Godsey on Substitutionary Atonement

                                                                                                                          Vol. X, No. 1, January 1997

           “Anti-Heritage” continues to present the views of those who question the authority of God’s Word because until the average Southern Baptist reads them for himself, he cannot believe some Baptists actually hold such views. Therefore, we bring you direct quotes whenever possible and as fully as space permits. In addition the source is always cited so that readers can check it out for themselves.

           The following selection is quoted from Dr. R. Kirby Godsey’s recent book, When We Talk about God ... Let’s Be Honest (Smyth & Helwys, Macon, 1996) p 141, 143. Godsey is president of Mercer University, the large “Baptist” school in Georgia which receives some $4 million per year from Georgia Baptists.

           “Closer to our own era, we have become far more consumed by what is known as the ‘substitutionary theory of atonement.’ It’s simple. If you don’t believe it, you are not a Christian. In fact, this doctrine is cited as one of the five beliefs that fundamentalism requires in order to meet its criteria of being Christian. In this analysis, the focus shifts from satisfying the honor of God to meeting the penalties for sin. Sin brings death. Jesus serves as our ‘substitute’ in paying the mortal penalties for sin. Assuming our guilt, Jesus accepts a punishment he does not deserve. He is a stand-in for us in taking on sin’s dreadful consequences.

           “This notion of substitutionary atonement leaves us with the irony that God’s chief concern seems to be to keep the books balanced. Over against one side of the ledger that records our sin must be another side that says the penalties have been paid. The books must be balanced. This theory, again, gives us a picture of God that looks more like a judgmental tyrant. It winds up making God responsible for Jesus’ death. God is a God who must get even. Sounds a lot like the way we do business. It has the idea of reconciliation working in the wrong direction.”

           “I believe that we can understand the cross only if we are willing to see that Jesus did not die to appease and angry God. Jesus did not die to appease some abstract penalty for sin.”

[Editorial Comment: Wow! Where to start? A deep theologian could probably write a book about the problems in Godsey’s concepts and reasoning in this brief selection, but let me just make two points. First, Godsey ignores what the Bible says about the Messiah’s assumption of our guilt. Consider Isaiah 53:5 “But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.” That Godsey has little or no compunction about ignoring the Bible’s words is not surprising in view of what he says earlier in the book (p 51) in a chapter headed “Reliable Sources” and a section titled “The Bible”: “The Bible is complete; revelation is not. To ascribe infallibility to the written words of the Bible is wrong.”

           Second, Godsey sets up a false dichotomy between “God” (presumably the Father) and Jesus with “God” being the harsh judge who demands great suffering from the innocent Jesus. Clearly Godsey doesn’t have a clue about the Trinity. Granted no man can fully understand the Three-in-One, we do know from God’s written Word that they are not only Three, but also One. Thus when Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.” Jesus replied, “Have I been so long time with you, and yet thou hast not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, show us the Father?” John 14:8-9. Also, in John 10:30 “I and my Father are one.”

           When we recognize that Jesus and the Father are One, it places an entirely different complexion on the atonement than Godsey espouses. The biblical view is of loving sacrifice, not to “balance the books” but to cleanse believers so that we may spend eternity in heaven, something no man can do for himself. Unfortunately the president of one of the largest Southern Baptist schools is condemned as a heretic by his own pen, not only in this selection, but in many other portions of his book. Eternal vigilance is the price of doctrinal faithfulness.

           Readers interested in Godsey’s book will also want to read “Let’s Be Honest” and “Honesty or Orthodoxy -- Must We Choose between Them?” in this Banner. TCP]