Skip to content

Archibald Alexander on the Substitutionary Atonement

January 2, 2017

The sufferings of Christ were, therefore, of a strictly vicarious nature. “He bare our sins in his own body, on the tree.” “He died, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God.” “He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities.” “Our iniquities were laid upon him.” No doubt he set us a glorious example of perfect patience and fortitude, in enduring so much pain and ignominy; but example was not the main end of these sufferings, which would place them on the same level with those of other martyrs. And, it is not disputed that the death of Christ is calculated to produce a moral impression on all intelligent minds, but even this was not the direct end of Christ’s sufferings, according to the Scriptures; but he died as an expiatory victim, a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice, as atonement for all the sins of his chosen, as a ransom to redeem them from their bondage; yea, as a curse, to redeem them that were under the curse. And this view of the atonement is vital to the Christian system. It is plainly the doctrine of the Old as well as the New Testament; and it ever has been the doctrine of every sound part of the Christian church; and it would be easy to show, that the objections to it are either frivolous, or they are such as subvert the gospel of Christ, and bring in another gospel, which exposes the abettors of it to the anathema of Paul. (Gal. 1:8.)

Archibald Alexander, A Brief Compend of Bible Truth, 111.

Advertisements

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: