Caleb Burge on the Problem of Forensic Models of Atonement

If the atonement consisted in the literal payment of a debt, it is acknowledged the case would be different. If sinners had, literally, owed divine justice an infinite debt, and Christ had stepped into their place and paid it by his sufferings and death, it is very evident, that faith in his blood would not be necessary to their justification. If the debt of sinners has been paid, it cannot be against demanded whether they have faith or not. If one person owe another, and a third person pay the debt, and procure a discharge, it surely cannot be necessary that the person discharged should have knowledge of the transaction, in order to his being free from his creditor. Of, if he be informed that his debt is paid, it can make no difference, with respect to the demands of his creditor, whether he believe the information or not. His not, believing, surely, cannot prevent its being discharged. Just so, if the atonement of Christ consisted literally in paying the debt of sinners, it can make no difference with respect to their discharge, whether they have any knowledge of, or belief in, what has been done, or, not. Whether they believe, or disbelieve, the debt must be discharged. (Caleb Burge, A.M., The Scriptural Doctrine of the Atonement: Its Nature, Necessity, and Extent [1822], 90-91)