Tag: satisfaction

Singing Theologically: Modern Hymns and the Atonement

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

Several years ago I highlighted the advent of the “Modern Hymn.” Keith Getty and Stuart Townend, along with others, have revived and reinvented the hymn for our generation. The most well known modern hymn, is perhaps one of the best: “In Christ Alone.” This song ranks up there with other greats and is as widely sung and loved today as “Amazing Grace.”

Timothy George, dean of Beeson Divinity School of Samford University, recently highlighted the refusal of the authors of “In Christ Alone,” to allow it to be slightly edited and thus included in a new Presbyterian (PCUSA) hymnal. George lauds that decision, since the proposed edit would take out the idea of Christ bearing God’s wrath for sin. Here is the proposed edit:

From: “Till on that cross as Jesus died / the wrath of God was satisfied.”

To: “Till on that cross as Jesus died / the love of God was magnified.”

George’s article, “No Squishy Love” was shared and discussed online and in print so much, that he has followed it up with a part 2, today. One of the places where his first article was discussed was Sharper Iron; and this most conservative of online evangelical blogs, was not even immune from those who argued against the idea that Jesus bore God’s wrath for sin. Truthfully the orthodox idea of Jesus bearing the punishment of our sin on the cross is facing hard times today.

The follow up piece by Dr. George, doesn’t back down from defending the satisfaction theory of the atonement, and it includes more historical insight on the question. In the piece, George also highlights another hymn with theological substance, “How Deep the Father’s Love for Us,” by Stuart Townend.

For my part, we should be glad that modern hymns are not as substance-less as some of the praise songs of the last few decades. Unadulterated joy and songs of intense emotion are needed, yes. But the didactic value of theologically rich hymns, which both move and instruct, is untold. May a new generation of hymn-writers pick up the mantle of Isaac Watts and continue to give the church faithful hymns for the next generation.

Book Briefs: “Anselm of Canterbury (Christian Biographies for Young Readers)” by Simonetta Carr

~ Bob Hayton ~ 3 Comments

Anselm of Canterbury by Simonetta Carr (Christian Biographies for Young Readers)Simonetta Carr has done it again. She has given us a superb historical biography of an important figure in Christian History written for young readers. And once again, an older reader like me, has enjoyed it as much or more than the intended audience.

Anselm of Canterbury is now the sixth title in the “Christian Biographies for Young Readers” series, a set of superbly illustrated and beautifully crafted hardcover books for children. Reformation Heritage Books is to be thanked for providing this coffee-table-quality set of treasures. I’ve previously reviewed Athanasius and Lady Jane Grey. This work on Anselm is even better than the two earlier works I read. Perhaps his story is more intriguing or less known, but I found the work even more captivating than the previous volumes, while the artwork was as engaging and the history as fascinating as ever.

Anselm became the unwilling archbishop of Canterbury who would rather have lived a life of solitude. Instead he served his fellow man and his church and state superiors. Known for his teaching and his care of the sick and the poor, Anselm is best remembered for his book Cur Deus Homo (Why God-Man?). In this book he develops his satisfaction theory of the atonement, providing a well reasoned argument for why Jesus had to become the God-man. In the simplified explanation of Simonetta Carr:

According to Anselm, even one “small” disobedience to God is greater than many worlds. Only one person could save people from this terrible problem–someone who was fully God, so He could live a perfect life and take the terrible punishment for all the sins of others, and fully man, because it was man who sinned, so man should repay. That’s why Jesus, who is fully God, became fully man for us. (p. 43)

As the above excerpt shows, Carr’s writing is suitable for older children and doesn’t dumb down history to be accessible. She aims to unfold the study of history for young readers but her care for accuracy prevents her from adjusting the story to be simpler and easier. She presents the real history, with its conundrums and questions, for her young readers. This title raises the question of the role of church and state, and the function of the Roman Catholic pope. She satisfactorily explains the quandary of church relations with the state, but only briefly sketches the nature of the papacy. In doing so she provides a platform for careful parents to engage their kids in the informed assessment of church history without overly simplifying complex debates and forcing premature conclusions.

Like the other titles in the series, period maps and illustrations illuminate the pages of her book. Masterful illustrations by Matt Abraxas and engaging full color photographs spark the imagination. Also included are excerpts of Anselm’s writings and interesting facts about the customs and lifestyle of his time period.

If you pick up a copy of this book, you will want to pick up the entire set. Books on Augustine of Hippo, John Calvin, and John Owen are also available. I hear she is working on John Knox as the next biography in this important series. I highly recommend this book and encourage you to pick up the entire series. You can get a deal on the first five books of the series over at Westminster Bookstore, where you can also pre-order the volume on Anselm.

Pick up a copy of this book at any of the following online retailers: Amazon, Westminster Bookstore, or direct from Reformation Heritage Books.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by the publisher for review. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

About Book Briefs: Book Briefs are book notes, or short-form book reviews. They are my informed evaluation of a book, but stop short of being a full-length book review.

Considering the "Multiple Intentions View" of the Atonement

~ fundyreformed ~ 24 Comments

In my last post I introduced the debate on the atonement that Seth McBee is hosting over at Contend Earnestly. Seth calls himself a 6 Point Calvinist, and dubs his view the “Unlimited/Limited Atonement” position. Yet Bruce Ware also calls that same view “4 Point Calvinism”, and I read an article which claims Benjamin Warfield interacted with what we would call “4 Point Calvinism” today, when he took on “Post-Redemptionism”. To confuse matters even more, Eric Svendsen posits a similar view which he calls “4.5 Point Calvinism”. Then there is the historical variety of this position called Amyraldianism, which seems to be specifically what Warfield was opposing.

In light of the confusion of determining whether we are really discussing 4, 4.5, or 6 point Calvinism, and to simplify things somewhat, I’m going to simply go by another name Bruce Ware has for this position: “The Multiple Intentions View”.

Now if someone else can straighten me out on how the various positions listed above differ from each other, by all means make an attempt! But for now, let me update where I’m at in evaluating the “Multiple Intentions View”.

1) I recently read an excellent article by Dr Roger Nicole entitled “John Calvin’s view of Limited Atonement“. Nicole explains why it is that both sides of the debate can claim Calvin for support. He makes a good case for Calvin actually supporting limited atonement, and does an excellent job tracing the history of this particular debate surrounding Calvin. Of special note was this quote from Calvin: “I should like to know how the wicked can eat the flesh of Christ which was not crucified for them, and how they can drink the blood which was not shed to expiate their sins.”

So all that is to say, quoting Calvin one way or another isn’t going to really win the debate. And ultimately Scripture matters much more than the opinion of Calvin or Spurgeon or anyone else.

2) Next, I should point out a convincing exegesis of John 3:16 which does not demand a universal atonement and does not do violence to the term “world”. In this open letter to Dave Hunt, James White gives a good exegesis of the passage (scroll about half-way down and look for the heading “John 3:16”). [So far only John 3:16 has been discussed in the debate at Contend Earnestly.]

3) While I do see how this “multiple intentions view” would be easier to hold to, when it comes to explaining some seemingly universal passages, I have to wonder how different it actually is to the normal limited atonement position anyway.

a) In both systems a bona fide offer of the gospel is made. There is no necessary connection between such an offer and an actual payment/provision for sins having been made. It is enough that God knows who will respond to the offer and has secured the payment for those as part of his intent in Christ’s death.

b) And isn’t it doublespeak to talk of a propitiation and atonement for all, yet actual redemption only for the elect? What does “save the world” in John 3:17 really mean if “world” is “every person”? What kind of saving is a mere potential salvation?

c) Basically, I see no reason to have to hold to a universal atonement for sins in order to legitimately hold to a universal preaching of the gospel to all people.

4) Another problem area concerns the bearing of God’s wrath which Christ accomplished in His death. His death satisfied God’s wrath in a substitutionary way for a certain people. I don’t see how the “multiple intentions view” adequately owns up to a substitutionary idea of the atonement. Is not an intentional substitution for certain, specific people inherent in the idea of substitutionary atonement?

5) Along the lines of point 4 (which someone did email me about to caution me in this debate), I also came across an excellent excerpt from Benjamin Warfield opposing Amyraldianism. That brief post is well worth your time, in considering this debate.

6) I also found the following summary by Bruce Ware to be helpful in explaining and distinguishing the three main positions.

7) Finally I should admit there is much more that can be studied with regard to this position. David of Calvin and Calvinism has compiled tons of info and quotes from various theologians which touch on this topic. Browse his “For Whom Did Christ Die?” category for many pertinent articles. Personally, I want to review my blogging pal Bnonn’s articles on the issue as well [here, here & here]. And I think it would also be worthwhile to explore Eric Svendsen’s posts on his “4.5 Point Calvinism”.

Now if there were just more time for all this reasearch!……