1. First of all, the Bible distinctly and repeatedly tells us by direct statement, and by countless typical reference in the Old Testament, that _He died as a vicarious offering for sin; that is, that He, an absolutely perfect, righteous one, who deserved to live, died in the place of unjust men who deserved to die_. For example, we read in Isa. 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."+ And in the eighth verse we read, +"By oppression and judgment He was taken away; and as for His generation, who among them considered that He was cut off out of the land of the living for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke was due?"+ And in the 11th and 12th verses we read, +"He shall see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied: by the knowledge of Himself shall my righteous servant justify many; and He shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide Him a portion with the great, and He shall divide the spoil with the strong; because He poured out His soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors: yet He bare the sin of many. And made intercession for the transgressors."+ In I Peter, 3:18 we read, +"Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring us to God; being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit."+ And in 1 Peter 2:24 we read, +"Who His own self bare our sins in His own body upon the tree, that we, having died unto sins, might live unto righteousness; by whose stripes ye were healed."+ Now the meaning of these verses and many other verses, is inescapable. They teach in language the meaning of which no one can misunderstand (unless he is determined not to see) that the death of Jesus Christ was a vicarious atonement, that is, a just one, who deserved to live, dying in the place of unjust ones who deserved to die. It was, to use the language of the Los Angeles minister who denied his belief in it, "an atonement of blood and recompense." This is God's doctrine of the Atonement versus the Unitarian and Christian Science doctrine of the Atonement. 2. But this is not all. We are further taught that _He died as a ransom, that is, His death was the price paid to redeem others from death_. He Himself says so. His own words are, +"The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many."+ If His life was not a ransom, that is to say, if He did not redeem others from death by dying in their place, then He was the greatest fool in the whole history of this universe. Was He a fool or was He a ransom? No one who in any real sense can be said to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ can hesitate as to his answer.