ed and perfectly unified
humanity to God. "And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then
shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things
under him, that God may be all in all."

CHAPTER VIII

THE ATONEMENT

+I. Association of the Doctrine with Jesus+

+Importance of the subject.+--This brings us to a subject, which, more
than any other, with the exception of that of the person of Jesus, has
come under discussion at the present time. In the course of Christian
history it has created a more extensive literature than probably any
other doctrine. I mean the subject variously known as Salvation,
Redemption, Atonement, and with which the terms Forgiveness, Expiation,
Reconciliation, Ransom, Justification, Propitiation, Satisfaction,
Sanctification, and such like have been commonly associated. The
Christian doctrine of Atonement, as we may call it for convenience,
bulks so large in Christian thought that all others may be held to be
dependent upon it, even that of the person of Jesus; for, according to
the received theology, Jesus became incarnate for our redemption, and
that redemption can only be accomplished by one who is very God.

+The need for an adequate explanation.+--But there is no subject upon
which modern Christian thought is less coherent than this. We are
constantly hearing the statement that a rational theory of the
Atonement is badly wanted, or that it is our duty to preach the fact
without a theory, or that the Atonement is such a mystery that no
theory is possible and we must just accept it on faith. This
confession of helplessness shows that there is something seriously
wrong with the conventional presentation of the doctrine. But I do not
think the Atonement is such a very great mystery after all, and it
ought to be possible to get at the heart of it without stultifying the
intellect. Anyhow, let us try.

+The usual theological method of expounding it.+--As a rule treatises
on the Atonement begin with an examination of the Scripture passages
which are supposed to have a bearing upon it. Then follows a careful
examination and criticism of the various theories of it which have
successively held the field during its history; the author concludes by
giving us his own. I do not propose to follow that method, for it does
not possess a living interest for the mind of to-day; the psychological
should take precedence of the historical. I do not feel called upon to