No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 February 2009
We live in a day and age when Creeds and Confessions are ‘under fire’ from different quarters. The reasons for this are varied, but undoubtedly one of the main exceptions which is taken to them is that their content cannot be justified in the light of modern biblical scholarship.
page 257 note 1 Because of their refusal to subscribe to Creeds and Confessions. The literature produced by them is enormous. To mention just a few names and works produced in the ninteenth century: Bruce, William, Sermons, 1824Google Scholar; Drummond, W. H., The Doctrine of the Trinity (3rd ed.), 1831Google Scholar; Porter, J. S., Lectures on Atonement, 1860Google Scholar; Montgomery, Henry, Creed of an Arian, 1830Google Scholar; Blakely, Fletcher, An Explicit Avowal of Truth, 1853Google Scholar; William Ellery Channing, Works, n.d.; Gordon, Alexander, A Glad Gospel, 1877Google Scholar; McAlister, C. J., The Trinity and the Athanasian Creed, 1854Google Scholar; Maginnis, David, Characteristics of Christian Unitarianism, 1859, etc.Google Scholar
page 257 note 2 See W.C.F., viii.6.
page 258 note 1 Porter, J. S.: Lectures on the Atonement, 1860, p. 128, Appendix.Google Scholar
page 258 note 2 op. cit., p. 129.
page 259 note 1 The Non-Subscribers hold that their view on the limitation of the sacrificial system is confirmed by the teaching of the prophets. They denounce the offering of sacrifices and praise those who repent and reform (Isa. 1.10–20, 55.7, Ezek. 18.21–22 etc.). A particular example is David's sin of adultery with Bathsheba, which was pardoned on the basis of repentance without any sacrifice.
page 259 note 2 Porter, ibid., p. 126. Cf. William Bruce, Sermons on the Bible etc., p. 321.
page 260 note 1 William Bruce, ibid. Cf. Porter, op. cit., p. 131.
page 260 note 2 J. S. Porter, op. cit., p. 131. He compares it with Paul's death in one place, PP. 55–56.
page 260 note 3 J. S. Porter, op. cit., p. 127.
page 262 note 1 Bruce, William, A Paraphrase and Notes on the Apostolic Epistles and Apocalypse, 1838.Google Scholar
page 262 note 2 H. W. Robinson, The Religious Ideas of the Old Testament; Taylor, Vincent, Jesus and His Sacrifice, 1937, Part IGoogle Scholar; W. Eichrodt, Theologie des A.T., 1.79; Vriezen, Th. C., An Outline of O.T. Theology, E.T. 1958, p. 300n.Google Scholar
page 263 note 1 W. Eichrodt, op. cit., E.T. by T. A. Baker, 6th edition, 1959, vol. 1, p. 165n. Cf. Whale, J. S., Victor and Victim, 1960, pp. 52–53.Google Scholar
page 263 note 2 North, C. R., ‘Sacrifice’ in T.W.B.B. ed. by Richardson, A., 1950, p. 209.Google Scholar
page 263 note 3 F. C. N. Hicks, The Fulness of Sacrifice, Part 1. Westcott seems to have been the first to suggest that ‘blood’ means life released.
page 263 note 4 F. J. Taylor, T.W.B.B. ed. Richardson, s.v. ‘Blood’; Morris, L., The Journal of Theological Studies, 1952, OctoberGoogle Scholar; Robinson, J. A., The Epistle to the Ephesians, 1903, P. 29Google Scholar; Johannes Behm in Kittel's Theologisches Wörterbuch, i, pp. 171–5.
page 264 note 1 H. W. Robinson, op. cit., p. 146; Th. C. Vriezen, op. cit., p. 300.
page 264 note 2 Koehler, Ludwig, Old Testament Theology, 1957, E.T. A. S. Todd, p. 175Google Scholar; Th. C. Vriezen, op. cit., p. 298; W. Eichrodt, op. cit., p. 494; J. S. Whale, op. cit., p. 69; V. Taylor, op. cit., Part 1.
page 264 note 3 The Doctrine of the Atonement, 1915, p. 27.
page 264 note 4 Moberly, R. C., Atonement and Personality, 1901, p. 167Google Scholar; Taylor, V., The Atonement in New Testament Teaching, 1940, p. 21Google Scholar. Knox, John, The Death of Christ, p. 47, 1959Google Scholar disagrees, but his arguments are not convincing. He feels that the conception was put on Jesus' lips by the early Church: and admits that the Lucan writings, Matthew, 1 Peter, and Hebrews contain clear reminiscences of Isa. 53. Tasker, R. V., The Old Testament in the New Testament, 1946, p. 28.Google Scholar
page 264 note 5 V. Taylor, ibid., pp. 36ff.
page 264 note 6 8.6, 7.5, 9.6, 27.5.
page 264 note 7 D. M. Baillie, God was in Christ, p. 194.
page 265 note 1 Oliver Quick finds much purpose in the cult. (1) It recognised sin as a taint or disease which weakened the will and impaired the power of man to do right. (2) It did not wait until a man could reform himself but indicated God's way of dealing with sin. (3) It indicated that man always felt the need for communion with God, and this through the offering of life by death. Doctrines of the Creed, p. 222f.
page 265 note 2 op. cit., p. 21.
page 265 note 3 Robinson, H. W., Inspiration and Revelation in the Old Testament, 1946, p. 227Google Scholar, points out that while the sin-offering cancelled ritual offence, the guilt offering centred in the necessity to make reparation for offences of a wider range; i.e. theft. Davidson, A. B., The Theology of the Old Testament, p. 159Google Scholar, says that ritual offences were as real to Jehovah as moral ones. In early Hebrew thought, as Ryder Smith (Bible Doctrine of Salvation) points out moral and ritual sins were so intertwined that little distinction is made. Thus it is equally sin to seethe a kid in the mother's milk and to commit adultery; and both for the same reason that they are contrary to the will of God.
page 265 note 4 Rowley, H. H., The Faith of Israel, p. 136.Google Scholar
page 265 note 5 Herbert, A. G., The Throne of David, p. 116.Google Scholar
page 266 note 1 op. cit., p. 176.
page 266 note 2 J. S. Whale, op. cit., p. 55.
page 266 note 3 ibid., pp. 56–57.
page 267 note 1 ‘The Meaning of Sacrifice’, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, vol. 33, no. 1.Google Scholar
page 267 note 2 Oesterley, W. O. E., Sacrifices in Ancient Israel, 1938, p. 11fGoogle Scholar; F. N. Hicks, op. cit., part 1, 1946, p. 11f; Gray, C. B., Sacrifice in Old Testament, 1925, passim.Google Scholar
page 267 note 3 Knight, G. A. F., A Christian Theology of the Old Testament 1959, p. 291.Google Scholar
page 267 note 4 W. Eichrodt, op. cit., p. 171
page 268 note 1 op. cit., p. 293.
page 268 note 2 Taylor, F. J., ‘Redeem’, TWBB, p. 185.Google Scholar
page 268 note 3 H. Rashdall, The Idea of the Atonement.
page 268 note 4 Taylor, V., Jesus and His Sacrifice, p. 105.Google Scholar
page 268 note 5 F. J. Taylor, op. cit., p. 187; J. K. Mozley, op. cit., D. 50.
page 269 note 1 Burnaby, J., The Belief of Christendom, p. 91Google Scholar; Taylor, V., The Idea of Atonement in New Testament Teaching, p. 86.Google Scholar
page 269 note 2 Mozley, J. K., op. cit., p. 73Google Scholar. Cf. Baur, , Paul, ii.154 (E.T.).Google Scholar
page 269 note 3 Interpreting Paul's Gospel, 1954, p. 91. Cf. Robertson, , A Grammar of the Greek New Testament, pp. 630–1.Google Scholar
page 269 note 4 Manson, T. W., ‘Hilastērion’, JTS, XLVI (1945), pp. 1ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 269 note 5 C. H. Dodd, MNTC, ‘Romans’ ad loc.
page 269 note 6 Kennedy, H. A. A., Theology of the Epistles, 130Google Scholar; Sanday, and Headlam, , ICC, ‘Romans’, p. 88Google Scholar; Westcott, , The Epistles of St. John, p. 87.Google Scholar
page 269 note 7 Bruce, F. F., The Epistle of Paul to the Romans, 1963, p. 106.Google Scholar
page 270 note 1 For a defence of ‘propitiation’ see Morris, L., The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross, 1955. PP. 125ff.Google Scholar
page 270 note 2 Bruce, ibid., p. 105. The Apostle seems to have the OT cultus in mind throughout this passage in his use of hilastērion. So Leenhardt, F. J., The Epistle to the Romans, p. 102nGoogle Scholar, E.T. A. M. Hunter, op. cit., p. 31.
page 270 note 3 ‘Romans’, MNTC, p. 23Google Scholar. Cf. Quick, op. cit., p. 259. Hanson, A. T., Wrath of the Lamb, 1957.Google Scholar
page 270 note 4 Robinson, H. W., Redemption and Revelation, 1942, p. 269Google Scholar; Tasker, R. G., Biblical Doctrine of the Wrath of God, pp. 28ffGoogle Scholar; Barrett, C. K., Romans, 1957, p. 33.Google Scholar
page 270 note 5 Intro, to N. T. Theology, p. 76.
page 270 note 6 Hunter, op. cit., p. 79.
page 271 note 1 See in this order Whale, J. S., The Protestant Tradition, 1960, p. 24nGoogle Scholar; Brunner, E., The Letter to the Romans, 1959, p. 167Google Scholar; A. M. Hunter, op. cit., p. 79. Hunter uses the analogy of ‘righteous indignation’ which a good man feels in the presence of evil. If we multiply it by infinity we have some idea of God's wrath. In any case, the opposite of love is hate, not wrath.
page 271 note 2 Whale, J. S., Victor and Victim, p. 77.Google Scholar
page 271 note 3 Taylor, V., The Atonement in N.T. Teaching, pp. 127, 129.Google Scholar
page 271 note 4 Denney, J., The Death of Christ, ed. Tasker, , p. 93.Google Scholar
page 271 note 5 Dodd, C. H., The Meaning of Paul for Today, pp. 110–11.Google Scholar
page 271 note 6 Duncan, G. S., ‘Galatians’, MNTC, 1934.Google Scholar
page 271 note 7 J. Denney, op. cit., p. 88.
page 271 note 8 Guillebaud, H. E., Why the Cross??, 1937, pp. 128ff.Google Scholar
page 271 note 9 Strachan, R. H., ‘Corinthians’, MNTC, 6th ed., 1954, p. 121.Google Scholar
page 272 note 1 A. M. Hunter, op. cit., p. 31.
page 272 note 2 op. cit., p. 31–32.