The Athenian synagogue (Ac 17^^), in which St. Paul met some 'devout persons' — ffejSofievoi, Gen- tiles more or less influenced by Judaism — was pro- bably small, for the university city did not attract his compatriots like Corinth, the seat of commerce. His reasoning 'in the Agora every day with those who met him' naturally recalls those Socratic dis- putations in the same place, of which Grote gives a hvely account in his History of Greece (London, 1869, yiii. 211 f.). That the address before the Council of the Areopagus was not entirely fruitless is proved by the conversion of a man holding so important an official position as Dionysius the Areopagite (q.v.).
Literature. — W. J. Conybeare and J. S. Howson, Life and Epistles of St. Paul, new ed., London, 1877, i. 405 f. ; W. M. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen, London, 1S9.5, p. 237 f. ; A. C. McGiffert, Apostolic Age, Edin- burgh, 1897, p. 257 f. ; E. Curtius, Gesammelte Abhamilungen, Berlin, lN91, ii. 52S f . ; A. Mommsen, Athence Chrisliance, Leipzig, ISdS ; J. P. Maliaffy, Greek Life and Thought, London, 18S7, and The Silver Age of the Greek World, do. 1906; A. Holm, History of Greece, Eng. tr., London, 1894-98.
Jaaies Strahan. **ATONEMENT.— Although found only once in the NT (Ho 5") and there in the AV alone, this word lias become the elect symbol in tlieologieal thought to indicate the doctrine in the Apostolic Church which placed the death of Christ in some form of causative connexion with the forgiveness of sins and with the restoration of men to favour and fellowship with God. The development of a doctrine of atonement in the NT is almost entirely the product of the experience and thought of the
Charles Scribner's Sons.
ATOXEIVIENT
atoxe:\iext
111
Apostolic Church. It moved along two Unes ; these were neither divergent nor exactly parallel, nor is it probable that one was precisely supple- mentary to the other ; they are best considered as converging towards an ultimate point of unity in which Godward and manward aspects are merged. They have been contrasted as objective and sub- jective, juridical and ethical, substitutionary and mj'stical. They correspond also to two definitions of the word itself. Originally and etj-mologicaUy the word means ' at-one-ment ' ; it is a sjoionym for 'reconcihation' as an accomplished fact. His- torically its usage signifies 'a satisfaction or reparation made by giving an equivalent for an injury, or by doing or suffering that which is received in satisfaction for an offence or injurj'' {Imperial Did., s.v.). Here its sjTionjTQ is 'expiation' as a means to reconciliation. Theo- logically it has been chiefly used in this latter sense, to indicate 'the expiation made by the obedience and suffering death of Christ to mark the relation of God to sin in the processes of human redemption.' A decided modem tendency is to retm-n to the more original use of the word. It win probably be seen that both uses are required to state the fullness of the apostolic doctrine.
The Uterature preserved in the NT witnesses to the undoubted fact that the Apostolic Church had very early established a close connexion between the death of Jesus the Messiah and the redemp- tion of men from their sins. Within seven years of His death — or probably considerably less — a 'doctrine of the cross' was freely and authorita- tively preached in the Christian community ; it appears to have been distinctly Pauhne in general character ; it held a primary place in the apostolic preaching ; it was declared to be the fulfilment of the OT Scripture ; it was set forth as the essence of the gospel, and was definitely referred to the teaching of Jesus for its ultimate authority. This much seems to be imphed in what is probably the earliest testimony, if regard be had to the date of the writings in which it occurs, concerning the apostohc doctrine of the atonement. It is St. Paul's confident assertion, 'I delivered unto you first of aU that which also I received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures' (1 Co 15^). This is undoubtedly typical of the teaching accepted by the primitive Church ; whatever St. Paul's differences with other apostolic teachers on other matters may have been, agreement seems to be found here. The confidence of this common wit- ness so early in the Apostolic Church raises many interesting questions, some of which must be con- sidered. To what extent can we find the more elaborate Pauline doctrine, which we shall find elsewhere in his writings, presented in such frag- ments of the teaching of the fu-st Christians as we possess? How far is the apostohc interpretation of Chi-ist's death sustained by appeal to the experi- ence and teaching of Jesus HimseK? By what means had the swift transition been made by the apostolic teachers themselves from the state of mind concerning the death of Jesus which is pre- sented in the SjTioptic Gospels to the beliefs exhibited in their preaching in the Acts? How was the unconcealed dismay of a bewildering dis- appointment changed into a glorying? It is clear from the contents of the SjTioptic Gospels that, whatever the confusion and distress in the minds of His disciples which immediately followed the death of Christ, they were already in possession of memories of His teaching which lay comparatively dormant until they were awakened into vigorous acti\'ity by subsequent events and experiences ; these, together with the facts of their Lord's life and the incidents of His death, may be spoken of as the sources of the apc^toUc doctrine of the