With the early church fathers, what can be tough is, they werent just stating, I hold to the ransom theory of the atonement. No, these things are in development. For such an important question, the Bible doesnt really give a clear answer. 0000032994 00000 n
Im your host, Phylicia Masonheimer, an author, speaker and Bible teacher. In this theory, it is Gods honor that is offended by our sin. It starts with understanding humanity as a whole and their propensity for conflict intention. 0000001817 00000 n
Imagine siting safely on a pier, in a deck chair, when all of a sudden, out of nowhere, a man flings himself into the ocean and drowns. Abelard developed quite a different view of the atonement, and its to his own theory we now turn. The third theory is satisfaction theory. Greggs majors on the universal scope of salvation and the omnipotence of divine love exercised in Christs cross. Why were we separated from God in the first place? The interactions between authors were earnest yet polite. 0000002500 00000 n
The earth and heaven are locked in a cosmic struggle between good (God) and evil (Satan). Summary. It was taken in by the enemy. So many of these theological issues require taking the historical context into consideration as we interpret them, as we read the scholars, as we discern through what they were teaching. In a sense, Jesus was scapegoated, but His resurrection proved His innocence and gave an example of love for society. To be fair, most, if not all, of these theories tend to crumble when pressed too hard. TAMMY - For the next several decades the Wesleyan voices on the atonement were strong and consistent remaining the same. I believe this is from a quote from Ligonier Ministries that said, The judgment is averted versus the judgment being absorbed. When Jesus took our penalty, He absorbed all the judgment that we deserved with satisfaction theory, that judgment is redirected or its. The atonement of God in Jesus Christ reveals the relational character of God and the depth of his love for the world. Someone being bought back. This was the main view of the atonement, the view of the churchs leading thinkers. (In the Wesleyan view, God's sustaining of the human race after Adam's sin was the first act of prevenient grace.) It is an attempt to help us understand how we now can be at peace with God despite sin. So, his example of love is one that we should be emulating. This, he submits, makes better sense of the pattern of Scripture and the universal scope of salvation. Pelagius and his followers in the 400s CE essentially argued that Christians could be saved by their good works without divine help (his main and most vocal opponent was St. Augustine). Its particularly distasteful to those who hold strictly to the penal substitutionary atonement view, because it skates around an individual atonement, and because PST is very popular right now, government theory is definitely in disfavor. 1 Jacob Arminius' position was very similar to that of John Wesley and was less extreme than the Arminians that followed him. If they get rid of Him, then the tensions will resolve. There is biblical basis for seeing the crosses of victory over Satan. Jesus wasnt dying to specifically pay a penalty for Phylicia. Really, what it does is, it removes the need for themes of atonement in general. The adult made a choice out of love. While there are some really neat elements of scapegoat theory that I think are worth considering, as a general rule, this is a theory that is perpetuated within progressive theology, and in doing so, also will undermine other key doctrines regarding the deity of Christ or the Trinity or theology of sin, things like that. The idea that Jesuss death was a ransom to the devil might seem crazy to us, but its not so crazy if you look at the culture that produced it. Okay, you guys, that was a lot. He was very well acquainted with the feudal system, in which you had slaves who worked on an estate for an overlord, and so that overlord usually at night protected the estate, but the knight also had to honor the king. Why would God have to pay Satan anything? This one should come first, because when we discussed that one, then well be able to talk about all of the other ones because they all connect to each other. In penal substitution, in this theory, the son is freely going to sacrifice. In 2007, 221 out of 1,691 churches were non-Whitea 66 percent increase. directed away from us, because Gods wrath is satisfied. Example Theory: This view sees the atonement of Christ as simply providing an example of faith and obedience to inspire man to be obedient to God. Anselm describes it this way in this dialogue from Cur Deus Homo he has with another monk named Boso: Anselm: So no one except God can make the satisfaction.Boso: That follows.Anselm: But no one except humanity ought to do it otherwise, humanity has not made satisfaction.Boso: Nothing could be more just.Anselm: So if no one except God can make it and no one except man ought to make it, there must be a God-Man to make it.Boso: Blessed be God. And just as every theologian has a Bible passage in support of their ideas, so to do the exemplarists (another name for this theory is moral example), notably 1 Peter 2:22, For this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you should follow in his steps, as well as various passages in John (see John 13:1316 and John 15:917). JOEY - The voices however, became those more of leadership and theologians, and less of the average pastor - but those voices continued to echo the . It seems like Gregory of Nyssa was holding to this idea of a ransom theory. I wanted to read a couple quotes. You would probably think the man was a lunatic. The Wesleyan Chapel was built in 1843. As one historian notes, it was not uncommon in late antiquity that marauding gangs would roam about capturing travelers and demanding payment for their release. There was also a very real sense of duality between good and evil that may seem very foreign to mainline and liberal Protestants today, if not contemporary Evangelicals. This analogy is still perpetuated to today, where God is basically saying to Satan, Oh, look, you can kill Jesus, you can actually get rid of Him by crucifying Him. I found two articles per atonement theory, so that you can check those out if you want to read more. He was demonstrating that sin has a cost. Ask questions, seek answers, and devote yourself to becoming a disciple of Jesus Christ. With ransom theory, the idea is that the thing thats being bought is humanity because of sin, and the thing that has them captured is Satan. You could argue that with every single one of these theories though. This is describing what happened in Genesis 3. Many of our newest Wesleyans are recent immigrants. In satisfaction theory, the judgment that we were supposed to receive is directed away from us because the wrath of God is satisfied. The problem comes when God is depicted as in this bargaining relationship with The Enemy or deceiving The Enemy. So, lets start with ransom theory. Nothing in the Christian system, wrote John Wesley, is of greater consequence than the doctrine of the atonement. How we answer this questions fundamentally shapes how we see the world and how we live our lives. Popular theology, in the wake of the two most destructive and deadly conflicts in all of human history, once again began emphasizing a just God over a God of love. Well, let me tell you guys, it is no small task to do the research for an episode on atonement theories. So, because they believe anyone can come to the Lord after the Lord has called them, they could not hold to this idea of everyones penalty being paid, because if the penalty is paid, as J. Kenneth Grider was saying, then logical conclusion is universalism. Instead, hes saying, Christ suffered for everyone so the father could forgive the ones who repent and believe. In a large way, Auln reinterpreted our first theory of atonement, the ransom theory. 0000040467 00000 n
Counterpoints: Bible & Theology, series edited by Stanley N. Gundry. Government theory has been the most confusing for me to study, so Im trying to reiterate a few of the principles here so that I can try and express exactly what is being said. Theyre theories about how Jesus actually accomplished salvation for fallen humanity. But as we know, humans could not pay the price, and therefore, Jesus had to pay the price in a human body. What His death was doing is showing that sin deserves to be punished by the just governor of the universe, the King of the universe. It says, It was in the best interest of humankind for Christ to die. This view of the atonement denies that Christ was a penal substitute and that he died in the sinners place to atone for sins and satisfy divine justice on behalf of the elect. It was necessary, therefore, to have an atonement that would provide grounds for forgiveness, and simultaneously retain the structure of moral government.. This is called atonement. McGONIGLE: Arminius and Wesley 97 way-house between the two systems, but on questions of free will and human sinfulness, leaning much more to Calvin than to Pelagius. Note there are many more theories and much ink has been spent debating and rebutting this fairly simple yet incredibly complex question. However, it was the earliest atonement theory that existed. While the example theory is operative in Scripture, it is not the substance of what was accomplished in the atonement, but itself derives from the rest . The final contribution by Tom Greggs covers the (Barthesque) Christian universalist perspective which exposits the idea that the atonement is both universally offered to all human beings and universally effective for all human beings. Aldersgate Papers, Vol.5 September 2004 . 0000007736 00000 n
The heart of this theory is that violence is not salvific, this is according to Mark Heim again. Because that justice was done corporately and on a cosmic scale, then individuals could have access to God through Jesus. We burn them at the stake, and when that person is roasted, when that person is removed from the community, we then say, Look, we can have peace. This actually, in studying this theory, I thought, Oh, my goodness, how many times did we see this happen in 2020 online. You direct all of this anger, all this tension towards the group thats considered the bad guy, the scapegoat, and when that person is rejected by the whole community, they have peace. https://www.theopedia.com/satisfaction-theory-of-the-atonement, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Anselm-of-Canterbury/The-satisfaction-theory-of-redemption, https://www.theopedia.com/governmental-theory-of-atonement, https://wesleyanarminian.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/atonement-series-governmental-view/, https://digitalcommons.denison.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1064&context=religion, https://reknew.org/2017/05/christus-victor-atonement-girards-scapegoat-theory/. Some people have attributed ransom theory to Irenaeus, but they also attribute Christus Victor to him. A modern conservative theologian describes it this way: The Father, because of his love for human beings, sent his Son (who offered himself willingly and and gladly) to satisfy Gods justice, so that Christ took the place of sinners. One writer called that dualism dangerous because among other things, [it] threatens the very sovereignty of God. Basically, in some respects, it makes Satan equal to God. You can grab your copy on Amazon, or for more information, head to my website. Most of the people who hold to scapegoat theory are theologically progressive to the point that what theyre teaching does not align with church history or with Scripture. My own sentiment is that the extent of the atonement is really an in-house Protestant debate, Louth and Levering both point out that this topic is not one normally germane to their own respective traditions, it is just not on their radar. Thus, Christ comes to earth as fully human and fully God, receives our punishment, and Gods demand for justice is fulfilled. Some have hypothesized its where the name for Bozo the Clown has originated. Must first free man from Satans dominion. Charles's view of the atonement was based in theology. He wrote extensively about God reclaiming humanity as His taking them from the enemys jurisdiction. It was that God, the ultimate judge of the universe, cannot let human sin go unpunished. As we mimic what others do and what they desire, we envy and quarrel. Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world. This is Verity, where every woman is a theologian. And further, if we are freed from evil and sin, why then do we keep sinning? The scapegoat whos found, in the case of the gospels, is someone whos hated equally by the Roman authorities and by the Jewish leaders. God had to make the satisfaction for Himself. This theory, I would say, is one that often gets picked apart, today. Every woman should be a student of the heart of God. He is the root. The apostle John writes in John 20:30-31 What is the doctrine of penal substitution? says that, Christ suffered for us. One theologian describes it this way: In [Anselms] theory, punishment is averted. Im so excited to put this book in your hands. The most important concept in Christianity is accepting Jesus as ones savior. Thanks for joining me, you guys. This idea of Christ as a conqueror, as the overcoming King would connect well to the imagery that we see, such as in 2 Corinthians 2, where the apostles writing about the victory that we experience in daily life in the Lord using the imagery of a Roman emperor leading conquered leaders of hostile forces. Every woman should be a student of the heart of God. Were learning what things we should want from the people were around. But man, being so much less than God, can never restore that honor on his own. Its my brand-new book, Stop Calling Me Beautiful: Finding Soul-Deep Strength in a Skin-Deep World. 0000004034 00000 n
He held to total depravity and the need for grace. In satisfaction theory, the judgment that we were supposed to receive is directed away from us because the wrath of God is satisfied. Keswick's understanding of sin involves six propositions: (1) Sin is an offense to God's and rebellion against his purity and goodness. Ask all of the worlds two billion or so professing Christians and theyll most likely agree with that. Their way of explaining it though often had to do with a fear of universalism, because the people who held to this theory were not Calvinistic. 0000004295 00000 n
The main objection by critics, however, is to the nature of God that is assumed by both of these theories. The view of the atonement was relatively unchanged. Basically, what this one is, its just that the cross changes our ethical behavior, because Christ is an example of love to us. Its sifting through their writings and coming away with the themes and the ideas that theyre presenting were able to say, Okay. They kill Him. Atonement is what God is doing through Christ, in which, this is according to him, the powers of sin, death, and the devil are overcome, and the world is reconciled to God. Ultimately, that is what the goal was. Writes one historian of theology: So conscious were the early Christians of the pervasiveness of Satanically inspired evil (see the book of Revelation) that they developed strong dualistic tendencies: God on one side, the devil on the other, and no neutral ground in between.. Our last theory today is scapegoat theory. Im going to talk about pursuing the truth of who God is and who we are in relationship to Him, how to study Scripture, how legalism, shallow theology, and false teaching keep us from living boldly as a woman of the word. This whole theory revolves around the idea that sacrifice is a negative thing. This podcast will help you embrace the history and depth of the Christian faith. So, the focus of penal substitution really is on that punishment. There are six or seven atonement theories. The faith repentance, etc., in Christ is possible because Christ fulfilled this governmental need for showing that the law mattered, and that sin grieves God. I think all of us have been at a womens conference where we were told you are a beautiful daughter of the Most High King, and its true, but its not the whole truth. If this idea of Christ being a substitute sounds somewhat familiar to you, thats because youre about to see how it evolves. This idea can usually be held alongside some other atonement ideas. When you hear the words, sin, death, and the devil together, that's usually an indicator of the Christus Victor theory. Its the combination of at one, as in, to be in harmony with. The rest of society simply has to be convinced that Jesus is the problem. But, as in Anselms theory, man has fallen so short of God that he cannot possibly come close to repaying God for his sins, only God can. From my notes and my research, what some of the scholars I was reading said is that Anselm believed that humans could not render God more than what was due Him. Rom 8:32, Gal 1:4) and 'Christ died for our sins' (cf. The system of order was based on personal (or at least semi-personal) relationships, rather than a strict code of laws. Were not saying the Anselm completely borrowed the idea directly from the system in front of him, but we do have to keep in mind that since this working out of the atonement is a secondary issue for the most part. Mark 10:45 and Colossians 2 talk about this. His death is such that all will see forgiveness is costly and will strive to cease from anarchy in a world God governs. is a book about going deeper with God. If you did something wrong, you offended the honor of the person above you. Conflict, in his view, comes from mimicking others desires and behavior. One modern theologian describes Anselms God as a status-paranoid power-monger who deliberately humiliates and infantilizes human beings under the guise of justice. Further, a thinker and theologian who lived around the time of Anselm, the French philosopher and ethicist Peter Abelard, wrote this: Indeed how cruel and wicked it seems that anyone should demand the blood of an innocent person as the price for anything, or that it should in any way please him that an innocent man should be slain still less that God should consider the death of his Son so agreeable that by it he should be reconciled to the whole world? In 1930, Swedish theologian Gustaf Auln published Christus Victor (it would be published in English a year later). The volume closes with something of an epilogue by Adam Johnson outlining questions raised by the various views and the critiques lodged against them as well as offering some helpful suggestions as to what the various traditions could potentially learn from each other. In the end, I just left the first theory were going to talk about as the original one, and that is ransom theory. Its different from penal substitutionary atonement or vicarious atonement, well talk about that in a second, because it has to do with Gods honor versus having to do with Gods law. I believe she did keep the recording but if not, if you ask her about it, she might have some resources for you as well, and her handle on Instagram is. Thats a term Calvin himself of course did not use, but was applied later in the 19th century. Its demonstrating Gods justice, its communicating Gods hatred for sin, its motivating holiness and it satisfies the demands of justice. I believe she did keep the recording but if not, if you ask her about it, she might have some resources for you as well, and her handle on Instagram is @amycategannett, C-A-T-E, Gannet, G-A-N-N-E-T. J. Kenneth Grider believes that if Jesus paid the penalty for the whole world, because thats what Scripture says, that Christ died for the sins of the world. COVENANT ATONEMENT AS A WESLEYAN INTEGRATING MOTIF . If he died for the sins of the world to pay their penalty, then it would result in universalism. The Jewish authorities charged Him with blasphemy, the worst religious crime, and Ill have a source for that. One thing again to notice is the cultural context of Anselm. I believe the Wesleyan way of Christian formation acknowledges that human beings are created in the image of God. Wesleyan Arminianism is classical Arminianism with the addition of Wesleyan perfectionism. Since this theory is so closely linked and integral to covenant theology, youre going to see the continuity between Old and New Testaments. When you hear the words, sin, death, and the devil together, thats usually an indicator of the Christus Victor theory. But he also became human, lived, healed, taught, modeled, and was raised from the dead. This is called the Penal Substitutionary theory of atonement. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, atonement is, "the process by . We also see that Jesus describes His death as an illustration of love, which could even fall under the moral influence theory, though that one would not be considered orthodox. Man is totally depraved. In his Galatians commentary of 1535, he evidences his departure Anselms satisfaction theory. Another element is that its not that God was having something offered to Him, but that God was making the offering. But God basically tricked him with Christ. So, everybody turns on Jesus. These were humans interpreting Scripture, and they also had a cultural context that impacted how they were looking at Scripture. Forde, in Levering points out that Catholic tradition is admittedly paradoxically committed to Gods efficacious predestination of certain rational creatures for salvation and God superabundantly loves without constriction every rational creature. All of us are standing in the middle of a cosmic war zone. In 1099, St. Anselm of Canterbury wrote Cur Deus Homo, or why God became man. It took the ransom theory to task. Im going to talk about pursuing the truth of who God is and who we are in relationship to Him, how to study Scripture, how legalism, shallow theology, and false teaching keep us from living boldly as a woman of the word. Were going to look at some of those major theories in this episode. I think the same goes for penal substitutionary atonement or vicarious atonement, which is the most popular view today. Everywomanshould be a theologian. Irenaeus is another one who talked about this theory. You later learn he did this because he loved you. The contributors include Andrew Louth (Eastern Orthodox View), Matthew Levering (Roman Catholic View), Michael Horton (Traditional Reformed View), Fred Sanders (Wesleyan View), and Tom Greggs (Christian Universalist View). If penal substitution were the only answer to our question, I probably would have abandoned Christ a long time ago, as I assume many have.