus.”
23
Before Christ’s atoning death, regular sacrifices had to be offered to compensate for the
sins of the people. The sacrifices were necessary, not to deter the sinner from committing further
sins, but rather to atone for the sin. In the Old Testament, a person was delivered from
punishment by the interposing of something between one’s sin and God. Then, instead of the sin,
19
Ibid., 704.
20
Ibid., 705.
21
Ibid., 742.
22
Moo, “Christ Died for Us,” page 266.
23
Canceran, “The Construction of Masculinity in the Theology of Sacrifice,” 2.
8
God saw the atoning sacrifice; the penalty of the sin was no longer required of the sinner. For the
sacrifice to accomplish its intended effect, several factors were necessary. The animal sacrificed
had to be spotless, without blemish.
24
In the article, “Theories of Atonement,” the author
comments, “We are so accustomed to think of Christ’s offering of himself to God for us as the
one and only sacrifice for sin that we forget when this language is used in the New Testament
that back of this language is the whole elaborate system of sacrifices found in the Old
Testament.”
25
Hebrews 9:6-15 likens the work of Christ to the Old Testament Day of Atonement. Jesus
Christ is depicted as the high priest who offers sacrifices in the Holy Place. But Christ’s sacrifice
was his own blood; thus he secured eternal redemption. Whereas the sacrifice of animals had
only a limited effect, the death of Christ has eternal effect. Jesus’s death was a once-for-all
atonement for the sins of all mankind.
26
Necessity of the Atonement
The Depravity of Man
Due to the total depravity of man, Christ’s atonement was necessary. Jesus not only came
to seek and to save the lost, but no other man could partake of salvation. Only those who come to
the realization of their depravity and confess their lost estate can receive salvation. One must first
recognize and confess that one is a sinner (unrighteous, spiritually sick) in desperate need of the
Great Physician (Matthew 9:12, 13). The apostle Paul, a Jew, an educated Pharisee of “the
24
Erickson, Christian Theology, 735.
25
Conner, “Theories of Atonement,” 305.
26
Erickson, Christian Theology, 741.
9
straitest sect” related the following message to the Gentiles to whom he was sent, “Among whom
also we all had our conversation in times past in the lust of our flesh and of the mind; and were
by nature the children of wrath (children of the devil) even as others” (Ephesians 2:3). Paul,
though a devout religionist by his own testimony, declared that all Jews were in the same
condition spiritually as the gentile “dogs.”
27
There are numerous Scripture passages that teach the total depravity of man; the
following are just a few:
28
1. God’s Word states that man is completely depraved, even the imagination of his heart is
continually evil (Genesis 6:5; Romans 3:11, 12; Mark 7:21-23; Jeremiah 17:9)
2. Further proof that man is depraved can be found in Hebrews 11:6. It clearly declares the
absolute impossibility of the unregenerate man doing anything to please God.
3. Scripture passages that speak of the whole of goodness (or the virtue as comprehended in
love) prove that man is completely depraved and incapable of loving until he possesses
God, because “God is love” (1 John 4:8).
No matter how sincerely one may attempt to correct the evil of his heart, there remains only
one way in which man’s wicked heart can be changed; and that is by the grace of God. God’s
grace is available to man only because of the atonement of Jesus Christ.
29
As attested by Eleanor
Stump, “Faith includes a second-order state of will in which a person repudiates his own evil and
longs for God and God’s goodness.”
30
27
Greene, The Atonement of Christ, 10.
28
Ibid., 16-19.
29
Ibid., 16.
30
Stump, “Atonement: An Overview,” 136.
10
The Divine Qualifications of Christ
The fact that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life is the abundant testimony of the Word of
God. Christ was the most unique Person that ever lived. Those who were closest to Jesus were
not hesitant to ascribe sinlessness to him (1 John 3:5; 2 Corinthians 5:21). Jesus not only
succeeded in living a sinless life, but he was incapable of sin. This is referred to as the
impeccability of Christ. It was impossible for Christ to commit sin (either in word, thought, or
deed) because he did not possess the root cause of sin – the sin nature
31
It is the assumption of some that on the basis of the sinless life and sinless nature of
Jesus, that therefore his life (as well as his death) provided substitution for humanity’s sin.
32
As
one writer puts it, “The Scriptures teach us plainly that Christ’s obedience was as truly vicarious
as was his suffering, and that he reconciled us to the Father by the one as well as by the other.”
33
Christ’s suffering in life are said to constitute his “active obedience,” while his suffering in
death, his “passive obedience.”
34
All of Christ’s life sufferings prepared and proved him to be a
qualified sacrifice for sin. It was imperative that Jesus be sinless and perfect (God) that he might
be qualified to offer up himself as a sacrifice for sin to the Father. Conversely, he had to be a
perfect man, in order to be man’s substitute. He could not have offered a sinless sacrifice without
a sinless life.
35
Faith Glavey Pawl accurately notes, “… Christ’s passion and death restore
31
Lightner, The Death Christ Died, 17-18
32
Ibid., 18.
33
Ibid.
34
Ibid., 19.
35
Ibid., 22.
11
relationship between humans and God and between humans and what they have wrecked by
sin.”
36
The Extent of the Atonement
Universal Atonement (Unlimited)
Universal atonement contends that God intended the atonement to make salvation
possible for everyone; Jesus died for all yet his atoning death only becomes effective when
accepted by the individual. This is the view of all Arminians yet some Calvinist also hold this
view. Various passages that speak of Jesus’ death (or the atonement) in universal terms are
appealed to by those who hold this theory. Particularly, passages that speak of Jesus as dying for
the sins “of the world” (John 1:29). In John 3:16-17, Christ’s coming is explained in universal
terms. In 2 Corinthians 5:14-15 the apostle Paul speaks in like fashion of Christ’s dying for all. 1
Timothy 4:10 is a very significant and interesting verse that speaks of the living God, “who is the
Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.” This verse appears to indicate a difference in
the salvation accomplished for Believers and for others.
37
The universal intent of Jesus’ death is also spoken of in the General Epistles. Hebrews
2:9 states, “But we see Jesus… crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God
should taste death for every man.” 1 John includes two statements reminiscent of John’s gospel
in that they refer to Jesus’ death as being for the world (2:1-2; 4:14). The prophetic passage of
Isaiah 53:6 is especially significant; it is particularly powerful from a logical standpoint. It
clearly points out that the extent of sin is universal. It specifies that every one of us has sinned,
36
Pawl, “Satisfaction and Restoration of the World,” 141.
37
Erickson, Christian Theology, 757.
12
“All we like sheep have gone astray; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” In
reading this passage, it is difficult not to conclude that just as everyone sins, everyone is also
atoned for. 1 Timothy 2:6 is also persuasive where Paul states that Christ “gave himself a
ransom, for all.”
38
Some biblical passages consist of verses indicating that the gospel is to be universally
proclaimed (Matthew 24:14, 28:19; Acts 1:8; Titus 2:11). The proponents of universal atonement
(citing such texts) ask, “If Christ died only for the elect, how can the offer of salvation be made
to all persons without some sort of insincerity, artificiality, or dishonesty being involved? Is it
not improper to offer salvation to everyone if in fact Christ did not die to save everyone?” When
one observes the various number of passages in which the offer of salvation is clearly
unrestricted, the problem is intensified (Matthew 11:28; 2 Peter 3:9). If Jesus died only for the
elect, it cannot be the case that he is “unwilling” for the non-elect to perish.
39
There is a challenge for those who hold to universal atonement; the risk that their position
can lead to belief in universal salvation. “Will not all humans be saved if Jesus atoned for all
persons?” Often the response is to say that Jesus’s death does not lead to “acquittal and life”
automatically; rather, only for those who accept him.
40
David McNaughton explains, “… Christ
gives the most valuable thing he has – his life… as a present to God, whose benefits will flow to
others. He gives it ‘for the purpose of removing our sin’ but we cannot ‘gain the benefit of
forgiveness from it until we associate ourselves with it.’”
41
38
Ibid.
39
Ibid., 759.
40
Ibid.
41
McNaughton, “Reparation and Atonement,” 136.
13
Particular Atonement (Limited)
It is not uncommon in debates about the extent of the atonement for someone to say that
they believe that Christ’s death was “sufficient for all, efficient for some.”
42
Peter Lombard
comments, “[Christ] offered himself on the altar of the cross not to the devil, but to the triune
God, and he did so for all with regard to the sufficiency of the price, but only for the elect with
regard to his efficacy, because he brought about salvation only for the predestined.”
43
What
Lombard said is very much in line with Augustinian theology; Jesus died for the predestined.
44
The salvation of mankind was obtained by Christ not on the condition that they “would” receive
it; but so fully and perfectly that certainly they should receive it. Christ purchased salvation (to
be applied to them that do believe) along with faith that they might believe.
45
Lombard stresses God does not predestine a person to salvation yet fail to bring it about.
That would be a denial of God’s sovereign omnipotence. Lombard maintains that even though
God foreknew of the fall, he did not cause it; thus does not bear any blame for those who perish.
Grace is no longer grace if it is deserved or earned. According to God’s foreknowledge and
predestination, grace is applied. God acts freely to apply salvific grace to those who do not
deserve it: equally, he acts freely to withhold salvific grace to whom he wills.
46
God’s will and
power work in agreement with his foreknowledge and predetermined purposes, to bring about
42
Gibson and Gibson, From Heaven, He Came and Sought Her, 81.
43
Ibid.
44
Ibid.
45
Owen, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, 131.
46
Gibson and Gibson, From Heaven, He Came and Sought Her, 87-88
14
salvation to those whom he has chosen in Christ. Jesus not only died for the elect, but each of the
elect was known apart from any choice or action of their own.
47
Most Calvinist believe “the purpose of Christ’s coming was not to make possible the
salvation of all humans, but to render certain the salvation of the elect.” Their argument is based
on several elements (including biblical passages that teach that Jesus’ death was “for his
people”). The angel’s promise to Joseph in Matthew 1:21; the collection of statements by Jesus
regarding his sheep, his people, his friends, in John 10:11, 15, 26-27; John 15:13.”
48
Limited atonement advocates face the awkward position of contending that Jesus did not
die for the non-elect, even though the atonement is sufficient to cover their sins. On the other
hand, advocates of unlimited atonement do not have difficulty with the fact that Jesus’ death is
sufficient for all, because in their view Christ died for everyone, not just the elect.
49
Conclusion
Significance of the Atonement
The atonement is vital to the Christian faith and theology. In the atonement, one comes to
an essential point of faith; transition from the objective, to the subjective aspects of Christian
theology. The focus is shifted from the nature of Christ to his active work on one’s behalf. The
atonement makes salvation possible and is the foundation of other major doctrines. From one’s
understanding of the other doctrines, issues one’s understanding of the various facts of salvation.
47
Ibid., 88.
48
Erickson, Christian Theology, 755.
49
Gibson and Gibson, From Heaven, He Came and Sought Her, 762.
15
The significance and impact of the atonement are rich and complex.
50
Macchia notes, “Christ’s
atonement has its victory in this wholeness of flesh and Spirit, which leads to the renewed
community that witnesses to Christ in the world through the power of the Spirit, and that gives
all glory to the heavenly Father.”
51
Final Thoughts on the Atonement
After thoroughly researching and reading through the various resource materials
regarding the purpose and extent of the atonement, I have summed it up as following: The
hypothesis of unlimited atonement is better able to account for larger segments of the biblical
witness (with less distortion) than the hypothesis of limited atonement.
52
An individual that believes in an unlimited atonement has no problem as a Believer and
proclaimer of the universal offer of God’s saving grace (nor a problem in personalizing the need
of each individual to accept that grace). There is an understanding that the non-elect will not be
saved; and the elect will be saved in God’s time. For one that believes in unlimited redemption,
the difficulty that the limited redemptionist face is removed; he is free to announce that Jesus
actually died for all men.
53
“… that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself…” (2
Corinthians 5:19).
50
Ibid., 715.
51
Macchia, “Baptism in the Holy Spirit-and-Fire: Luke’s Implicitly Pneumatological Theory of Atonement,” 6.
52
Erickson, Christian Theology, 117.
53
Lightner, The Death Christ Died, 117.
16
Bibliography
Baillie, D. M. God was in Christ. United States of America: Scribner, 1948.
Canceran, Delfo C. "THE CONSTRUCTION OF MASCULINITY IN THE THEOLOGY OF
SACRIFICE." Colloquium: The Australian & New Zealand Theological Review, vol. 49,
no. 2 (2017): 1- 10.
Conner, Walter T. “Theories of Atonement.” Review and expositor. 44, no. 3 (1947): 301–311.
Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013.
Gerrish, Brian A. “Atonement and Saving Faith.” Theology Today. 17, no. 2 (1960): 181–191.
Geyser-Fouchè, Ananda B. and Thomas M. Munengwa. “The Concept of Vicarious Suffering in
the Old Testament.” HTS Teologiese Studies/ Theological Studies (2019): 1-10.
Gibson, David and Jonathan Gibson. From Heaven He Came and Sought Her. Wheaton, IL:
Crossway, 2013.
Greene, Oliver B. The Atonement of Christ. United States of America: The Gospel Hour, 1968.
Lightner, Robert P. The Death Christ Died. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1998.
Macchia, Frank D. “Baptism in the Holy Spirit-and-Fire: Luke’s Implicitly Pneumatological
Theory of Atonement.” Religions (2018): 1-6.
McNaughton, David. “Reparation and Atonement.” Religious studies (1992): 129–144.
Moller, Francois P. “Three Perspectives on the Sabbath.” In die Skriflig (2019): 1-10.
Moo, Douglas J. “Because of His Mercy.” Bibliotheca Sacra 177 (2020): 3-14.
Moo, Douglas J. "Christ Died for Us". Bibliotheca Sacra 177 (2020): 259-268.
Murray, John. Redemption Accomplished and Applied. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1955.
Owen, John. Death of Death in the Death of Christ. Finland: Banner of Truth Trust, 1959.
Pawl, Faith Glavey. “Satisfaction and Restoration of the World.” Religious Studies (2021): 141–
147.
Pink, Arthur W. The Atonement. Swengel, PA: Reiner Publications, 1971.
17
Smeaton, George. The Doctrine of the Atonement as Taught by Christ Himself. Grand Rapids,
MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1953.
Smith, H. Mayard. Atonement. London: MacMillan and Co, 1925.
Stump, Eleonore. “Atonement: An Overview.” Religious Studies (2021): 136-140.
