Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life.
This is the first time I've come across the Arminian Baptist blog and so far I've learned a few new things. Although I've read some of the literature on how the Atonement works by those who support various versions of Anselm's theory and Reformed Theologians including Reformed Baptists, as well as New School Presbyterians and J.J. Butler and Ransom Dunn's 19th century Free Will Baptist Systematic Theology, I've never seen Isaiah 53 invoked either as a defense of the Commercial view of the Atonement, or a response to the use of Isaiah 53 when used to support the Commercial view of the Atonement. Personally, I came to believe a versious of the Governmental View of the Atonement which also includes the Christus Victor view of the Atonement. Thus, I believed that Jesus Christ, in the Atonement, defeated the forces of Sin and Death and the works of Satan as well as being a substitute for the penalty we deserve for our sins in thought, word, and deed. However, the quoting of this passage will force me to give another look at the Commercial Theory. My main problem though will be this: If the atonement is a literal commercial transaction and Christ died for everyone, then the "debt" is literally paid for and it is unjust to call in a debt once its been paid in full. If, on the other hand, "propitiation" and "debt" are not taken taken as literal commercial terms, though the Atonement itself is literal, one can say that Christ was punished as a substitute for the p penalty, then we could say that that Christ died for all men, however, the commercial terms are not meant literal, therefore not all are saved by the Atonement meant for all men. This is the teaching I came to believe, but the passage from Isaiah 53 may lead me to rethink my position.
Post a Comment