The Ante-Nicene Church

2010-02-26T16:46:00.000-08:00

The Early Church View of

the Atonement

The Early Church vs. the Modern Church

The early church held to the Classic or Ransom view of the atonement. This was the view of the Western Church for the first 1000 years of church history, and it is still the view held by the Eastern Church. This view says that in the Garden Adam and Eve had a choice regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They could choose to obey God and not eat of the tree or they could choose to obey Satan and eat. Well, we all know the choice they made. According to the Classic or Ransom view, when Adam and Eve decided to obey Satan they fell under his control. Basically they became his slaves. Since they were slaves all of their offspring would also be born slaves. At this point they had no hope and were condemned. However, Jesus offered himself to God as a sacrifice to lay down his life in man’s place to purchase back what had been lost, mankind. It was common in the days of Christ that people would be taken and then a ransom demanded for their freedom. This is how Christ’s sacrifice was understood by the early church. Not as an animal offered for sacrifice at the altar. Christ’s sacrifice was a heroic sacrifice; He laid down His life for others.

There are many other aspects of the atonement. Such as Christ coming as a teacher showing us how to live so that we would not fall back into Satan’s power once freed. He came to fulfill the Law, preach the Kingdom of God, and destroy the works of the devil among others.

What did the Ante-Nicene Church say?

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

Ignatius, c.105 The Martyrdom of Ignatius Chapter 2
He was a disciple of the Apostle John.

Trajan said, “Do you mean Him who was crucified under Pontius Pilate?” Ignatius replied, “I mean Him who crucified my sin, with him who was the inventor of it, and who has condemned [and cast down] all the deceit and malice of the devil under the feet of those who carry Him in their heart.”

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

Irenaeus, c. 180 Against Heresies, Book 3 Chapter 23
He was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the Apostle John.

For at the first Adam became a vessel in his (Satan’s) possession, whom he did also hold under his power, that is, by bringing sin on him iniquitously, and under colour of immortality entailing death upon him. For, while promising that they should be as gods, which was in no way possible for him to be, he wrought death in them: wherefore he who had led man captive, was justly

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

Irenaeus c. 180 Against Heresies, Book 4 Chapter 24
He was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the Apostle John.

As I have pointed out in the preceding book, the apostle did, in the first place, instruct the Gentiles to depart from the superstition of idols, and to worship one God, the Creator of heaven and earth, and the Framer of the whole creation; and that His Son was His Word, by whom He founded all things; and that He, in the last times, was made a man among men; that He reformed the human race, but destroyed and conquered the enemy of man, and gave to His handiwork victory against the adversary.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Irenaeus, c.180 Against Heresies, Book 5 Chapter 1
He was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the Apostle John.And since the apostasy tyrannized over us unjustly, and, though we were by nature the property of the omnipotent God, alienated us contrary to nature, rendering us its own disciples, the Word of God, powerful in all things, and not defective with regard to His own justice, did righteously turn against that apostasy, and redeem from it His own property, not by violent means, as the [apostasy] had obtained dominion over us at the beginning, when it insatiably snatched away what was not its own, but by means of persuasion, as became a God of counsel, who does not use violent means to obtain what He desires; so that neither should justice be infringed upon, nor the ancient handiwork of God go to destruction.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 8

Milito, c.170 The Philosopher Chapter 2

The whole creation, I say, was astonished; but, when our Lord arose from the place of the dead, and trampled death under foot, and bound the strong one, and set man free, then did the whole creation see clearly that for man’s sake the Judge was condemned,
captured in his turn by God; but man, who had been led captive, was loosed from the bonds of condemnation.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3

Tertullian, c. 197 First Apology Chapter 2

We, therefore, who in our knowledge of the Lord have obtained some knowledge also of His foe—who, in our discovery of the Creator, have at the same time laid hands upon the great corrupter, ought neither to wonder nor to doubt that, as the prowess of the corrupting and God-opposing angel overthrew in the beginning the virtue of man, the work and image of God, the possessor of the world, so he has entirely changed man’s nature—created, like his own, for perfect sinlessness—into his own state of wicked enmity against his Maker, that in the very thing whose gift to man, but not to him, had grieved him, he might make man guilty in God’s eyes, and set up his own supremacy.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 9

Origen, c.228 Commentary on the Gospel of John Book 1 Chapter 39

But Christ is our redemption because we had become prisoners and needed ransoming.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 9

Origen, c.228 Commentary on the Gospel of John Book 6 Chapter 35

This slain lamb has been made, according to certain hidden reasons, a purification of the whole world, for which, according to the Father’s love to man, He submitted to death, purchasing us back by His own blood from him who had got us into his power, sold under sin.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 5

Cyprian, c.250 The Treatises of Cyprian, Treatise 8

But, moreover, what is that providence, and how great the clemency, that by a plan of salvation it is provided for us, that more abundant care should be taken for preserving man after he is already redeemed! For when the Lord at His advent had cured those wounds which Adam had borne, and had healed the old poisons of the serpent, He gave a law to the sound man and bade him sin no more, lest a worse thing should befall the sinner.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 6

Methodius, c 290 The Banquet of the ten Virgins Discourse 3 Chapter 6

For with this purpose the Word assumed the nature of man, that, having overcome the serpent, He might by Himself destroy the condemnation which had come into being along with man’s ruin. For it was fitting that the Evil One should be overcome by no other, but by him whom he had deceived, and whom he was boasting that he held in subjection, because no otherwise was it possible that sin and condemnation should be destroyed, unless that same man on whose account it had been said, “Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shall return,” (Gen. 3:19) should be created anew, and undo the sentence which for his sake had gone forth on all, that “as in Adam” at first “all die, even so” again “in Christ,” who assumed the nature and position of Adam, should “all be made alive.” (1 Cor. 15:22)

These are just a few of quotes From the Ante-Nicene writers

In this article I will deal mostly with issues that relate to the Satisfaction, Penal and the Classic/Ransom views.

I personally find that the Satisfaction and Penal models of the atonement fall woefully short in explaining the atonement. I also find that they cannot be supported by Scripture very well. For instance, the major claim of the Penal model of the atonement says that Christ died to satisfy the wrath of God. Can anyone present a Scripture that says Christ died to satisfy the wrath of God? I have not found a single verse.

The satisfaction model came into being around the 11th century it came from the Catholic Theologian Anselm of Canterbury. Not liking the historically held Classic view, he introduced his Satisfaction model of the atonement. The idea is that man offended God’s holiness when he sinned and this offense was so great that man could not make amends. Under this idea God demands justice but man is unable to provide it. Man had offended God, so, it must be man who satisfies this demand for justice. Christ coming as a man not only is able to satisfy the demand for justice but is also holy enough to provide the required payment.

The Penal model of the atonement is basically a modification of Anselm’s Satisfaction model. During the Reformation the reformers took Anselm’s Satisfaction theory that they had grown up with and tweaked it into what is now known as the Penal model. While Anselm’s Satisfaction model said that man had offended God’s honor, the Penal model sees Christ’s death as appeasing the wrath of God. An exchange or substitution was necessary and Christ died in the place of the sinner, Paying the debt owed to God by the sinner.

Notice that in both the Satisfaction and Penal models restitution must be made. The difference between the satisfaction and Penal models is that the satisfaction model says that God’s honor has been offended by man’s sin, the Penal model says that Man owes God a debt for his sin. Either way both say that man must make restitution to God for his sins, since man cannot do so Christ did so in his place.

The first problem I have with this is that I have found nowhere in Scripture that states God requires any kind of payment for sins. Everything that I see simply says God will forgive our sins.

The second problem I have with these is that they do not allow God to forgive our sins. Both of these models say that we owe God. If we pay God what we owe Him, what is there to forgive? If I owe you $100 there are two ways we can reconcile the debt. Either I pay you the $100, in which case the debt is paid and there is nothing for you to forgive, or you forgive the debt, and thus I have not paid it. They are the only two ways I know to reconcile the debt. So if Christ paid the debt for man, then there is nothing for God to forgive the debt has been paid and man’s obligation to God has been met. There are other problems but these are the two most glaring issues with these models.

But what do the Scriptures say?

Scriptural support for the Classic or Ransom view of the Atonement is strong, unlike the Penal and Satisfaction models which I find very shaky at best. I find that in order to support the Satisfaction and Penal views of the Atonement from Scripture one needs to infer quite a bit. Let’s look at the Classic/Ransom view. The main idea in this model is that Christ redeemed or ransomed mankind from sin, death, and the Devil.

Acts 26:12-19 ( KJV ) Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests, At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me. And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me. Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:

Jesus says that He called Paul to turn the people from the power of darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God. I don’t think it gets much clearer than this. This is what Paul is talking about in Colossians 1.

Colossians 1:12-14 ( KJV ) Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

Also notice that we have forgiveness (not payment) of sins and the inheritance which do not come until the people are turned from the power of Satan.

You see the penal model of the atonement does not even address the issue of Satan, yet Jesus said that those of faith do not even have the forgiveness (not payment) of sins until after they are translated out of the power of Satan. John tells us the same thing.

1 John 3:8 ( KJV ) He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

Again Paul says,Colossians 2:14-15 ( KJV ) Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

Christ fulfilled the law and spoiled the works of the devil.

Consider Peter's words,
Acts 10:38 ( KJV ) How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

Consider the writer of Hebrews,Hebrews 2:14-15 ( KJV ) Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

The Penal model does not deal with this at all. We see many passages that speak of Christ coming to destroy the works of the devil. The Classic view deals with all of this and more. It is comprehensive and explains much more about why Christ came. Considering that the devil is our adversary and the Scriptures warn us to be on our guard against him, I find it amazing that the Penal model doesn't even mention the devil.

Let’s look at the Satisfaction and Penal models of the Atonement. I will deal mainly with the Penal model of the Atonement because it is the more prevalent of the two. In the Penal model of the Atonement there are two similar ideas, one, the death of Christ appeased the wrath of God, and two, that Christ’s death paid the sin debt owed to God by man.

Let’s begin with the first one since it seems to have stronger Scriptural support. Does Scripture support the idea that Christ’s death was to appease the wrath of God? We do have this passage.

Romans 1:18 ( KJV ) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

Does this passage say that Christ’s death appeased the wrath of God? Actually it doesn’t. When we look closely we see that the passage actually says that the wrath of God is revealed against those who hold the truth in unrighteousness. This passage speaks of those holding the God’s word in unrighteousness. Suppose these people no longer hold God’s word in unrighteousness, it seems they would no longer be under God’s wrath.

Did Christ’s death appease the wrath of God? If it did wouldn’t that mean that God’s wrath has been appeased towards all men? After all Scripture does say,

Hebrews 2:9 ( KJV ) But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

Why then is God still upset with those who hold the truth in unrighteousness if His wrath has been appeased?

What about the idea that Christ’s death was a payment to God for sins? Well, I can’t actually find any Scripture that supports that idea. As I said, much of the support for these ideas must be inferred from Scripture because they are not explicitly stated. Therefore there is not much for me to post in their defense. However, there is this passage of Scripture that deals with debt owed to the King.

Matthew 18:23-35 ( KJV ) Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt. But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt. So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was done. Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.

We see the king simply forgave the debt, he didn’t require it from some third party he simply forgave it. Jesus said this is how the kingdom of heaven is.

I find the evidence quite convincing. Look how many passage clearly state that Christ redeemed mankind from the power of darkness, while not many passages can be found in support of the Satisfaction and Penal models. I didn’t mention that Satisfaction model above but the same basic arguments can be made against it, there just doesn’t seem to be much Scripture for it.

But Doesn’t Scripture tell us that Jesus was a Sacrifice for our Sins?

Yes, Scripture does tell us that Jesus was a sacrifice for our sins. The question is how are we to understand that sacrifice? Do we understand it as a heroic sacrifice, one in which Christ willingly took a lower position and humbled Himself giving up the glory of a king, or as ritualistic sacrifice being offered on an alter?

Philippians 2:5-8 ( KJV ) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Hebrews 2:9 ( KJV ) But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

John 15:12-13 ( KJV ) This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

Has Christ, the king of kings not sacrificed in this? He left behind all of the glory he had with the Father, humbled Himself and became obedient unto death. If that is not a sacrifice I don’t know what is. Consider what He left behind.

John 17:5 ( KJV ) 5And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

This alone is a sacrifice that we cannot comprehend. And He did this for God, to redeem that which was precious to God. Everything He did in the Atonement, He did for God.

Hebrews 9:14 ( KJV ) 14How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

Again, as I said everything He did in the atonement was for God. Scripture says He offered Himself without spot to God. He was sinless and perfect. He lived the law perfectly.

What about the Old Testament sacrifices?

Don’t these point to Jesus? Yes, they do, but how? The Old Testament sacrifices were types pointing the way to Christ. Paul calls Christ “Our Passover”. In the same way that the Israelites were protected by the blood of the lamb when the angle of death passed over, Christians are protected by the blood of Christ. What about the bullock for a sin offering? What was this showing? It was showing that an innocent one would die for the guilty. Why did it have to be perfect and without blemish? God was giving man the best He had and wanted the same from man. What about the scapegoat?

Leviticus 16:7-10 ( KJV ) And he shall take the two goats, and present them before the LORD at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other lot for the scapegoat. And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the LORD’S lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering. But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness.

One innocent goat dies for sin while the other is set free.

If we say that this sacrifice was a type of ritualistic sacrifice to appease that wrath of God I think we run into a few problems. Scripture says at that God had no pleasure in the animal sacrifices of the Israelites.

Hebrews 10:3-10 ( KJV ) 3But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. 4For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. 5Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: 6In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. 7Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. 8Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Isaiah 1:10-15 ( KJV ) Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats. When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts? Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them. And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood.

Jeremiah 6:19-20 ( KJV ) Hear, O earth: behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts, because they have not hearkened unto my words, nor to my law, but rejected it. To what purpose cometh there to me incense from Sheba, and the sweet cane from a far country? your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices sweet unto me.

OK, we see that God had no pleasure in the Old Testament sacrifices. He said “offering for sin thou wouldest not”. God didn't want that. Why would God not want animal offerings for sin, yet want His Son offered for sin?

If Christ was sacrificed on that cross to die to appease the wrath of God wouldn’t that be a human sacrifice? What does God say about human sacrifices?

Ezekiel 16:20-22 ( KJV ) 20Moreover thou hast taken thy sons and thy daughters, whom thou hast borne unto me, and these hast thou sacrificed unto them to be devoured. Is this of thy whoredoms a small matter, 21That thou hast slain my children, and delivered them to cause them to pass through the fire for them? 22And in all thine abominations and thy whoredoms thou hast not remembered the days of thy youth, when thou wast naked and bare, and wast polluted in thy blood. Ezekiel 16:35-37

( KJV ) 35Wherefore, O harlot, hear the word of the LORD: 36Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thy filthiness was poured out, and thy nakedness discovered through thy whoredoms with thy lovers, and with all the idols of thy abominations, and by the blood of thy children, which thou didst give unto them; 37Behold, therefore I will gather all thy lovers, with whom thou hast taken pleasure, and all them that thou hast loved, with all them that thou hast hated; I will even gather them round about against thee, and will discover thy nakedness unto them, that they may see all thy nakedness.

These passages are in the middle of a scathing rebuke from God to Israel, read the chapter. In it God rebukes the Israelites for sacrificing their children to appease the gods of the heathen, are we to believe, that God says this is an abomination to Him, and then to understand, that He did the same thing, that He says is an abomination?

Ezekiel 20:29-33 ( KJV ) 29Then I said unto them, What is the high place whereunto ye go? And the name thereof is called Bamah unto this day. 30Wherefore say unto the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Are ye polluted after the manner of your fathers? and commit ye whoredom after their abominations? 31For when ye offer your gifts, when ye make your sons to pass through the fire, ye pollute yourselves with all your idols, even unto this day: and shall I be inquired of by you, O house of Israel? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I will not be inquired of by you. 32And that which cometh into your mind shall not be at all, that ye say, We will be as the heathen, as the families of the countries, to serve wood and stone. 33As I live, saith the Lord GOD, surely with a mighty hand, and with a stretched out arm, and with fury poured out, will I rule over you:

Ezekiel 23:36-39 ( KJV ) 36The LORD said moreover unto me; Son of man, wilt thou judge Aholah and Aholibah? yea, declare unto them their abominations; 37That they have committed adultery, and blood is in their hands, and with their idols have they committed adultery, and have also caused their sons, whom they bare unto me, to pass for them through the fire, to devour them. 38Moreover this they have done unto me: they have defiled my sanctuary in the same day, and have profaned my sabbaths. 39For when they had slain their children to their idols, then they came the same day into my sanctuary to profane it; and, lo, thus have they done in the midst of mine house.

Jeremiah 19:3-6 ( KJV ) 3And say, Hear ye the word of the LORD, O kings of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem; Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, the which whosoever heareth, his ears shall tingle. 4Because they have forsaken me, and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of innocents; 5They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind: 6Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that this place shall no more be called Tophet, nor The valley of the son of Hinnom, but The valley of slaughter. Jeremiah

32:32-35 ( KJV ) 32Because of all the evil of the children of Israel and of the children of Judah, which they have done to provoke me to anger, they, their kings, their princes, their priests, and their prophets, and the men of Judah, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem. 33And they have turned unto me the back, and not the face: though I taught them, rising up early and teaching them, yet they have not hearkened to receive instruction. 34But they set their abominations in the house, which is called by my name, to defile it. 35And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

God says it is an abomination to offer their sons and daughters to idols, He says it never entered His mind. Now consider what God said to Noah.

Genesis 22:1-2 ( KJV ) And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.

This appears to be a human sacrifice.

Genesis 22:3-10 ( KJV ) And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him. Then on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off. And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ass; and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you. And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took the fire in his hand, and a knife; and they went both of them together. And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together. And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.

Genesis 22:11-13 ( KJV ) And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I. And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me. And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.

God could have very easily raised Isaac from the dead and Abraham knew this.

Hebrews 11:16-19 ( KJV ) But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city. By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called: Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.

So why did God stop Abraham? If God had allowed Abraham to kill Isaac this would have given the nations reason to bring a charge against God. Their claim could be that God was no different than their gods because He accepted human sacrifice. However, God tested Abraham and at the same time proved Himself Holy and just.

Contrary to what the Penal model of the Atonement says, I think it clear that God does not like or desire human sacrifices, especially not His own Son. If we look at this sacrifice in which Jesus chose to lay down His life to redeem that which was so beloved to God we see how loving God is, as opposed to an angry God seeking punishment to appease His justice. John said God is love, Jesus said greater love has no man than this, that He lay down his life for his friends. Yes God is just, but He also is love. He says I will forgive their sins. Jesus offered Himself to God, in that He humbled Himself, came to earth and paved the way that would allow mankind to be reconciled to God.

Baptism and the Ante-Nicene Fathers

2010-02-09T12:16:00.000-08:00

How did the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers understand baptism? Was it essential or was it just a act of obedience? First let me clarify, the Ante-Nicene Church Fathers are those men who led the church prior to the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. Any mention of the Early Church will be limited to this time period. To answer the question one need only look to the writings of these men. Below are some quotes taken from their writings.

Ignatius was a disciple of the apostle John

Ignatius appeals to Rom. 6:5"Wherefore also, ye appear to me to live not after the manner of men, but according to Jesus Christ, who died for us, in order that, by believing in His death, ye may by baptism be made partakers of His resurrection." (Ignatius, Epistle to the Trallians, II)

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

Barnabas 70-130
Further, what says He? “And there was a river flowing on the right, and from it arose beautiful trees; and whosoever shall eat of them shall live for ever.” (Ezek. 47:12) This meaneth, that we indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement, but come up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear [of God] and trust in Jesus in our spirit. “And whosoever shall eat of these shall live for ever,”

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2

Hermas 150
And I said to him, “I should like to continue my questions.” “Speak on,” said he. And I said, “I heard, sir, some teachers maintain that there is no other repentance than that which takes place, when we descended into the water and received remission of our former sins.” He said to me, “That was sound doctrine which you heard; for that is really the case. For he who has received remission of his sins ought not to sin any more, but to live in purity

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2

Hermas 150
Accordingly, those also who fell asleep received the seal of the Son of God. For,” he continued, “before a man bears the name of the Son of God he is dead; but when he receives the seal he lays aside his deadness, and obtains life. The seal, then, is the water: they descend into the water dead, and they arise alive.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

Justin Martyr 160
Since at our birth we were born without our own knowledge or choice, by our parents coming together, and were brought up in bad habits and wicked training; in order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe; he who leads to the laver the person that is to be washed calling him by this name alone.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

Justin Martyr 160
But there is no other [way] than this,—to become acquainted with this Christ, to be washed in the fountain spoken of by Isaiah for the remission of sins; and for the rest, to live sinless lives.”

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

Irenaeus 180
Disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John.

In refuting the Gnostics,

And when we come to refute them, we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole [Christian] faith.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

Irenaeus 180
“And dipped himself,” says [the Scripture], “seven times in Jordan.” (2 Ki. 5:14) It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [it served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions; being spiritually regenerated as new-born babes, even as the Lord has declared: “Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (John 3:5)

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2

Clement of Alexandria 195
Then within the same period John prophesied till the baptism of salvation; and after the birth of Christ, Anna and Simeon.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3

Tertullian 195
Happy is our sacrament of water, in that, by washing away the sins of our early blindness, we are set free and admitted into eternal life!

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3

Tertullian 195
But we, little fishes, after the example of our ΙΧΘΥΣ Jesus Christ, are born in water,

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3

Tertullian 195
When, however, the prescript is laid down that “without baptism, salvation is attainable by none” (chiefly on the ground of that declaration of the Lord, who says, “Unless one be born of water, he hath not life” (John 3:5, not fully given)), there arise immediately scrupulous, nay rather audacious, doubts on the part of some,

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 9

Origen 228
Matthew alone adds the words “to repentance,” teaching that the benefit of baptism is connected with the intention of the baptized person; to him who repents it is salutary, but to him who comes to it without repentance it will turn to greater condemnation.

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 9

Origen 228
“by the laver of regeneration,” (Titus 3:5) through which they were born “as new-born babes,

The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 6

Pamohilius 309
Of the divine descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost which lighted on them who believed. In this we have also the instruction delivered by Peter, and * passages from the prophets on the subject, and * on the passion and resurrection and assumption of Christ, and the gift of the Holy Ghost; also * of the faith of those present, and their salvation by baptism; and, further,* of the unity of spirit pervading the believers and promoting the common good, and of the addition made to their number.

These writings span the time from the apostles with Ignatius to the Council of Nicaea. They are all pretty much in agreement that water baptism is necessary for salvation. However, is this what the Scriptures teach? Because it doesn't matter one bit if they all agree if the Scriptures do not teach this. So, we need to look and see if the Scriptures teach that water baptism is necessary. There are several to consider, Titus 3:5 says that God saved us through the "Bath" of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit.

Titus 3:4-5 ( KJV ) But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

The Greek word translated "Washing" Is "Loutron" and means a bath. Paul is saying that God saved us through a bath. The only bath that I am aware of in Christianity is water baptism. Jesus said 'unless one is born of water and Spirit he cannot see the kingdom of heaven'. Here we have Paul basically saying the same thing with different words, He (God) saved us with the bath of regeneration (water baptism) and the renewing of hte Holy Spirit (Spiritual baptism). We also see that it was at Jesus' baptism that the Holy Spirit descended upon Him.

Paul also speaks of this in Romans 6,

Romans 6:3-5 ( KJV ) Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

This passage is claimed by many to be speaking of Spiritual baptism, however, this simply is not possible. One reason is that the grammar does not allow such an interpretation. Paul says that this baptism makes us partakers of the resurrection, so we need to make sure we understand what it is. The Greek word that is translated "Likeness" in this passage is the Greek word, "Homoioma". It means a representation or an image.

G3667
ὁμοίωμα
homoiōma
Thayer Definition:
1) that which has been made after the likeness of something1a) a figure, image, likeness, representation1b) likeness, i.e. resemblance, such as amounts almost to equality or identity

A representation or image is something that can been with the eye. This baptism that Paul is speaking of is a visible baptism, it is am image or representation of something. It is a visible representation of Spiritual baptism as we saw with Jesus baptism. He received the Spirit upon coming out of the waters of baptism.

There is another reason this passage cannot be speaking of Spiritual baptism. Paul said that the baptism in Romans 6 is a representation or an image. A representation or image is not the original, for instance, when one goes to the store and buys a picture of the Mona Lisa, they are not buying the original, only a representation or image of the original. If this baptism in Romans 6 was a Spiritual baptism, what is it a representation of? The original is not a representation of a copy. If union with the Holy Spirit is essential for the Christian to have life it must be the original, not the copy. Therefore there is no way that this passage can be speaking of Spiritual baptism simply because Paul said it is the representation of the original

This fits nicely with what Peter said,

1 Peter 3:18-21 ( KJV ) For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

Peter equates Noah and the eight souls being saved in the Ark with baptism saving the Christian. He connects the baptism with water to show that it is water baptism, yet he says that it is not the water that actually saves. He says that it is the answer of a good conscience towards God. The Christian with a good conscience goes into the waters of baptism and in that God gives an answer. It is the answer that saves but it is going into the water is the question. This fits nicely with what Paul has stated, 'He (God) saved us through the bath of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit.

There is also, Ephesians 5

Ephesians 5:23-27 ( KJV ) For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

Paul says that Christ may sanctify and cleanse the Church with the "Washing of Water" by the word. Many think that "The word" in this passage is Christ, however, Paul did not use the word "Logos" he use the word "rhema" which means,

Thayer’s Greek Definitions
G4487 ῥῆμα rhēma Thayer Definition: 1) that which is or has been uttered by the living voice, thing spoken, word 1a) any sound produced by the voice and having definite meaning 1b) speech, discourse 1b1) what one has said 1c) a series of words joined together into a sentence (a declaration of one’s mind made in words) 1c1) an utterance 1c2) a saying of any sort as a message, a narrative 1c2a) concerning some occurrence 2) subject matter of speech, thing spoken of 2a) so far forth as it is a matter of narration 2b) so far as it is a matter of command 2c) a matter of dispute, case at law

Basically the word means an utterance, a spoken word, a command. What command was given in the Christian faith regarding washing or a bath? Mathew elaborates for us.

Matthew 28:19-20 ( KJV ) Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Here is the "Washing of water with by the word". Also the Greek word translated by is the word "en" which is better translated "in" or "with". In this case with is the better translation.

I think it can be seen that there is much to what the Ante-Nicene Fathers has said about the importance of baptism. Their claims can be supported in Scripture.