Philip Arthur Bence PhD Thesis - Research@StAndrews:FullText

94
cross objectively transform the interrelationship of God and
man? Or did this event merely serve as the greatest visible
demonstration of God's eternal love for humanity? If a
theologian's answers to both questions was a qualified
"yes," on which half of the balance did the most weight lie?
As stated in the remarks introducing this chapter, the
statement on the right (as opposed to the left) side of each
continuum approximates a traditional 'conservative' opinion.
That certainly is true for this pair of statements on the
atonement.
Yet, surprisingly, this chapter's conservative
statement more nearly describes the position of Karl Barth
and James Stewart than it does Martyn Lloyd-Jones, typically
the most theologically conservative of the seven. Equally
surprising is the fact that, in relation to the atonement,
the theologian closest in agreement to Lloyd-Jones, in many
ways, is Rudolf Bultmann, a figure scorned by
fundamentalists such as Lloyd-Jones.
Now beginning with those closest to the right hand
statement, we consider the theologians' positions.
Barth and Stewart, in similar statements, proclaimed
that Christ's death on the cross defeated evil once and for
all. This cosmic victory objectively transforms the lives
of all persons. Humanity, formerly under the dominion of
sin, has been freed. Evil's power has been broken. Nothing
can now block man's eternal fellowship with his Creator.
In his presentation of these thoughts, Barth placed
primary emphasis on God's need to overcome sin.