Later Unitarians in Christianity 185• If, for the sake of argument, it is coneeded that Christ
did somehow offer infinite atonement, then this
makes it impossible to speak of the forgiveness of
God, or of man's gratitude to Him for granting His
forgiveness - since any person baptised in the name
of Christ would automatically acquire atonement for
his or her sins, even before God could grant forgive
ness and remit the penalty for them.• To accept the doctrine ofAtonementmeansthatGod's
Law is no longer binding on His servants sinee what
ever they do, the penalty for all their sins has already
been paid in full.• Therefore, a person who believes in Christ is at full
liberty to do whatever he or she likes - for since the
offering ofChristwas absolu te andinfini te, it there
fore included everytlùng and, therefore, universal sal
vation must necessarily follow.• In other words, the logic inherent in the doctrine of
Atonement demands that God has no right to add
any further conditions to what He requires of man.
The whole priee has been paid - past, present and
future - and, therefore, all debtors are now free, even
before they have fallen into debt.• For,supposea numberof menhadoweda greatdebt
to an earthly creditor and someone had paid it all off;
then what right would the creditor have to make fur
ther demands or conditions on these men who were
no longer indebted to him?The doctrine of atonement was also implicitly criticised by Socianus
simply by his affirming that Jesus was not God, but a man - for it is
self-evident that there is no way that one man eould possibly atone
for all the wrong actions of all the people who believed in him, no
matter how great both he and any suffering that he might have
endured happened to be. This fact in itself is enough to expose the
erroneous reasoning on whieh the established Church relies, and
50 dispel this mythical doctrine.