(a) First, they differ in object. Atonement is offered to God as its object ; redemption is pur chased or procured for men as its object. Atone ment is a sacrifice offered ; redemption is a bene fit conferred. Secondly, they differ in design. The design of the atonement is to render God pro pitious, as the Sovereign Ruler ; the design of re demption, to make man everlastingly blessed. [fence, thirdly, they differ in nature. Atonement being made to God, and made by a sacrifice of inestimable value, is in its own nature infinite; nor is it possible for us to conceive how its in trinsic worth and glory, or its efficacy and adapta tion to its end, could be increased. Its sufficiency is infinite, for who can overrate "the precious Hood of Christ." or take exact account of His "unsearchable riches?" Its end was "that God might be just, and the justifier of him thot be lie veth in Jesus." This end was infinitely desir able, for it involves an infinite good, glory to God in the highest, on earth peace, and good-will to men. But this end the atonement has accom plished. God is just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. Its efficacy, therefore, is com plete. It could not be more so. By one offering of himself, says the apostle, lie hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified x :141. Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth x:tol. Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justiticth. ll'h0 is he that condemned'? It is Christ that died; yea, rather that is risen again; who is also at the right hand of God, and who maketh intercession for us (Rom. viii :33, 3.1). Is not that atonement then in its nature infinite which is sufficient to satisfy God, the infinite Law giver and Judge. in the remission of sin to every one who cordially confides in it, and which so effectually repairs the injury done by sin as to justify Him in the sight of the whole universe for so doing? Can we talk of limits to the value of such a sacrifice? Can we assign 1)01111;1, to the efficacy of such an expiation? Can we apply terms of measurement to the nature of such an atonement for sin? Is not The covering ample enough to protect a universe from the punish ment of sin, were they all in need of its pro tection, and to resort to it for shelter? (b) Rcilempt inn, on t he contrary, is in its very nature definite. It has an inseparable rela tion to men, as its object, and therefore in its very nature is limited to the mother for whom its price is paid, in whose behalf it is accepted. and on whom the blessing is actually bestowed Redemption is not expiation for sin, but the de liverance of men from sin, by meant of such an expiation I hence Christ is said by his own blood to have obtained eternal redemption for us (Ilcb.
ix :12). Hence, the word redemption is used for pardon, which is our actual deliverance from pun ishment (Ephes. i :7; Col. i :14) ; for sanctification, which is our actual deliverance from the dominion of sin (I Pet. i :IS; Is. lix :20), and for the resur rection, which is the actual deliverance of our body from the grave at the last day (Rom. viii :23 ; Ephes. i :14 ; iv :3o). Hence it is clear that in Scripture usage atonement and redemption differ in their nature, and that the one is the cause and the other the effect. Atonement is the ground of redemption (is. liii :4-9). Redemption is the re
sult of the atonement (Is. liii :10-12). The atone ment. takes effect by changing the relations of God toward the guilty (Rom. iii :21). Redemption takes effect by changing the relations of the guilty towards God (Rev. xiv :4). The former was com pletely finished on the cross (Dan. ix :24 ; John xix :30). The latter is now in daily progressive operation, and will not be finished till the final consummation of all things (Ephes. iv :3o).
(6) Extent of Atonement. As to the question whether the atonement be general, or limited, "that controversy," as Mr. Malcom observes, "has ever seemed rather the result of misunderstanding between the parties, or of each party looking too exclusively to those aspects of the doctrine which seemed best to comport with their system of the ology. In some respects the atonement is gen eral ; in others limited ; in respect of sufficiency it is infinite; in respect to its application in the final salvation of men it is limited; but in no re spect is it indefinite." (7) Summary. J. 0. F. Murray, in Hastings' Bib. Diet., sums up the question briefly as fol lows : "The effect of the atonement is therefore to remove altogether the obstacle introduced by sin, to undo the work of the devil (i John iii :8), and to open anew the way by which sinful men can return into communion with their Father in heaven (Heb. x :20). The blood of Christ, under stood in the full measure of its spiritual reality, reveals the true law of man's being, and brings home to him the extent of his degradation. By its revelation of the love of God triumphant over sin, it wins men back from their spiritual aliena tion, making them ready to return to their alle giance, and willing to give tip their sin. It cleanses their consciences from the stain of sin, and sets them free from the curse of the law, by the assurance that a perfect satisfaction has been offered to the righteous claims of the Divine jus tice, and by enabling them to make their own the perfect confession of their sins that has al ready been offered in their name. It is the well spring of a new power of moral self-determination by which they may be enabled, in spite of the tyrannous domination of past habits acquired and inherited (I Pet. i :IS), and in the midst of an atmosphere of temptation, to live henceforward in obedience to God's will, submitting in patience and in hope to all the suffering that He may require from them, whether by way of discipline or of service. It thus robs even death itself of its sting.
"It is true that we can but dimly see why such a sacrifice as the death of Christ should have been necessary, and guess in the light of partial human analogies at the secret of its power. But it is enough for our present guidance to know that the sacrifice itself has been offered, and that there have been men in every age who, from their own experience, have borne witness that it is effectual." (8) Ecclesiastical. In ecclesiastical writers, and in the canons of councils, Katallagay is em ployed to signify the reconciliation of offender: to the church after a due course of penitence. 01 this there are said to have been two kinds; the one consisting merely in the remission of punish ment ; the other, in the restoration of the penitent to all the rights and privileges of communion.