i'.i) Pentecost. — The coming to abide with them of the Holy Spirit, 'the promise of the Father' (Ac 1''), ' the Spirit of Christ,' was for the Apostolic C'hurch the ultimate certainty of guidance into all the truth, and the supreme authority for its adequate utterance. The work of the Spirit as Jesus had defined it was: 'He shall take of mine and shall declare it unto you' (Jn IG'"*). To the fullness of His ministry the Apostolic Church owed the interpretation of the cross, the insjjira- tion of its preaching, the construction of its doc-
ATONEMENT
atont:ment
113
trine, and especially the moral and spiritual results in the life of the individual and of the community which were the hving verification of it9 power, and also the justification of the moral gi-ounds on which the declaration and experience of remission of sins were based. The meaning of the words of Jesus is understood through the works of His Spirit ; the significance of His death can be apprehended only in the light of the experience it creates. Only so can an adequate soteriology be reached. From first to last the apostolic doctrine of the atonement is the effort to interpret this experience in the relations in which it was conceived to stand to the Christian conceptions of God and man.
II. The doctrise'preached. — 1, In the Acts of the Apostles. — Tlie early chapters of the Acts contain the one particular account of the earliest form the doctrine of atonement took in the Apos- toUc Church ; for it is generally admitted that some source of considerable value underhes the speeches of Peter. Both their christology and soteriolog}' are primitive in type — it is sureh' not the doctrine of the 2nd century. In this account the sufferings and death of Jesus the Messiah have a fundamental place. The cross is now more than a scandal; the 'word of the cross' is more than an apologetic device for getting over the difficul- ties of accepting a crucified Messiah. Although the great feature of the apostohc preaching is not the explanation of the death of Christ in re- lation to the remission of sins, but its power in spiritual renewal, it contains much which enables us to perceive how the primitive community was taught to regard it. Summarized, this is — (1) The death of Christ was a Divine necessity, ap- pointed by God's counsel and foreknowledge. It was a crime whose issue God thwarted for His redeeming purpose (Ac 2-^ 3^**). — (2) Jesus as the Messiah is identified with the suffering Servant of the Lord (4" 8^*'^^). This conception, abhorrent to the Jewish mind and a sufficient ground for rejecting the Messianic claims of Jesus, is the assertion of the vicarious principle of the righteous one suffering for the unrighteous many and also the sign of a Divine fellowship. — (3) The great gift of the gospel — remission of sins — is set in direct relation to the crucified Jesus (2^ 3'^ 5^'^ 10^^). The prominence given to this in every sermon suggests that this connexion cannot be considered accidental. — (4) Reference to the fre- quent observance of the Lord's Supper {2*-). When it is remembered that nothing in the Apos- tohc Church is more primitive than the sacra- ments, and that both of them bear implications of Christ's relation to the remission of sins, this reference is significant. — (5) Christ's death is not distinctly represented as the ground of forgiveness, by setting forth the IVIessiah's death as a satisfac- tion for sin or as a substitute for sin's penalty. It is set forth as a motive to repentance and a means of turning men away from sin, but its saving value is not more closely defined. It is certain, however, that the early Apostohc Church attached a saving significance to the death of Christ.
2. In 1 Peter. — It is usual to associate with the indications of the doctrine in the early chapters of Acts the constructive tendencies found in 1 Peter. The Epistle of James i^ too uncertain in its date and authority, and its aim is too purely practical to warrant appeal to it on the apostohc doctrine of atonement. Indeed, 1 Peter is far from being free from difficulty when used for this purpose. The signs of Pauline influence are too strong for its use as a source of primitive Christian ideas with- out some hesitation. Still, the fact that St. Paul and St. Peter are represented as in harmony on the significance of the redemptive work of Christ, when they are manifestly at variance in other important
VOL. I. — 8
factors of the primitive faith, is not without its value ; it is possible also that their similarities may be accounted for by their common loyalty to the accepted Christian tradition. Taken as it stands, St. Peter's contribution maj' be epitomized thus : (1) Whilst the suffering death of Chi-ist holds, as else- where in apostolic writings, the central place, its strongest appeal is made in regard to the moral quahty of the sufferings. The patience and inno- cence of the Sufferer for righteou.sness' sake control its theological presentation. The exhortation to suffer with Christ by expressing His spirit in the hfe of discipleship obviously emphasizes the ethical appeal of His example, but this is based upon a due appreciation of His sufferings on our behalf. Quite a procession of theological ideas thus emerges. - — (2) The covenant idea with its sacrificial impHca- tion in 'sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ' is present (1^), possibly reminiscent of the words at the Supper. — (3) Ransomed 'with precious blood, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot, even the blood of Christ ' (1"), combines the idea of the sacrificial lamb with possibly an echo of the 'ransom' of Mk 10^1 — (4) The close connexion of Christ who 'suffered for you, leaving you an example, that ye should follow his steps,' and its ethical appeal, with the clear interpretation of the Passion as a sin-bearing, 'who his own self bare our sins in his body upon the tree' (2^'*), and its profound moral issues, 'that we ha\'ing died unto sins, might Uve unto righteousness ; by whose stripes ye were healed' — shows how intimately what are termed the objective and subjective con- ceptions of the atonement are associated in the writer's thought ; the end is moral and dominates the means, but the means are clearly substitution- ary, to the extent that the obligations to righteous- ness involved in. 'our sins' are assumed by the sinless Lamb of God. — (5) The writer once again glides w4th simple ease and familiarity from the force of the example of Christ to the abiding fact of His sin-bearing (3^^) : ' Because Christ also suffered for sins once (<iTaf, 'once for all'), the righteous for {vTr4p) the unrighteous, that He might bring us to God.) Acce.ss to God is regarded as a high privilege obtained by a great self-surrender and not as a native right to be taken for granted. Of course these ideas, which the writer of 1 Petei discusses in this apparently incidental way, are closely akin to those of the righteousness by faith and ethical obedience 'in Christ' which St. Paul discusses so fully and of set purpose in Ro 3 and 6 respectively, and this may suggest his influence. If so, then the evidence of 1 Peter will fall into the later PauHne period of apostohc doctrine, which we shall now consider at length ; but that would not depreciate its value as a witness to the faith of the Apostohc Church in its wider range.