The Work of Christ: Atonement and Resurrection

What you'll learn

Explain the covenant of grace and the main biblical pictures of the atonement: sacrifice, propitiation, redemption and reconciliation
Demonstrate from Isaiah 53, Romans 3:21-26, 2 Corinthians 5:21 and Galatians 3:13 why penal substitution is the heart of the atonement, and show how Christus Victor and example fit with it
Articulate the Reformed view of definite atonement and the meaning of the bodily resurrection, ascension and session, and why 1 Corinthians 15 makes the resurrection essential

The doctrine in one sentence

In the covenant of grace, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the priest of his people, offered himself as a sacrifice that bore the penalty of their sins in their place, satisfying God's justice, turning away his wrath, redeeming them from bondage and reconciling them to God, and then rose bodily from the dead, ascended and now reigns and intercedes at the Father's right hand.

Lesson 4 asked who Christ is; this lesson asks what he did. The two cannot be separated. Because he is truly man, he could stand in our place; because he is truly God, his sacrifice has infinite worth. Lesson 5 described the problem: guilt, corruption and death in Adam. Here is God's answer. (Defending justification and the gospel against objectors is covered in Doctrines Under Fire, Lesson 3, and the historical evidence for the resurrection in Foundations of Defence, Lesson 4. Here we focus on the doctrine itself.)

Why can the person of Christ (Lesson 4) and the work of Christ (this lesson) not be separated?Show answer

What Christ did depends on who he is. Because he is truly man, he could stand in our place; because he is truly God, his sacrifice has infinite worth. And his work is God's answer to the specific problem Lesson 5 described: guilt, corruption and death in Adam.

truly man: could stand in our place
truly God: infinite worth
answer to guilt, corruption, death

The covenant of grace

After Adam broke the covenant of works, God did not abandon the human race. The Shorter Catechism (Q20) says God, out of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity elected some to everlasting life and "did enter into a covenant of grace" to deliver them by a Redeemer. The covenant of grace is God's gracious commitment to save sinners through Christ, received by faith. It was first announced in Genesis 3:15, unfolded in the covenants with Abraham (Genesis 12; 15; Galatians 3:8), Moses, David (2 Samuel 7) and promised in the new covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34), which Christ ratified in his blood (Luke 22:20).

Reformed theology sees one covenant of grace with different administrations across history: in the Old Testament through promises, sacrifices and types pointing forward, in the New Testament through the clear preaching of Christ and the sacraments. Abraham was justified by faith exactly as we are (Romans 4). Many Reformed theologians also speak of a covenant of redemption in eternity, in which the Father gave a people to the Son and the Son undertook to save them (John 6:37-39; 17:2-6). (Presbyterian and Reformed Baptist theologians describe the relation of the old and new covenants somewhat differently, a difference that surfaces in baptism, Lesson 8.)

This framework guards us from treating the cross as a last-minute rescue. It was God's plan from before the foundation of the world (Acts 2:23; 1 Peter 1:19-20; Revelation 13:8).

What is the covenant of grace, and how does it guard us from treating the cross as a last-minute rescue?Show answer

The covenant of grace is God's gracious commitment to save sinners through Christ, received by faith, first announced in Genesis 3:15 and unfolded through Abraham, Moses and David until the new covenant Christ ratified in his blood (Luke 22:20). There is one covenant of grace in different administrations, so Abraham was justified by faith just as we are (Rom 4). Because the cross was God's plan from before the foundation of the world (Acts 2:23; 1 Pet 1:19-20), it was never an emergency response.

God's commitment to save through Christ
Gen 3:15 to new covenant
one covenant, different administrations
planned before the world

Four biblical pictures of the atonement

Atonement means making at-one: the work by which Christ deals with sin and brings sinners to God. Scripture uses several pictures, each drawn from a different area of life, and each answers a different aspect of our problem. John Murray (Redemption Accomplished and Applied) treats Christ's work under these four headings, and John Stott (The Cross of Christ) uses a similar cluster of images.

Sacrifice (from the temple). Under the law, a spotless animal died in the worshipper's place, its blood covering sin (Leviticus 1:4; 16; 17:11). These sacrifices could never finally take away sins (Hebrews 10:4) but pointed to "the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). Christ "offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins" (Hebrews 10:12). Our problem is defilement; the answer is a cleansing sacrifice.

Propitiation (from the courtroom and the temple). To propitiate means to turn away wrath by satisfying justice. God's wrath is not an outburst of temper but his settled, holy opposition to evil (Romans 1:18). God "put forward" Christ "as a propitiation by his blood" (Romans 3:25; also 1 John 2:2; 4:10; Hebrews 2:17). Notice the wonder: God himself provides the propitiation. The Father does not need to be persuaded to love us; his love sends the Son to bear the wrath we deserved. Our problem is God's just wrath; the answer is propitiation.

Redemption (from the marketplace). To redeem is to set free by paying a price, as slaves or captives were bought back. Jesus came "to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mark 10:45); "you were bought with a price" (1 Corinthians 6:20); "redeemed... with the precious blood of Christ" (1 Peter 1:18-19). The ransom is not paid to Satan, as some early writers suggested, but to satisfy God's justice. Our problem is bondage to sin, the law's curse and death; the answer is redemption.

Reconciliation (from personal relationships). Sin makes us enemies of God and him rightly opposed to us. "While we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son" (Romans 5:10); "in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them" (2 Corinthians 5:19). Our problem is enmity; the answer is peace with God (Romans 5:1).

Match each of the four biblical pictures of the atonement to the problem it answers.Show answer

Sacrifice, from the temple, answers our defilement with a cleansing sacrifice. Propitiation answers God's just wrath by satisfying his justice. Redemption, from the marketplace, answers our bondage to sin, the law's curse and death by paying a price. Reconciliation, from personal relationships, answers our enmity with peace with God (Rom 5:1, 10).

sacrifice: defilement
propitiation: wrath
redemption: bondage
reconciliation: enmity

Why does the section insist that propitiation does not mean the Son persuading an unwilling Father to love us, and to whom is the ransom paid?Show answer

God himself provides the propitiation: he 'put forward' Christ as a propitiation by his blood (Rom 3:25). The Father does not need to be persuaded to love us; his love sends the Son to bear the wrath we deserved (1 John 4:10). The ransom is not paid to Satan, as some early writers suggested, but to satisfy God's justice.

God provides the propitiation
the Father's love sends the Son
ransom not paid to Satan
satisfies God's justice

Penal substitution: the heart of the atonement

Penal substitution means that Christ, as our substitute, bore the penalty (Latin poena) of God's law that we deserved, so that we are forgiven and accepted. It is not one picture alongside the others; it is the reality that makes the others work. A sacrifice cleanses because the victim dies in the sinner's place; wrath is propitiated because the penalty is paid; we are redeemed because the price is the substitute's life; we are reconciled because the barrier of guilt is removed. Four texts show it.

Isaiah 53:4-6, 10-12. The Servant was "pierced for our transgressions" and "crushed for our iniquities"; "upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace"; "the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all"; it was "the will of the LORD to crush him", making "his soul an offering for guilt"; "he shall bear their iniquities." Note the pronouns: him and us. The suffering is substitutionary, it is punishment (chastisement), and God is the one who lays the iniquity on him. The New Testament applies this chapter to Jesus repeatedly (Acts 8:32-35; 1 Peter 2:24).

Romans 3:21-26. Paul's problem is how God can be both just and forgiving. If he simply overlooked sin, he would be unjust (3:25 speaks of his "divine forbearance" in passing over former sins). His answer: God put Christ forward as a propitiation "to show his righteousness... so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus" (3:26). The cross is where God's justice and mercy meet.

2 Corinthians 5:21. "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." This is the great exchange: our sin counted to Christ, his righteousness counted to us. Christ did not become a sinner in himself; sin was imputed to him, as righteousness is imputed to us.

Galatians 3:10-13. Everyone who fails to keep the law is under its curse. "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us", for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree" (Deuteronomy 21:23). The cry of dereliction, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Mark 15:34), shows the Son bearing that curse. The Heidelberg Catechism (Q37) says he "sustained in body and soul the wrath of God against the sins of all mankind."

Some object that this is "cosmic child abuse." But the Son is not an unwilling victim; he lays down his life of his own accord (John 10:18), and the Father, Son and Spirit act together (Hebrews 9:14). The judge takes the penalty on himself in the person of the Son. That is not abuse but the highest love (Romans 5:8; 1 John 4:10).

Why does the section call penal substitution 'the reality that makes the others work' rather than just one picture among four?Show answer

Each of the other pictures depends on substitution. A sacrifice cleanses because the victim dies in the sinner's place; wrath is propitiated because the penalty is paid; we are redeemed because the price is the substitute's life; and we are reconciled because the barrier of guilt is removed. So penal substitution is the heart that gives the others their meaning.

sacrifice: dies in our place
propitiation: penalty paid
redemption: price is his life
reconciliation: guilt removed

How do Romans 3:21-26 and 2 Corinthians 5:21 each show what happened at the cross?Show answer

Romans 3 faces the problem of how God can be both just and forgiving: if he simply overlooked sin he would be unjust, so he put Christ forward as a propitiation 'so that he might be just and the justifier' of the one who has faith in Jesus (3:26). The cross is where justice and mercy meet. 2 Corinthians 5:21 describes the great exchange: our sin counted to Christ, who knew no sin, and his righteousness counted to us, by imputation rather than Christ becoming a sinner in himself.

just and justifier
justice and mercy meet
great exchange
imputation, not infusion of sin

Other aspects held together: Christus Victor and example

Scripture also presents the cross as victory. Christ shared our flesh "that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil" (Hebrews 2:14-15). He "disarmed the rulers and authorities" and triumphed over them in the cross (Colossians 2:15), fulfilling Genesis 3:15. This theme is often called Christus Victor, after Gustaf Aulén's book of that name (1930; English translation 1931). It is a precious truth. But notice how Colossians 2:13-15 gets there: God cancelled "the record of debt that stood against us" by nailing it to the cross. Satan's power over us was the power of accusation based on our guilt. Once the penalty is paid, the accuser is disarmed. Victory comes through substitution.

Scripture also presents the cross as an example of humble, self-giving love (1 Peter 2:21; Philippians 2:5-8; Ephesians 5:2). Christians are called to take up the cross and follow. But the same passage in 1 Peter goes straight on: "He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree" (2:24). An example alone cannot save sinners who cannot follow it; we need a substitute first, and then we can follow the example by his Spirit.

So the Reformed approach is not to choose one model but to see them as a cluster with a centre. Penal substitution is the heart, and from it flow victory over the powers, a moving example of love, the moral influence of the cross on our hearts, and the cleansing of creation.

How does Colossians 2:13-15 show that Christ's victory over the powers comes through substitution?Show answer

Colossians 2:15 says Christ disarmed the rulers and authorities and triumphed over them in the cross, which is the Christus Victor theme. But verses 13-14 show how: God cancelled 'the record of debt that stood against us' by nailing it to the cross. Satan's power over us was the power of accusation based on our guilt, so once the penalty is paid the accuser is disarmed.

Christ triumphed over powers
record of debt cancelled
Satan's power was accusation
penalty paid disarms the accuser

Why can the cross as an example of self-giving love not be enough on its own to save?Show answer

Scripture does present the cross as an example to follow (1 Pet 2:21; Phil 2:5-8). But an example alone cannot save sinners who cannot follow it, which is why 1 Peter 2:24 goes straight on to say he 'bore our sins in his body on the tree'. We need a substitute first, and then we can follow the example by his Spirit.

the cross is a real example
sinners cannot follow an example alone
1 Pet 2:24
substitute first, then follow

For whom did Christ die? Definite atonement

Reformed theology teaches definite atonement (also called particular redemption or, less helpfully, limited atonement): the Father intended, and the Son accomplished, the actual salvation of all the elect, so that Christ's death secures everything needed for their salvation, including the gift of faith. The question is not whether the death of Christ is sufficient for all (it is of infinite worth, and the Canons of Dort, Head 2, Article 3, say it is abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world), but what it was designed to accomplish.

The case rests on several lines. Christ laid down his life "for the sheep" (John 10:11, 15), "loved the church and gave himself up for her" (Ephesians 5:25), and came to "save his people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21). The Trinity acts in unity: those the Father gave the Son are those for whom the Son prays (John 17:9) and those he will raise (John 6:39). And the atonement is effective: it actually propitiates, redeems and reconciles, rather than merely making salvation possible. As Romans 8:32-34 reasons, those for whom God gave his Son will be given all things, and none of them can be condemned.

Texts such as John 3:16, 1 John 2:2 ("the whole world") and 2 Peter 3:9 are read in Reformed exegesis as speaking of the worldwide scope of the gospel (Jew and Gentile), of God's sincere offer to all, or of the elect, depending on the context. Many evangelicals, including Arminians and some Calvinists ("four-point" or hypothetical universalists), hold that Christ died for every person in the same way, with the benefit applied to those who believe. They are brothers in Christ, and the debate is in-house. All agree the gospel must be freely offered to everyone, and Reformed churches insist on it (Matthew 11:28; Acts 17:30).

What is definite atonement, and what is the debate really about: sufficiency or design?Show answer

Definite atonement teaches that the Father intended and the Son accomplished the actual salvation of all the elect, securing everything needed for it, including the gift of faith. The question is not whether Christ's death is sufficient for all; it is of infinite worth, and the Canons of Dort say it is abundantly sufficient for the whole world. The question is what it was designed to accomplish.

intended and accomplished salvation of the elect
secures even faith
sufficient for all
debate about design

How do Reformed interpreters read texts like John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2, and how should this debate be conducted with other Christians?Show answer

Depending on context, Reformed exegesis reads such texts as speaking of the worldwide scope of the gospel (Jew and Gentile), of God's sincere offer to all, or of the elect. Many evangelicals, including Arminians and some Calvinists, hold that Christ died for every person in the same way; they are brothers in Christ and the debate is in-house. All agree that the gospel must be freely offered to everyone (Matt 11:28; Acts 17:30).

worldwide scope, sincere offer, or the elect
depends on context
in-house debate among brothers
gospel offered to all

Raised, ascended and reigning

The work of Christ does not end at the cross. He was raised bodily on the third day. The tomb was empty, and the risen Jesus ate fish, invited Thomas to touch his wounds, and said, "a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have" (Luke 24:39-43; John 20:27). His body was the same body, now glorified and immortal (1 Corinthians 15:42-44). The Shorter Catechism (Q28) lists the steps of his exaltation: rising, ascending, sitting at the Father's right hand and coming to judge.

1 Corinthians 15:14-19 explains why the resurrection is essential. If Christ has not been raised, preaching is in vain, faith is futile, "you are still in your sins", the dead are lost and Christians are most to be pitied. The resurrection is the Father's verdict that the sacrifice was accepted: Christ "was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification" (Romans 4:25). It declares him Son of God in power (Romans 1:4). It is the firstfruits of the harvest, guaranteeing our own bodily resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:20-23). And it is the beginning of the new creation.

The ascension (Acts 1:9-11) is not a departure into absence. Christ went in his human body into the presence of God as our forerunner and high priest (Hebrews 6:19-20; 9:24). His session at the right hand (Psalm 110:1; Ephesians 1:20-22) means he now reigns over all things for the church, pours out the Spirit (Acts 2:33), and "always lives to make intercession" for his people (Hebrews 7:25; Romans 8:34). His priestly work continues: the sacrifice is finished, but the advocacy goes on (1 John 2:1).

According to 1 Corinthians 15 and Romans 4:25, why is the resurrection essential and not optional?Show answer

If Christ has not been raised, preaching is in vain, faith is futile, we are still in our sins and the dead are lost (1 Cor 15:14-19). The resurrection is the Father's verdict that the sacrifice was accepted: Christ was 'raised for our justification' (Rom 4:25). It also declares him Son of God in power and is the firstfruits guaranteeing our own bodily resurrection.

without it, faith futile, still in sins
Father's verdict of acceptance
raised for our justification
firstfruits of our resurrection

What is Christ doing now in his ascension and session at the Father's right hand?Show answer

The ascension is not a departure into absence: Christ went in his human body into God's presence as our forerunner and high priest (Heb 6:19-20; 9:24). At the right hand he reigns over all things for the church, has poured out the Spirit (Acts 2:33) and always lives to intercede for his people (Heb 7:25). The sacrifice is finished, but his advocacy goes on (1 John 2:1).

not absence
forerunner and high priest
reigns and poured out the Spirit
intercedes; advocacy continues

Why it matters, and where others depart

The atonement is the ground of assurance: "It is finished" (John 19:30). Your acceptance with God rests not on the quality of your faith or repentance but on the sufficiency of the substitute. It is the measure of God's love (Romans 5:8), the motive for holiness (2 Corinthians 5:14-15), the heart of worship (Revelation 5:9-10) and the message of evangelism. Because Christ alone is the God-man who has made atonement, he is the only Saviour: 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me' (John 14:6), and 'there is salvation in no one else' (Acts 4:12). The apologetic case for this exclusivity is taken further in the Hard Questions module.

Others depart at different points. Islam denies that Jesus was crucified (Quran 4:157) and teaches that no one bears another's burden (Quran 6:164), so substitution is rejected outright (Islam module). Judaism today generally holds that repentance, prayer and good deeds atone in the absence of the temple, and reads Isaiah 53 of Israel (Judaism module). Jehovah's Witnesses teach a "ransom" in which Jesus, a perfect man, paid for Adam's lost life, died on a stake, and was raised as a spirit creature, not bodily (Jehovah's Witnesses module). Latter-day Saints locate much of the atonement in Gethsemane as well as the cross, and see it as securing resurrection for all and exaltation for those obedient to gospel ordinances (Latter-day Saints module). Roman Catholicism affirms Christ's satisfaction but teaches that the sacrifice of the Mass re-presents it and that temporal punishment remains to be paid in purgatory (CCC 1366-1367; 1030-1032) (Roman Catholicism module). Progressive Christians and many secular critics reject penal substitution as violent and see the cross only as example or solidarity (Progressive Christianity and Secular Society modules). Knowing exactly what the cross accomplished lets you speak with clarity and joy.

How does the atonement ground a believer's assurance, and why does it mean Christ is the only Saviour?Show answer

Because Christ said 'It is finished' (John 19:30), our acceptance with God rests not on the quality of our faith or repentance but on the sufficiency of the substitute. The cross is also the measure of God's love (Rom 5:8) and the motive for holiness (2 Cor 5:14-15). And because Christ alone is the God-man who has made atonement, he is the only way to the Father (John 14:6), and there is salvation in no one else (Acts 4:12).

'It is finished'
rests on the substitute, not our faith's quality
measure of God's love
Christ the only Saviour (John 14:6; Acts 4:12)

How do Islam and the Jehovah's Witnesses each depart from the biblical doctrine of the cross and resurrection?Show answer

Islam denies that Jesus was crucified (Quran 4:157) and teaches that no one bears another's burden (6:164), so substitution is rejected outright. Jehovah's Witnesses teach a ransom in which Jesus, a perfect man, paid for Adam's lost life, died on a stake and was raised as a spirit creature rather than bodily.

Islam: no crucifixion
Islam: no one bears another's burden
JWs: perfect man's ransom
JWs: raised as spirit, not bodily

Key texts

Isaiah 53:4-6, 10-12: The Servant pierced for our transgressions, the LORD laying on him our iniquity. The Old Testament's clearest picture of penal substitution.
Romans 3:21-26: God put forward Christ as a propitiation to show he is both just and the justifier. Explains how God can forgive without compromising justice.
2 Corinthians 5:18-21: God reconciling the world, not counting trespasses, making the sinless one to be sin for us. The great exchange.
Galatians 3:10-13: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us. Substitution under the law's penalty.
Mark 10:45: The Son of Man came to give his life as a ransom for many. Jesus' own interpretation of his death.
Colossians 2:13-15: The record of debt cancelled and the powers disarmed. Shows victory over Satan flowing from forgiveness.
John 10:11-15 and Ephesians 5:25: The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep; Christ gave himself for the church. Key texts for definite atonement.
1 Corinthians 15:3-8, 14-20: The early gospel summary and the consequences if Christ is not raised. Why the resurrection is essential, and the firstfruits of ours.
Hebrews 7:25 and 9:24-28: Christ entered heaven itself, appeared once to put away sin, and always lives to intercede. His finished sacrifice and ongoing priesthood.

Objections and answers

Try answering each one yourself before you open the response.

“Penal substitution makes God look like a violent father punishing his innocent son. Isn't that cosmic child abuse?”Show a response

That would be true only if the Son were an unwilling third party and the Father a separate being venting anger. But the Bible teaches neither. The Son is one God with the Father and freely lays down his life (John 10:18; Galatians 2:20). The Father's love is the source of the cross, not its obstacle (John 3:16; 1 John 4:10). The Trinity acts together: the Son offers himself through the eternal Spirit (Hebrews 9:14). So the judge himself, in the person of the Son, takes the penalty he could have justly given us. Remove penal substitution and you do not get a kinder God; you get a God who either ignores evil or leaves us to bear it ourselves.

“Why couldn't God just forgive us without the cross? We forgive people all the time without demanding a sacrifice.”Show a response

When we forgive, we absorb the cost ourselves; real forgiveness is never free, someone pays. And we are private persons, while God is the judge of all the earth (Genesis 18:25). A judge who simply waived crimes would be unjust, and Scripture says God will "by no means clear the guilty" (Exodus 34:7). Romans 3:26 states the problem and answer: God must be just and the justifier. At the cross he does not ignore sin; he deals with it fully in his Son. Far from making God less forgiving, the cross shows forgiveness is costly, and that God himself paid the cost. Taking evil seriously is part of love.

“If Christ died only for the elect, how can you honestly tell anyone, "Christ died for you"?”Show a response

Reformed evangelists usually do not lead with that sentence, because the apostles did not. In Acts they preach that Christ died and rose, and they call everyone to repent and believe, promising that whoever believes will be saved (Acts 2:38-39; 13:38-39). That promise is entirely sincere and universal: Christ's death is infinitely sufficient, and he says, "whoever comes to me I will never cast out" (John 6:37). We can truthfully say, "Christ is offered to you; if you come to him, all he accomplished is yours." Definite atonement actually strengthens that offer, because the Saviour you are inviting people to is one who really saves, not one who only makes salvation possible.

“Does it really matter whether the resurrection was bodily? Isn't the point that Jesus lives on spiritually?”Show a response

Paul says it matters supremely (1 Corinthians 15:14-17). Jews in Jesus' day used "resurrection" for bodily life after death, not survival as a spirit, and the empty tomb, the meals and the wounds all stress the body (Luke 24:39-43). A merely spiritual survival would not defeat death, which destroys the body. It would not vindicate Jesus' claims, nor show the sacrifice accepted (Romans 4:25), nor guarantee our bodily resurrection, since Christ is the firstfruits (1 Corinthians 15:20). God's plan is to redeem creation, not escape it. A spiritual-only Jesus leaves the grave undefeated.

“The idea of penal substitution was invented much later in church history. Christians before that just saw the cross as victory over evil.”Show a response

Church history is worth studying, but the decisive question is not who first wrote a systematic account of the atonement; it is what Scripture teaches. And penal substitution is in Scripture long before any theologian. Isaiah 53, written centuries before Christ, says the Servant was 'pierced for our transgressions', that 'the chastisement that brought us peace' was on him, and that 'the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all'. Paul says Christ became 'a curse for us' (Gal 3:13) and was made sin for us (2 Cor 5:21). Nor do we have to choose between substitution and victory. Colossians 2:13-15 shows that Christ disarmed the powers by cancelling the record of debt against us. Victory comes through substitution, because the accuser's power was our guilt. Christus Victor is precious; penal substitution is how the victory was won.

“Jesus suffered for a few hours and was dead for three days. How can that possibly pay for the sins of millions of people, let alone eternal punishment?”Show a response

That question takes sin seriously, which is good. The answer lies in who suffered. If Jesus were only a good man, his death could at most stand for one other person, if that. But the one who died is the eternal Son of God who became truly man. Because he is man, he could stand in our place; because he is God, his sacrifice has infinite worth. Scripture says no mere man can ransom another (Ps 49:7-8), yet Christ 'offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins' (Heb 10:12). The Heidelberg Catechism says he 'sustained in body and soul the wrath of God against the sins of all mankind' (Q37). The measure of the payment is not the length of the suffering but the worth of the person. An infinite debt needs an infinite Saviour, and that is exactly who God gave.

Written task

A member of your youth group says, "I get that Jesus died to show us how much God loves us, but I don't get why he had to die." In 300-400 words, explain in your own words why Christ had to die, using Isaiah 53, Romans 3:21-26, 2 Corinthians 5:21 and Galatians 3:13. Explain penal substitution clearly, show how it reveals God's love rather than contradicts it, briefly connect at least one other aspect of the atonement (victory or example) to it, and explain why the resurrection matters for the story.

Hand this in to Mr Scott. He will look for:

Explains why sin requires a just penalty and how Christ bore it as our substitute, using the four named texts accurately
Shows that penal substitution expresses the love of the triune God (for example Romans 5:8; 1 John 4:10; John 10:18) rather than pitting Father against Son
Connects at least one other aspect of the atonement (Christus Victor or example) to substitution without replacing it
Explains the significance of the bodily resurrection (Romans 4:25 or 1 Corinthians 15:17)
Uses clear, warm language suitable for a teenager and avoids jargon or defines it