Atonement - Dan Weaver

Greetings in the precious name of Jesus, and I do want to welcome each

one here this morning. It's a privilege to be gathered together for this service

with this congregation. It's it's one of those things I remember as a as

a little child, the wonder of communion service. I looked forward to it

a lot going on. It piqued curiosity. There came a time in my

childhood that we didn't have Communion for about three years, and I kind of

missed it from the curiosity standpoint it At that point it didn't mean that much

to me. But the thing I remember is the Sunday we were going to

have Communion that week. Dad was calling his preachers friends around the United States

and say, we're having Communionists, We're having Communion. And I realized,

at my young age, probably ten to eleven somewhere near that that was a

big deal to my dad. And I just have to think about at different

time, probably every communion. Now it's just getting to be a bigger deal

to me. And my message this morning is maybe born out of a conversation

I had that and maybe it's the reason it's becoming a bigger deal to me

and I didn't. I didn't think a lot of it at the time.

But well, let's not get ahead of ourselves. Let's I'm going to first

just go to John six. And interestingly enough, I discovered after I got

here this morning that about three years ago, last time I appreached a communion

message, my text was John six. So I'm not going to just pull

off those notes, and we're not going to spend a lot of time here,

but I'd just like to set the stage a little bit. So this

Jesus fed the five thousand and as was Jesus way of teaching in this chapter.

Then he started teaching about Brett and it was accusing them, Hey,

you're just coming for the bread, but you should be looking for the bread

of life, and it's eternal life. And they said, give us that

bread, and he said, it's my body. You need to eat my

flesh. And they were offended. They were really offended by that thought.

And so Jesus had an answer for him. And I am just going to

read Versus fifty three to fifty five barely barely, I say, unto thee,

except to eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood,

you have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my

blood hath eternal life, and I will raise him up the last day,

for my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. So

you know, whenever my tendency is, whenever I'm having a conflict, especially

if it's something doctrinal or you know, as it gets deep, I just

I kind of backpedal and soften and try to go Joel with someone. Jesus

didn't take that approach here. He's like, well, no, you're not

only gonna eat my blood and drink eat my flesh, You're gonna drink my

blood too. And you know, we have the scriptures, we understand context

more of what Jesus was saying at the time, but I would contend there's

a lot we don't understand about it. But you know, today we're not

very offended by reading these verses, we think, but if someone says,

if you had you're gonna have to eat my flesh and drink my blood,

we'd be offended physically. And so back to my friend. I think I

mentioned this before, and it's one of those things that I don't know that

even tried to look into that much. But he asked me which theory of

atonement I ascribed to of the seven theories of Atonement, And to be honest,

when he asked me, I didn't even know anything about the seventh theories

of atonement. I believe that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from sin.

It was pretty simple. We'll get to more of that. But I

started looking into some kind of curiosity in and actually my first looks into it

seemed more confusing than helpful. But the more I studied it, the more

I realized. And it came out just this morning. Every song we sang,

and to be honest, most of the songs we sing have the Atonement

woven into it. And also, I want to be really careful here because

there's songs that we have written from with the wording it's from the basis of

what I consider a false belief about the tonement. But there's so much power

in the song. I don't want to ruin it for you, so I'm

not going to try. I'm gonna try not to point any of those out.

But the comment, the comment then that followed up, he says,

well, as I've studied into this, he says, I the blood is

a really big deal in Salvation. The blood is a big deal, and

that that comment had kind of struck a chord with me. I agreed the

blood is a big deal, but it kind of came to me that as

I was I was thinking about it, and it kind of reminded me of

when I was young, and if there was a electronics or motor or something

that Dad was done with, i'd reverse engineer it to see how it works.

Kind to go down to the take things apart and try to understand how

it works better. And that's a little what I would like to attempt to

do this morning with the blood. I would like to look a little deeper

at how does it work. And I'm not going to go into very much

detail about the seven theories of Atonement, but we are going to touch on

him this morning. And for those that maybe it piques your interests are there

are multiple books written on everyone, and some of them, iould contend probably

aren't worth reading. But so we're barely touching that. So I'm not going

to get real detailed obviously in my time this morning. One thing I should

warn you is that normally I get up here with four pages of notes.

Today I have eight. So if you were thinking of getting out early,

I can't guarantee anything. But one thing I did do is I wrote I

have most of the scripture written out today because there's is a lot of scripture,

and I think that is that is the difference. So I can take

some comfort in that how does how does it work? And and one thing

I think is really important, though, and is that there's mystery in the

blood and in the cross, and sometimes we can dig in and try to

understand it. And probably the biggest error in the theories of atonement, as

I would say, there's an element of truth in all of them. And

what can happen as we get we decide well that this is my theory,

this is my belief, this is what I'm going to ascribe to, and

we can be one right but lose the awe and the wonder and the glory

of the cross and of the blood of Christ. And I think that is

the that that's the key, and that is what I don't want us to

forget. And I would say my study of this and I'm not saying I

went way way deep into studying, because I'm not a way way deep studier.

Let's just be clear about that. But it's been very enriching. And

and the scriptures on the Blood of Christ and the songs on the Blood of

Christ as it's brought up, have begun to mean so much more to me.

There's so much in fact, it just helps you see that the that

the inspiration and the authors of those songs had a deep understanding, a deeper

understanding of the Blood of Christ that I would like to have. So atonement,

what is atonement? Well, and very simply to go clear back in

the beginning, atonement in the Ark of Noah, the arc was atoned in

the in the very beginning, it was covered with pitch within and without,

and that covering is the word atonement. But we take it. We go

on to Leviticas more and I believe it's sixteen times specifically talks about atonement.

But the whole book of Leviticas is referring to to the ritual sacrifice. And

what's included with the terms for we're purging sin, forgiven sin, wiped away,

sin, xpiated sin. This is through the rest of the Old Testament,

and on the on the day of a moment, the priest went into

the tabernaffle and sprinkled the blood on the mercy seat. Remember, first he

offered for himself, that was atonement. He offered for the sins of the

people. That was atonement. But on the once a year, not without

blood, he went in and sprinkled the blood on the mercy seat. That

was also atonement. But that was different. It wasn't for the sins of

the people. What that was doing is signifying God's acceptance or God's covering of

sin. In the Old Testament, Hebrews goes into that in more detail.

That was that was that was the sprinkling of the mercy seat and the great

high priest, according to Hebrews, and that's when Christ went in, and

he was both the sacrifice for our sins and the sprinkling on the mercy seat.

He signified the blood's reception by God. I'm keeping it that simple because

the blood's reception by God is a big deal in these different theories. And

so we'll get to that later. How does it work. It does not

work without blood and atonement, as we're referring to it, and we'll get

to those verses. But as I was thinking about Noah's ark as an analogy.

It actually is the analogy of both Old Testament and New Testament atonement,

because on the outside, the covering was the law that kept them, that

created a vessel for the souls to live on the inside for to say salvation

of their souls. Blood from the Smith Dictionary to blood is ascribed the Scripture

the mysterious sacredness which belongs to life, and God reserved it to himself when

allowing man the dominion over and use of the lower animals for food. Thus

it acquires a double power. There's a double power in blood. First,

is that sacrificial atonement, and that's what we're going to be looking mostly out

this morning, is that sacrificial atonement. But it's that of becoming a curse

when wantonly shed unless duly be it it. So it's both an atonement and

it's a curse when wantonly shed, and especially we think of that and when

we crucify Christ afresh. I'm just you can turn to Hebrews nine. I'm

going to read the last half of that chapter. There's a couple things about

the blood of Christ. Judas testimony was that it was innocent blood Matthew twenty

seven four. First Peter one nineteen calls it the precious blood of Christ as

of a lamb without blemish or spot. Precious precious blood of Christ. And

I think Peter, we see that in his writings and his testimony. It's

cleansing. First John one seven says, but if we walk in the light

as he is in the light, we have fellowship one one of another,

and the blood of Jesus Christ, his son, cleanses us from all sin.

And that's just step one of the mysteries. And it goes back to

the two definitions of blood. We talk about blood stains and in the in

the world of law and order and murder, and we sac to the we

talk about the the price of blood. We talk about justice for murder,

but that is the blood stains. But this blood of Christ cleanses and it's

a it's an oxymoron that is hard to quite wrap our heads around until we

experience it. And revelations won five and from Jesus Christ, who is a

faithful witness in the first begotten of the dead, and the Prince of the

kings of the earth, unto him that loved us and washed us from our

sins in his own blood, in his own blood he washed us. And

so going into Hebrews nine, he unpacks this a little more. I think

I'm just going to read from verse eleven through eleven through the end of the

chapter. So the first ten verses speak of the Old Testament tabernacle, mas

sacrifice, the insufficiency of it, how couldn't make it perfect? In verse

nine, and it talked about that the high priest went in every year,

not without blood in verse seven. But Christ verse eleven about Christ. Let's

start there. But Christ being coming a high priest of good things to come

by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is

to say, not of this building, neither by blood of goats and calves,

but by his own blood. He entered in once into the Holy Place,

having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and

goats and ashes and then half are sprinkling the unclean sanctifieth to the purifying of

the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who, through

the eternal Spirit, offering himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from

dead works to serve the living God. And for this cause he is the

mediator of the New Testament, that by means of death, for the redemption

of the transgression that we're under the First Testament, they which are called might

receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is there must also

of necessity be the death of the testator. So that's where there's a covenant,

there is a covenant, there must be of necessity the death of the

testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead. Otherwise it

is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. And this is giving

an analogy of like a last Will and Testament. Whereupon neither the First Testament

was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the

people according to law, he took the blood of calves and of goats,

with water and scarlet wool and hisssop, sprinkled both the book and the people,

saying, this is the blood of the Testament, which God hath enjoined

unto you. Moreover, he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle and all the

vessels of the ministry. And almost all things are by the law purged with

blood. And without the shedding of blood is no remission. It was therefore

necessary that the patterns of things in heaven should be purified with these, But

the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ is not entered

into the Holy Place made with hands, which are the figures of the chew,

but into Heaven itself now to appear in the presence of God for us.

Nor yet that He should offer himsel self often as the High priest entereth

into the Holy Place every year, with the blood of others. For then

must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world. But now once

in the end of the world, hath he appeared to put away sin by

the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men, wants to

die. But after this the judgment, So Christ was once offered to bear

the sins of many, and unto them that took for him, shall he

appeared the second time without sin unto salvation. So but Christ and we just

talked about Christ's own blood, offering his own blood that he is watching us

from. In Revelations, it has the same term here in verse twelve.

But by his own blood he entered once into the Holy Place, and the

the goats, the sheep, the goats, the animals. They were a

substitution offering. Rather than I die, they die. Christ in a sense

was also a substitution offering. He died so that we could live. But

the power is that he willingly gave himself. It was the first, It

was the only, It was the ultimate sacrifice. It was not the blood

of animals. It was a purchase of redemption, not for himself. You

know, there have been many innocent men that have died wrongly convicted, convicted

and died. There's only one that was perfectly innocent. And it just goes

on. And I don't think I'm going to go through here peace by peace,

but maybe just rehighlight that. It talks about the insufficiency of the bulls

and the goats. But christ blood is sufficient. And that's especially in thirteen

and fourteen, and you go down to twenty two, and almost all things

are by the law purged with blood, and without the shedding of blood is

no mission. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things to have should

be purified with these. It was necessary. It was necessary because we are

human, and it was sufficient because He is God. Where there's a covenant

blood is required, and so Christ once offered to bear the sins of many.

So I'm going to summarize here the theories of atonement. I was trying

to figure out how to put this into a handout, because I so much

gets lost and in just summarizing summaries and so, this is this is probably

summarizing a summarized summary about so. And I'm not I'm not trying to be

detailed here, but more just kind of help us understand the difference and maybe

pique our interest a little to personally study it further, because you know,

one thing I noticed is I remember my friend telling me different things that really

got a hold of him when he was studying this thing, and I could

tell it was a big deal to him, but it didn't really affect me

until I studied it. And so thinking of the nature of Christ and his

work, and remember, we can never fully understand or fully appreciate it.

The first one is the moral influenced theory, and it's thought sometimes that this

was the verily earliest one, and it simply thought that Jesus came and died

in order to bring about a positive change to humanity. That was the purpose

it was a positive change, and the moral change comes through his teachings of

Christ and his example. So it focuses not just on his death, where

I believe that we would tend to focus atonement or on the death of Christ,

that would be what would But it's and there I believe there's an element

of truth here, but it's inadequate. If you hang your hat on it

is that the theory focus is not just on his death, but on his

entire life and sees the saving work of Jesus not only in the event of

the crucifixion, but also in the words he has spoken. In example,

he said, I guess I'll just say that I would tend to believe that

while his spoken word and example he said is priceless and necessary through the for

a Christian and it can be made practical through the Holy Spirit, we're saved

through the blood of Christ. And then the next was the ransom theory.

And this theory essentially teaches that Jesus Christ died as a ransom sacrifice. Now

here's the deals and it's paid either to Satan. Which is the most dominant

view of this is that this death was was Christ's payment to Satan. To

free the world from sin, to free Satan's clutch on the world. The

death of Christ was that, but then Satan was trick because Christ raised from

the dead, that is, and that goes. Actually, the Gospel of

Nicodemus has sort of written with this theory, but it also does include that

the ransom was paid to God the Father, and Jesus death then acts as

a payment to satisfy the debt of the souls of human the human race,

the same death that we inherited when we inherited adam sin, the sin nature,

and probably then the most common in Christianity is called the Christus victor the

Christmas Victor theory, and this theory Jesus dies in order to defeat the powers

of evil such as sin, death and the devil, in order to free

mankind from their bondage. It's related to ransom for you, but the difference

is is it's not paying God or the devil off, it's there's no payment

to them. Within the Christian victor framework, the cross did not pay off

anyone, but defeated evil, therefore setting the human race free. So that

was a freedom. And then these rests those are those are early Church theories

those first three, the fort next four like the next one. The satisfaction

theory came out in the twelfth century, so it's it's later, and some

of these build on each other. The satisfaction theory is Jesus christ death is

understood as a death to satisfy the justice of God, and so it's it's

focus is on the justice of God, and there had to be a balance

of justice, and so Christ took that that punishment and satisfied. So it

was a means of restitution. Satisfaction means restitution, the mending of what was

broken, to paying back of a debt. The penal substitution theory, and

this is during the time of the Reformation. It's just a modification of the

or it's a further modification of the satisfaction theory. And the penal substitution is

Christ dies to satisfies God's wrath against human sin. Jesus is punished, which

is the penal in place of the sinners in order to satisfy the justice of

God and the legal demand of God to punish sin. And so the difference

between these last two the satisfaction and that and that God was satisfied with Jesus

sin for justice or this one. This one is saying that instead that God

is not satisfied with the debt of justice being paid by Jesus, but that

God is satisfied with punishing Jesus in the place of mankind. So the example

of the penal substitution theory would be that, if I'm just a very analogy

in our day would be if somebody steals, they go to jail, and

that's there, they do their time, they put in their their So it's

not paying just for that specific by the specific offense, and then it goes

on to another. The governmental theory is also then a variation of the penal

substitution that Jesus Christ does not take the exact punishment we deserve. He takes

a punishment. Jesus dies on the cross, therefore to demonstrate the displeasure of

God towards sin. Actually, with my analogy was going a little more towards

this one. He died to display God's wrath against sin in the high price

which must be paid, but not to specifically satisfy that particular wrath. The

governmental theory also teaches that Jesus died only for the church, and if you,

by faith are part of the church, you can take part of God's

cell in God's salvation. The church then acts as the sort of hiding place

from God's punishment. And my warning to this one, which is a later

one, is it's under this that Christianity fights wars as this governmental It is

because we are the chosen. And I was just starting one of my one

of my friends at work this week. He said, some one of his

family, they've gotten into a segment of a I forget even which domination is

a pretty far right segment of it. And their their push is to set

up a theocracy. And I just tell them, you know, I can't

reconcile that with the teachings of Christ and the Kingdom of Heaven. And he

actually agreed with me he couldn't either. But and he's with them this weekend,

so we can pray that he can help give him some truth, share

some truth. That's the governmental theory the church. Then, well, the

Jesus died for the church. If you, by faith are part of the

church, then you can take part of God's salvation. So the other thing

is that Jesus didn't die for all men. So you can see the Calvinists

flavor coming in here. In fact, they were, they were instrumental in

that Jesus didn't die for all men. Jesus died for the Church. And

yeah, I just I believe there's a lot of error in that one.

The scapegoat theory is the last one. And there's, like I said,

there's an element of truth here that Jesus dies as a scapegoat of humanity,

and Jesus was a type of the scapegoat. This theory moves away from the

idea that Jesus died in order to act upon God or as a payment to

the devil scapegoating. Therefore, it's considered to be a form of non islent

atonement, and that Jesus is not a sacrifice but a victim. And so

what I want us to catch on here, and thanks for bearing with me

going through this these So we started out with a moral influence theory that minimize

the blood, and we ended up with the scapebuilt theory that puts emphasis on

the person but minimizes the blood. And I guess I am one thing as

I've studied us that I'm convinced of personally is that the blood is supreme.

The sacrifice was sufficient, and each each theory presented here is is. It's

actually very dense and complex, and there's so much more that I didn't touch.

There are there are deep truths in every one of them. But thankfully,

at the end of the day, we aren't saved by theories. We're

saved by Jesus. And that's how Morrison ended his summary of this. I

appreciated that, and I have tried. I have tried to as I've gone

through and studied this and look at it too. To be as someone testified

once of Pilgrim Marpak that he said his view was bibly derived and maintains the

same simplicity and lack of detail found in the scripture. And so I'd like

to go look at some scripture about the blood of Christ. And like I

said, I have quite a few here. I think I'm spent too much

time to get to this point reconciliation Ephesians two. But now as Christ Jesus,

he who sometimes were far off, made nigh by the blood of Christ.

For he is our Peace, who hath made both one, and hath

broken down the middle wall of partition between us, having abolished in his flesh

the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in obedience, for to make

in himself of Twain one new man, so making peace, and that he

might reconcile both onto God in one body by the cross, having slain the

enmity, thereby reconciled, be brought back together, be made as new.

And the thing I love about this passage is Christ didn't need to be reconciled

to God. He was reconciling us to God. But included in that as

we're reconciled to each other. And that's brought out different times in jesus teaching

and in the communion as an aspect of his blood that we'll get to redemption,

redemption being bought, and this there's elements of the ransom that come back

to this being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ

Jesus. That's Romans three twenty four and twenty five, whom God has set

forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness

for the remission of sins that are that are passed through the forbearance of God.

So we've been redeemed again by His blood justification Romans five. I'm just

going to break in a couple of verses here. I think I'll read nine

through eleven. Much more than being now justified by his blood, we shall

be saved from the wrath through him. For if when we were enemies we

were reconciled to God by the death of his son, much more being reconciled

are we saved by his life. And not only so, but we also

joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, whom we have now received the

atonement. So this is It talks about being justified by his blood, but

it goes on and talks about the reconciliation. Sanctification is Hebrews ten, verse

twenty eight, twenty nine, He that despised Moses law died without mercy under

two or three witnesses, how much sore punishment? Suppose? Ye, shall

we be thought worthy? Who hath trodden under the foot the son of Man

and have counted the blood of the Covenant, wherewith he was sacrificed an unholy

thing, And hath not hath done? Hath done despite unto the spirit of

grace the blood where we're sanctified. And let's talk about how much of a

punishment will have. And this goes back to the description of blood, the

definition in the beginning it's a sacrificial atonement and become a cursed when wantonly shed

or unduly unless duly expiated. And Hebrews sixty six, as if they fall

away, seeing they crucified to themselves the son of God afresh, to put

him to an open chain. And I think this is one thing with this

study is helped me understand this, this seriousness of taking the Lord's supper unworthily,

crucifying him afresh, and especially if you go back to Versus Hebrews.

Nine, and what that does, what that does to the conscience in Christ

blood. We already read this passage from from John, but also in Matthew

twenty six seven twenty six. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread

and blessed it, and break it and gave it to the disciples and said,

take eat. This is my body. And he took the cup and

gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, drinking all of it,

for this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for

many for the remission of sins. But I send you I will not drink

henceforth of this truth of vine until that day when I drink it new with

you in the Father's kingdom. And then the verses we read earlier talked about

the blood gives eternal life. But the thing with Jesus instituting communion with his

blood is the blood. It's not just between it's not just between us and

God. This thing of communion that Jesus institute is a fellowship, it's a

coin and nia it's the blood flow. Is the blood flows in a congregation,

the blood flows among God's people. Might think I'm getting over to the

governmental theory. Now that's not my intention. And finally, victory is by

the blood. The blood overcame, and the blood overcomes the revelations twelve eleven.

And they overcame by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of

the testimony. And they loved not their lives unto the death. And they

overcame by the blood of the Lamb. Jesus overcame by his blood. He

overcame sin. But here it's talk is a testimony that the saints overcame by

the blood of the Lamb. And this blood was shed not just so that

he could have the victory. So that but that we can have the victory.

I'd like to go to Second Corinthians five, read seventeen to twenty one.

This is just a beautiful summary in it talks about substitution, reconciliation.

He can probably pull all the theories out of this. Actually, in fact,

that's the interesting thing is in the theories of atonement they tend to use

the same scriptures and emphasize different words. So we're just I'm going to just

read Second Corinthians five seventeen. Therefore, if any man be in Christ,

he has a new creature. Old things are passed away. Behold, all

things are become new, and all things are of God, who hath reconciled

us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given us the ministry of reconciliation.

Or again is that idea of us. It's not just a ministry of

reconciliation to sin, it's with each other. To wit that God was in

Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them, and

hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. And when we are ambassador of

Christ, as though God did beseech you by us. We pray you in

Christ's stead be reconciled to God, for he hath made him to be sin

for us who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of

God in him. And that last verse speaks of that substitution made sin for

him Verse twenty. Now are we ambassadors for Christ? Let let's be ambassadors

for Christ and his redeeming blood. Now, if you could humor me,

I'd like to sing one song. It's some two sixty one in the churchill,

very familiar. Probably don't need a book, and it's some It's a

song that nothing but the blood. And the thing I love about this song

is I couldn't find any doctrinal error in it because there's actually not very many

words in it. But I would like if you could just stand and sing

this worshipfully with us together and the awe and the wonder and the glory of

the blood. Let's sing what can wash using a love? Jesss What can't

make me your everything? Nothing but love? Jess, Oh, preshious sins

too makes me? Why so no found? I know nothing but the blood

of cheese for my glancy, this size, nothing but the blood of Jessus

for my mother, and signy nothing but the blood jess Oh crash juss of

blood. Face me like snow found dying. Know nothing with the blood cheers,

nothing can be for see my toe my blood of cheesss not night love

cheese. Oh Presus is a blow face me I snow no found dye go

nothing with me. See that's about our heads to break our kind grace,

Assembly, Father, we come well. Thank you for the blood, for

Christ's sacrifice, for his for your love, for your great love, for

the provision you made. And nor do we thank you for the privilege of

gathering together this morning and help us that we might humbly and obediently follow Christ's

command to drink his blood and eat his flesh, and remember his death until

he comes. Nor we just pray Thy blessing on our communion service here,

on each of us here, that we might be true stewards of the blood

of Christ in our own lives. Just guide and direct and give this time

to you in the name of Jesus. We pray Amen. Maybe seated