YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → The Necessity of the Atonement (Remastered)

The Necessity of the Atonement (Remastered) — Transcript

by MLJ Trust · 5,673 words · 883 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:01you will recall that we are still
0:03considering together the biblical
0:05doctrine of the
0:08atonement and having considered a
0:10fortnight ago some of the false theories
0:13which have been elaborated and put
0:14forward at various times in the history
0:17of the church we uh came last Friday
0:21evening to a consideration of what is
0:24regarded and described always as the
0:26essential Protestant
0:28Doctrine concerning this not that it's
0:32confined by any means to the period in
0:34the church subsequent to the Protestant
0:37Reformation because it could be shown
0:40clearly and easily that it has in a
0:42sense always been the
0:45main Doctrine and Exposition of the
0:48doctrine of the atonement from the very
0:50beginning but it is often called the
0:55Protestant
0:56emphasis a better name is of course to
0:59call it the
1:01substitutionary teaching of the
1:03atonement the doctrine which emphasizes
1:06the
1:07substitutionary and the penal elements
1:10in the atonement we summarized it like
1:12this we described it as the doctrine
1:15which teaches that the Lord Jesus Christ
1:18vicariously suffered the penalty of the
1:20broken law as the substitute of his
1:24people and we began last Friday to aduce
1:29arguments
1:31to demonstrate that particular view of
1:34the
1:35atonement and we arrived at seven
1:39arguments may I hurriedly remind you of
1:41them the first was the analogy from the
1:43Old Testament sacrifices which are
1:46obviously
1:48pular
1:50expiatory
1:52substitutionary the sins were
1:54transferred to the animal that was to be
1:56killed and it was the death and the
1:58shedding of the blood of the animal that
2:00makes the experation expunges wipes out
2:04the sin now the argument was that all
2:08those point forward to Christ and the
2:10New Testament in turn teaches that what
2:12he did is in line with those it's a very
2:15powerful
2:16argument then secondly the New Testament
2:19teaches that our Lord saves Us by his
2:22death we had notable statements of that
2:25as we read that fifth chapter of the
2:27epistle to the Romans just now I need
2:29stay with that then the third argument
2:32was certain New Testament terms such as
2:34Ransom propitiation
2:37reconciliation terms we've already
2:39considered I'm simply recapitulating the
2:42fourth argument was certain New
2:45Testament terms which teach substitution
2:48explicitly and
2:50specifically and especially those that
2:53emphasize this vicarious element He died
2:58for
3:00the three different meanings of that
3:01word for us for our sins and so
3:06on then the next argument was number
3:10five that all statements that emphasize
3:13our Union with Christ really teach that
3:16I shall come back to that this evening
3:18so I leave it at that now the sixth was
3:21that all statements which say that his
3:24death liberates us from the law are
3:27rarely teaching this substitution of and
3:30penal aspect again I'll have to say a
3:33word about that and the seventh argument
3:35was the statements that
3:38emphasize God's activity in the death of
3:42Our Lord God was in Christ reconciling
3:46the world unto
3:49himself he God hath made him to be sin
3:52for us who knew no sin and there are
3:56many other statements which put the same
3:58emphasis
3:59and Deliver Us from the idea that the
4:02main purpose of our Lord's death is to
4:04do something to us or that it was even
4:07only something that he did
4:09himself this whole idea that it was the
4:11action of God surely teaches the
4:15substitutionary view and rarely that
4:19alone I ended by saying that I had
4:22another argument a final argument the
4:24eighth argument and speaking for myself
4:28this next argument is one of of the most
4:30cogent of them all if not indeed the
4:32most
4:33cogent so I would put it in this
4:36form we are going to consider statements
4:39in the
4:41scriptures which emphasize the fact that
4:44the death of Our Lord upon the cross was
4:47an utter absolute
4:50necessity obviously these are very
4:53crucial matters the Bible
4:56teaches that the death of Our Lord upon
4:59the cross was an absolute
5:02necessity now then I would subdivide the
5:04statements in this way first of
5:07all there are certain statements which
5:10are made about our Lord's own
5:14conduct and certain things which he said
5:17which prove it seems to me quite
5:19conclusively and finally that his death
5:22was an absolute
5:24necessity the first of course
5:27is what we are told
5:30about what took place in the Garden of
5:34Gethsemane why did our Lord endure that
5:38Agony why did he sweat those great drops
5:42of
5:43blood what is the meaning of
5:45it how can we really explain that if it
5:50was a Marty's death it's
5:52obviously a totally inadequate
5:54explanation the martyrs haven't behaved
5:57like that face to face with death
6:00our Lord there was facing the fact that
6:02there was an element in his death which
6:04was utterly abhorent to
6:07him something that caused him such Agony
6:11as to lead to this Blood Stained sweat
6:14we've got to explained it it's got to be
6:17accounted
6:18for and I suggest to you that all those
6:21other ideas and theories about the
6:23atonement completely failed to account
6:26for that but you remember we had left
6:29not
6:30only with a need of explaining what took
6:33place in the garden but also what our
6:35lord
6:36said do you remember his prayer father
6:39if it be
6:40possible let this cup pass
6:43by he goes on to say
6:46nevertheless not my will but thine be
6:48done but the request was there if it be
6:52possible let this cup pass by now that
6:56can't refer merely to the fact of
6:58physical death for again it obviously
7:00makes him inferior to the martyrs his
7:02own
7:03followers no I say again there was
7:07something which he foresaw as going to
7:09happen in his
7:11death which he was anxious to avoid if
7:14it was
7:16possible now we must emphasize
7:19this it was the only time during his
7:22Earthly life that our Lord ever made a
7:25request like this to his
7:27father and obviously therefore it was
7:30something very
7:31exceptional it points to this that there
7:34was something in his death that was an
7:37absolute necessity he says the question
7:39he asks is is it an absolute
7:42necessity is it possible for me to do
7:46this work in any other way if it be
7:49possible let this cup pass by let let
7:53not this happen if it is possible
7:56nevertheless he says if it is not
7:58possible I ad MIT to it nevertheless not
8:01my will but thine be done now there
8:04surely is a final and an absolutely
8:07conclusive argument to the effect that
8:10the death of Our Lord upon the cross in
8:12the way in which it happened was an
8:15utter absolute
8:17necessity nothing can be
8:20stronger but then we can add to that
8:23something that confirms
8:25it and in a sense repeats it and that is
8:30of course the Cry of dereliction upon
8:33the
8:34cross my God my
8:36God why hast Thou forsaken
8:40me now no doctrine of the atonement is
8:43adequate which doesn't explain that and
8:47again it's obviously inadequate to
8:49suggest that mere physical suffering
8:51produced that
8:52cry again the whole argument of the Mars
8:55comes in no no there was something
8:58happening there which is in a category
9:00on its own our Lord was there conscious
9:05of being forsaken of
9:08God his contact with the Eternal Father
9:11was temporally
9:13broken he who had come from the Eternal
9:16bosom and was with God from the
9:18beginning for the one and only time in
9:20all
9:22eternity was not able to see the face of
9:25God my God my God why have Thou forsaken
9:31me surely again here is another of those
9:34all important and inclusive and
9:36conclusive arguments which demonstrates
9:39Beyond any caval whatsoever that when a
9:42thing like that happened there's only
9:43one reason for it it had to happen it is
9:47an utter absolute
9:49necessity none of the other theories
9:52really account for the Cry of
9:54dereliction upon the
9:57cross then the second uh group of
10:01statements which I am
10:05quoting I would term as statements which
10:08state this absolute necessity
10:12directly those others have been stating
10:14it more or less indirectly but here now
10:16is something
10:22direct the specific statement which is
10:25to be found in the epistle to the Romans
10:27in the third chapter
10:30and vers 25 and
10:3326 which is undoubtedly the Locust
10:37classicus in connection with this whole
10:39subject Romans 3:25 and 26 whom God ha
10:44set forth to be a propitiation through
10:47faith in his blood to declare his
10:50righteousness for the remission of sins
10:52that are passed through the forbearance
10:54of God to declare is say at this time
10:58his righteousness God's righteousness
11:01that he God might be just and the
11:04justifier of him which believeth in
11:07Jesus now that's a tremendous statement
11:11you see what he's saying is
11:13this that the problem that arises is how
11:17could
11:18God overlook or cover the sins of the
11:21children of Israel under the old
11:24dispensation how can we account of of
11:26the remission of sins that are passed
11:28through the for erance of God and Paul's
11:31answer is that the death of Our Lord
11:33upon the cross does that that that is
11:37one of the things that it is meant to do
11:40but he says it goes beyond
11:43that it not only explains how God could
11:45cover the sins that are pasted it
11:49explains how God can forgive sin at any
11:52time and it's the only explanation of it
11:55here is the
11:57problem how can God at one and the same
12:00time be
12:01just and yet the justifier of him that
12:05believeth in
12:06Jesus how can this eternal holy God who
12:10is just and righteous and unchangeable
12:12the Father of Lights with whom is no
12:14variableness NE shadow of turning the
12:16God who is light and in whom is no
12:18Darkness at all the God who is of such a
12:21pure countenance that he cannot even
12:22behold evil and sin how can he forgive
12:27sin and still remain
12:29what he eternally
12:31is and the answer that the Apostle gives
12:34is
12:35this that the only way in which God can
12:38do that is what he did to his son upon
12:40the cross Heath set him forth as a
12:44propitiation of sins and he's done it in
12:47that way to declare I say at this time
12:50his righteousness that he might be just
12:53and the justifier of him which believeth
12:56in
12:57Jesus and you see there is one
12:59explanation of
13:01that God is just and yet forgives sins
13:06because he has punished sin as a just
13:09God must he's done so in the person of
13:13his only begotten
13:15son so he remains righteous he remains
13:18just he has done to sin what he said he
13:21would do to sin and yet because he's
13:23done it in the substitute he can forgive
13:26us he can justify us who believe in
13:28Jesus
13:30now the argument of the Apostle
13:32is that that was the only way in which
13:35it could
13:36happen in other words it was an utter
13:39absolute
13:41necessity there was no other way in
13:44which even God could have done it for
13:47God to remain just and to forgive this
13:50which happened in Christ upon the cross
13:52when he was set forth as a
13:55propitiation is the thing that
13:57establishes it
13:59and indeed I would say again that for
14:01myself if I had no other text that is to
14:03me
14:05enough none of the other theories can
14:07explain that and they
14:10don't there is only one way of
14:12explaining this it is that what happened
14:14there was an absolute
14:16necessity it was the only way in which
14:19if I may so term it the Eternal
14:22character of God could be reconciled
14:24with itself and could be Vindicated not
14:27only before the whole world of men
14:29but before the principalities and powers
14:31in Heavenly places indeed even before
14:34the
14:35devil and all the citizens of
14:39Hell God proclaims his eternal Justice
14:43and
14:44yet can forgive the sins of those who
14:47believe in Jesus the most amazing a most
14:51profound
14:52statement and then my third and my last
14:55group under this heading I'd put like
14:57this
14:59there are certain statements in the
15:01scriptures which suggest that this was
15:04an absolute necessity take for instance
15:07Hebrews 2:9 Hebrews
15:1029 where the author says but we see
15:14Jesus who was made a little lower than
15:16the angels for the suffering of death
15:20crowned with Glory and Honor that he by
15:23the grace of God should taste
15:27death for every man
15:30he had to suffer death he had to taste
15:33death now take that word
15:36taste what a word it is what a strong
15:39word do we realize the full content of
15:42that
15:43tasting there is a sense in which it can
15:45be said that the Lord Jesus Christ is
15:46the only one who's ever tasted death in
15:49all its bitterness and in all its
15:52horror that was why we see him there
15:54sweating blood in the garden that's why
15:57we hear him crying out upon on the cross
16:00that is why he died so soon and the
16:02authorities were surprised that he was
16:03already dead that's why his heart
16:06literally broke it actually
16:08raptured it was because he tasted
16:12it and my argument is
16:16this would God the Eternal
16:19Father ever allow his only begotten
16:23beloved Son to endure that if it were
16:27not absolutely asend
16:30but take another statement which says
16:31the same thing take Romans
16:36832 he that spared not his own
16:41son but delivered him up for us all how
16:46shall he not also with him freely give
16:48us all things it's the first part I'm
16:50interested in
16:52now he that spared not what does it mean
16:57spared him from what spar SP him from
16:59all
17:00that spared him from that Agony that
17:04shame he delivered him up he God
17:08delivered him it was the father who
17:11delivered him to that who sent him to
17:13that it was the only way the son
17:16volunteered the son went willingly
17:19voluntarily but it was the father who
17:22delivered him who sent him he didn't
17:25spare
17:26him and when the son bore our sins the
17:30father spared him
17:32nothing the full wrath of God against
17:36sin descended upon
17:38him he wasn't spared anything at all the
17:42full blast of It Came Upon him he that
17:46spared not his own
17:48son but delivered him up for us all
17:52indeed John 3:16 Says exactly the same
17:55thing God so loved the world that he
17:57gave and that giving includes the shame
18:00and the suffering and the agony of the
18:02death upon the cross and my argument
18:05again is
18:06this is it
18:10conceivable that God would have
18:12delivered up his own son to
18:14that even to the point of that break in
18:17the Eternal contact that was between
18:20them is it conceivable I ask that God
18:23would have done that unless it was an
18:25absolute
18:27necessity well very well this Doctrine
18:29this substitutionary penal view of the
18:31doctrine of the atonement asserts all
18:34that and that is why I say again that it
18:38is the only adequate and satisfactory
18:42explanation of the biblical doctrine of
18:44the atonement but if you require certain
18:47subsidiary arguments take
18:50these the doctrine of the WTH of
18:53God if you believe at all in the
18:56doctrine of the wrath of God against sin
18:58well then obviously sin must be punished
19:01the penal element comes in and that
19:02leads to the necessity of
19:06substitution or take this
19:08argument the
19:10majesty and the immutability of the
19:14Divine
19:16Law not one jot nor one title of this
19:19shall pass away until all shall be
19:21fulfilled Heaven and Earth shall pass
19:23away but my word shall not pass away the
19:27immutability
19:29of the law of God because it is God's
19:32law because it is the Divine Law and
19:35then another argument is that if we do
19:37agree that sin is guilt and not merely
19:41something negative not merely some
19:43weakness not merely some failure to
19:45develop if we agreed when we were
19:47considering the doctrine of sin that sin
19:50is transgression that sin is
19:53lawlessness and that sin therefore
19:55involves guilt well obviously then you
19:57will have to agree that guilt's got to
19:59be dealt with and that somehow or
20:01another it must be
20:03punished and this is the only view of
20:06the atonement that really does
20:08that you remember John defines sin as a
20:11sin he says is the transgression of the
20:13law that's the first Epistle of John
20:183:4 and then lastly I put it like
20:23this there is no other Theory which
20:26really shows us why it is essential to
20:28Believe In
20:30Christ and why it is believing in him
20:34and on him that saves us take any one of
20:37those other
20:39views the moral influence view which
20:42tells us that the love of God is
20:45displayed by the death of Christ upon
20:47the cross it's supposed to melt our hard
20:49hearts and to do away with our enmity
20:52against God well very well then I say if
20:55that is its function what it does is to
20:57make me believe in God God directly it's
20:59simply a means to make me believe in God
21:02I don't have to believe in Christ as
21:04such he has merely shown me God I don't
21:08believe in him I believe in the god whom
21:10he shown me and if he's an example it's
21:13the same thing and so with all the other
21:16theories this is the only view of the
21:18atonement that shows us why we've got to
21:21believe in him that we don't know God
21:24without believing in Christ and that
21:26belief in Christ is the thing that saves
21:31us very well now then that entitle
21:34allows us to come on to consider very
21:36hurriedly some of the objections that
21:38are brought forward to this particular
21:40teaching of course all people who deny
21:43that sin is guilt disagree with this
21:46Doctrine I can't stay to argue that
21:49we've already demonstrated that sin is
21:52guilt but if you don't regard sin as
21:54something which renders you guilty well
21:56of course you can't accept this Doctrine
21:58but if you regard sin as guilt you must
22:00immediately accept this Doctrine then
22:03there's an argument which says that
22:05surely God's love is
22:07enough the argument is put like this it
22:09says we forgive one another without any
22:12substitution and without any punishment
22:15and if we in our love for one another
22:17can forgive one another surely God whose
22:20love is still greater should be able to
22:21do it with still greater ease that's the
22:26argument to which of course the reply is
22:30this that if God were only love there
22:34might be some FAL in that argument but
22:37God is God and God is light and God is
22:40Holy and God is just and God is
22:43righteous not only that there is no
22:46greater fallacy and no more felicious
22:50type of
22:50argument than the argument that goes
22:54from men to God it's a very common
22:57argument today
22:59people are constantly arguing like that
23:01if this is true of us how much more so
23:03of God as if God were in serious with us
23:07the truth being of course that we are in
23:09sin and that all our ideas are wrong
23:11that our conception of Love is more
23:14wrong than anything
23:15else and that if we begin to think of
23:18God's love in terms of what we do and
23:20what we think well then I say it with
23:23reverence God help
23:25us if we are going to attribute
23:28sentimental loose unjust and unrighteous
23:32Notions of love to the Everlasting
23:36godhead well then we place ourselves in
23:38the most precarious
23:40position another way of stating that is
23:42to say that this substitution review of
23:44the atment derogates from God's
23:46character here's Justice they say it
23:48would be unjust in God to punish someone
23:51who was innocent to which the reply is
23:54that when the innocent
23:56volunteers and takes upon himself self
23:58the sins of others and asks God to put
24:00them on him and to punish them in him
24:03there is obviously no Injustice at all
24:06this was the great decision of the
24:08Eternal Council between Father Son and
24:10Holy Spirit the son said here am I send
24:14me and God provided him a body there was
24:17perfect agreement and therefore no
24:20Injustice I've just been dealing with
24:22the argument which says that it
24:23derogates from his love they say fancy
24:26god demanding blood to a SE him before
24:30he can forgive to which the reply is
24:33what I've just been
24:34saying and then those who feel that we
24:36derogate from the pardoning grace of God
24:39because they say God Demands a payment
24:42before
24:44forgiving and again the argument is
24:46still the
24:47same that the character of God must
24:51always be thought of in terms of its
24:54every
24:55aspect the Holiness this just ice that
24:58Paul speaks about that God be just and
25:01the justifier and all the great and
25:04eternal attributes of God God is one and
25:07all these things are true of God and are
25:09manifestations of God's
25:12character and therefore this argument
25:15collapses then another argument that one
25:17sometimes hears is this it used to be
25:19very popular it's not as popular today
25:21but still one finds it they say you know
25:24that substitutionary penal view of the
25:27atonement
25:29was the invention of the Apostle Paul
25:32and they say you don't find it in the
25:34gospels and the argument was and still
25:36is that if it were true of course our
25:38Lord would have taught it but you only
25:41find it in the Epistles to which the
25:43reply is that that isn't true we saw
25:46last Friday night that our Lord did say
25:48this the son of man is not come to be
25:50ministered unto but to minister and to
25:53give his life a
25:55ransom for many it's all there in that
25:58word Ransom as we saw but wait a minute
26:01it's not the end of the
26:05argument there were very good
26:08reasons why our Lord couldn't give a
26:11full exposition of the doctrine of the
26:12atonement before he had accomplished it
26:15upon the cross do you remember what
26:17happened let me suggest this as a bit of
26:19research and homework for you read your
26:22gospels and observe what happened every
26:25time our Lord spoke about his death
26:29you will find that each time the
26:30disciples misunderstood it didn't grasp
26:33it were cast down by it objected to it
26:36what's the explanation well our Lord
26:38himself gives the explanation he turned
26:41to them just at the end you'll find this
26:43in the Gospel of John 16:12 and he said
26:47I have yet many things to say unto you
26:51but you cannot bear them
26:53now and they couldn't bear
26:56them every time he brought this teaching
26:59forward they couldn't receive
27:00it their minds were darkened their
27:03hearts seem to be
27:05held it's most interesting to watch that
27:07in the
27:08gospel and it's not difficult to
27:10understand
27:12this indeed their whole idea of him was
27:15still not clear Peter had made his
27:16confession at cesaria Philippi but he
27:19hadn't understood it all it was the
27:21resurrection that convinced them of the
27:24ultimate truth concerning the fact that
27:26he was the only begotten son of God and
27:28in the light of that they begin to
27:30understand the atonement after his
27:32resurrection you remember we saw he took
27:35them through it all right through the
27:36Old Testament and they were able to
27:38receive it they couldn't receive it
27:40before so that that argument likewise
27:43has no real substance and no real
27:46foundation in other words if I may sum
27:49it up I'll put it in this
27:51form the real difficulty people seem to
27:54get with this Doctrine is generally due
27:56to the fact that their whole view of the
27:59person of God is
28:00inadequate they forget one aspect of his
28:03character they emphasize one side only
28:06to the exclusion of others if they were
28:10to take God as he is and to realize the
28:12truth about God their difficulties would
28:16vanish there is one particular argument
28:19that I'm particularly anxious to
28:22demolish and it is this there are those
28:26who say I don't like that sub
28:28substitutionary penal view because what
28:30it says is this that God was reluctant
28:33to forgive us and that our Lord had to
28:36die and to go to God and plead his death
28:39and plead the Merit of his blood before
28:42God would forgive unfortunately that has
28:45been taught sometimes Evangelical
28:48preachers have put the doctrine like
28:49that and there are hymns which put it
28:51like that as if our Lord is there having
28:54to plead with God and pleading the Merit
28:57of his blood in in order to persuade God
28:59to forgive it's a terrible travesty of
29:02the biblical truth I've really already
29:05answered it when I put it like
29:08this it is God himself who has done all
29:12this why did the sun ever come on Earth
29:16why did the sun die and the answer is
29:19God so loved the
29:21world it was the love of God that
29:24thought out this way of Salvation it was
29:27the love of God that carried it out it
29:30is not something that influences the
29:32love of God the love of God has produced
29:34it that's the
29:37order were it not for the love of
29:40God God would have punished sin in
29:43us and we should all suffer Eternal
29:48death it was the love of God that I say
29:52produced this way and has carried out
29:56this way so we must never start with the
29:59doctrine of the atonement and go up to
30:01the love of God as something which is
30:03influenced by it we start with the love
30:06of God it was the Holy Love of
30:11God desirous of forgiving
30:15men that produced and carried out this
30:19way of atonement so that God might be
30:21just and the justifier of him that
30:25believeth in Jesus indeed I don't don't
30:28hesitate to go so far as to say
30:31this there is nothing anywhere in the
30:37scripture which in any way approaches
30:40the substitutionary and penal doctrine
30:43of the
30:44atonement as an exposition and an
30:48explanation of the love of
30:51God is there anything greater than
30:54this that God should take your sins and
30:57mine and put them on his own son and
31:00punish his own son not sparing him
31:04anything causing him to suffer all that
31:07that you and I might be forgiven can you
31:10tell me of any greater exhibition of the
31:13love of God than
31:15that the moral influence Theory and all
31:18these other
31:19theories which claim that they put
31:21themselves forward because they believe
31:23in the love of God are failing to
31:26comprehend the love of God
31:28it is there you see the love of God when
31:32his own son suffers as our
31:36substitute the penalty of the law that
31:39you and I have incurred and so richly
31:43deserve I therefore claim ye forgiven
31:46and reconciled to God fully before he
31:48can be justified the law must be honored
31:51it must be satisfied it must be dealt
31:54with and
31:56obviously that is something that must
31:58take place in two respects first and
32:01foremost the law comes to us and tells
32:03us that unless we keep it unless we
32:06honor it unless we live it we are
32:10condemned Moses describeth the
32:12righteousness which is of the law says
32:14Paul like this that the man which doeth
32:17those things shall live by
32:21them before he can reconcile us to God
32:24both those things have got to be done he
32:27deals with the guilt as we've seen upon
32:29the cross he was there
32:31passive he offered himself he presented
32:34himself his body his life and God put
32:37our sins upon him he was passive God was
32:40doing it it was God's
32:42action passive obedience ah yes but in
32:46his
32:47life it was an active obedience do you
32:50remember how Paul puts it in writing to
32:52the Galatians in the 4th chapter veres 4
32:54and 5 when the fullness of the times was
32:57come God sent forth his son made of a
32:59woman made under the law that he might
33:02redeem them that are under the law
33:05that's it and this is how he did
33:09it he rendered the law a perfect
33:13obedience he kept it fully he carried it
33:17out in every jot and tit he said he was
33:20going to do it he says you remember in
33:22Matthew 5:17 think not that I am come to
33:25destroy the law of the prophets I am
33:27come not to destroy but to
33:29fulfill and as I say not one jot nor one
33:33title shall in any wise pass until all
33:36is fulfilled and he did
33:39so he kept the law perfectly
33:43completely he came up to God's demand in
33:46the
33:47law now
33:50then this is how he saves
33:54us we are in him that's why I read the
33:58fifth chapter of Romans at the
34:00beginning we were all in Adam Adam was
34:04our representative he was our federal
34:06head when he fell we all fell with
34:10him we who are saved Paul
34:14argues are in
34:17Christ as we were in Adam we are in
34:21Christ all that was true of Adam was
34:23true of us all that Adam did became true
34:25of us all that is true of Christ is true
34:28of us becomes true of us all that Christ
34:31has done becomes true of us and I'm
34:36saved therefore in this way when Christ
34:39honored and kept the law by his active
34:42obedience he wasn't only doing it for
34:44himself he was doing it for
34:46me and therefore I can say with the
34:49Apostle Paul ye are not under law but
34:52under
34:53grace the Christian is no longer under
34:56the law in the sense that it is the
34:58keeping of the law that's going to save
35:00him as far as he is concerned the law
35:02has been kept it has been honored it is
35:05imputed to him for
35:07righteousness God has made him to be sin
35:10for us who knew no sin that we might be
35:13made the righteousness of God in him or
35:17take it again in the 8th chapter of the
35:19epistle to the Romans this Mighty
35:21statement of
35:22it for what the law could not do in that
35:25it was weak through the flesh
35:28God sending his own son in the likeness
35:31of sinful flesh and for sin condemn sin
35:34in the flesh why that the righteousness
35:37of the law might be fulfilled in
35:40us that's
35:42it in other words it is this great
35:45doctrine of our being one with Christ in
35:48Christ and so you see the atonement
35:50Works in that
35:52way what he did actively is imputed to
35:55us what he did passively is imputed to
35:59us so that in Christ believing in Christ
36:02Incorporated in
36:06him we can face the
36:08law without any fear without any Tremor
36:12without any
36:13quiver indeed I'm going so far as to say
36:16this that unless we are able to say that
36:19there's something wrong with our
36:21faith we are no longer under the law we
36:25are under grace
36:28so we all ought to be ready to say with
36:30Augusta stop
36:32lady the Terrors of
36:35Law and of
36:38God with me can have nothing to
36:43do my savior's
36:46obedience and blood hide all my
36:52transgressions from VI what a glorious
36:56statement
36:58I'm ashamed to think it's not in this
36:59him book of
37:00ours and do you know my friends it's
37:03rather a sad and pathetic observation to
37:05have to make but I suggest that you look
37:08through these sections on the death of
37:11Christ in this him book and in most
37:13others and I think you'll agree with me
37:15when you've done so that they're very
37:18inadequate how few of them State these
37:21magnificent doctrines as they're stated
37:24in the scriptures but top lady has
37:26stated it there it's the hymn which
37:28begins a DEA to Mercy alone of Covenant
37:32Mercy I sing nor fear with thy
37:35righteousness on my person and offering
37:39to bring the Terrors of Law and of
37:44God with me says a man who is a
37:48sinner but he must say it and we must
37:51say
37:52it with me can have nothing to do why my
37:56savior obedience
37:59active and blood passive my savior's
38:04obedience and
38:06blood hide
38:09all my
38:12transgressions from
38:14VI very well when we go on and when
38:17eventually we come to consider the
38:19doctrine of justification I'll have to
38:22come back to this and we will see more
38:25fully what it means but as regards the
38:27atonement it means
38:29that I am fully
38:32atoned and thus covered because my sins
38:36are blotted out and because I have the
38:39righteousness of Christ it is what has
38:41happened in him the person of Christ the
38:45work of Christ God willing next Friday I
38:48hope to go on to consider some of the
38:50results and
38:52consequences of this perfect work of Our
38:55Lord on our
38:58behalf and it's a greater subject than
39:00we sometimes think God willing we'll go
39:03on to do that next Friday let us
39:08pray almighty God our heavenly
39:12father again we are conscious of the
39:16total
39:17inadequacy of anything that we can
39:19attempt to
39:21say but oh God thou knowest us and th
39:24knowest our minds thou knowest our
39:26hearts
39:28we do indeed desire to say together
39:31Praise My Soul the king of Heaven to his
39:35feet thy tribute bring ransomed healed
39:39restored
39:41forgiven who like thee who his praise
39:45should sing praise him praise him praise
39:51the Everlasting King oh God accept our
39:57pray
39:59and now May the grace of the Lord Jesus
40:01Christ and the love of God and the
40:04fellowship and the communion of the Holy
40:06Spirit abide and continue with us now
40:09this night and ever
40:12more amen

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of The Necessity of the Atonement (Remastered) by MLJ Trust, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 5,673 words across 883 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to choose a caption track available on the video.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, caption language selection, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.