Journal: Southern Baptist Journal of Theology
Volume: SBJT 27:3 (Fall 2023)
Article: What Qualifies As Orthodoxy In Regard To The Atonement? Five Elements From The First Seven Ecumenical Councils
Author: Zachary Taylor Hunn

SBJT 27:3 (Fall 2023) p. 10

What Qualifies As Orthodoxy In Regard To The Atonement? Five Elements From The First Seven Ecumenical Councils

Zachary Taylor Hunn

Zachary Taylor Hunn is the Minister to Junior High at Clifton Baptist Church, Louisville, Kentucky. He received his Master of Divinity from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky and is currently pursuing a Masters of Theology in Church History and Theology. He is married to Blair and they have two children.

In a recent work entitled Atonement: A Guide for the Perplexed, Adam Johnson argued that orthodoxy in regard to the atonement is, “abundant rather than monolithic; more of a flower-filled alpine meadow than a knife-like ridge.”1 In this article, I will argue that atonement orthodoxy is more monolithic than Johnson supposes. I will play by Johnson’s rules. In his work, he explains that there are “five main elements essential to every theory of the atonement”2 and shows that these five elements are “necessary criteria for a full and sufficient theory of the atonement.”3 While Johnson uses these five elements4 to analyze various theories of the atonement, I will repurpose them for a constructive project.

Drawing from the first seven ecumenical councils, the creeds they produced, as well as the documents and theologians who influenced the councils, I will construct five elements of historic, Christian orthodoxy on

SBJT 27:3 (Fall 2023) p. 11

the atonement. I will be working with an understanding of orthodoxy as expressed by Gregg Allison. Orthodoxy is “right doctrine or belief ... that which properly reflects in summary form all that Scripture affirms and which the church is therefore bound to believe and obey ... Orthodoxy stands in contrast with heresy, which is anything that contradicts sound doctrine.”5 It is plain this is the same understanding of orthodoxy the bishops and theologians of the ecumenical councils possessed.

Perhaps some will think it a fool’s errand to look for a doctrine of the atonement, “a unique explanation of the causal efficacy of the passion, the precise way in which the death and resurrection of Jesus was effective for our salvation,” in the ecumenical councils.6 Many argue there was no consensus on the atonement during that period of church history (or any period, for that matter).You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe