Atonement victor_penal

THE DOCTRINE OF THE
ATONEMENT
LECTURE TWO:
CHRISTUS VICTOR + PENAL SATISFACTION +
MORAL INFLUENCE

Today:
Quiz + Presentations on Boyd and Reichenbach
Lecture: The Atonement in Church History (pt. 1):
- Christus Victor
- Penal Satisfaction
- Moral Influence

The Plight: What Atonement Solves
What Problem(s) does Christ’s work deal with?
- Sin.
- Death.
- The Devil.
Luther’s Satanic Trinity

- Sin (What is sin at its root? - different answers)
‣Selfishness (homo incurvatus in se)
‣Idolatry
‣Rebellion

- Paul, and the relocation of the problem.
‣N.T. Wright: Prior to Paul, no Jewish writer ever
traced the plight all the way to Adam.
๏See Romans 5 especially.

Romans 5:
12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through
one man, and death through sin, and in this way
death came to all people, because all sinned—
…15 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the
many died by the trespass of the one man, how much
more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the
grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the
many!

- Paul, and the relocation of the problem.
‣N.T. Wright: Prior to Paul, no Jewish writer ever
traced the plight all the way to Adam.
‣Where the blame was placed previously:
๏Bad Jews, Bad Gentiles, Bad Angels (Demons)
‣Why the Change? The radical solution (cross)
proved the problem was more radical than anyone
expected.

- Each Atonement model will stress a slightly different
feature of the “plight.”
- We begin with Christus Victor.

Christus Victor
Working Definition:
- The Atonement reveals Christ’s Victory over Satan
and Evil.
Modern Popularizer:
- Gustaf Aulen (Christus Victor, 1931)
‣Calls it the “classic” or “dramatic” view.
‣Claims it was the view until Anselm (11th c.), at
which point “juridicial” categories took over.
We must ask if this
is true…

Christus Victor
Irenaeus: Christus Victor and Recapitulation.

IRENAEUS
OF LYONS
C. 130 - 202 AD
‘AGAINST THE
HERESIES’

Christus Victor
- In contrast to the Gnostics, Irenaeus sees the
problem not in created being (matter), but in
Adam’s choice to rebel against God.
- For Irenaeus, Christ is victorious as the Second
Adam (Recapitulating human history in himself).
- Anakephalaío̱ si̱s - “to sum up / re-enact”
- The Logic:

Recapitulation Explained:
While the notion is complex, its viability hinges upon the
continuity between Christ and Adam.
For Irenaeus, the human race is one in Adam, who was
fashioned in the image of the Christ (cf. Rom. 5.12,14).
Thus it was possible for the Son to take up the whole of
human existence by becoming precisely what was lost (The
Human Being) in order to redeem it. As Irenaeus states:
“he took up humanity into himself…thus summing up all
things in himself.” Therefore, just as all were implicated by
Adam’s sin, so may all be corrected and indeed perfected
through Christ’s victory.
Joshua McNall, “A Free Corrector,” PhD Thesis.

Christus Victor
- The Logic:
- Irenaeus in his own words:

Irenaeus: Against Heresies, 3.18.7.
God recapitulated in Himself the ancient formation of
man and woman, that He might kill sin, deprive death
of its power and vivify humanity.

Irenaeus: Against Heresies, 2.22.2
Not despising or evading any condition of
humanity…he came to save all through means of
himself—all, I say, who through him are born again to
God…He therefore passed through every age,
becoming an infant for infants, thus sanctifying infants;
a child for children, thus sanctifying those who are of
this age… Then, at last, he came even to death itself,
that he
might be “the first-born from the dead, that in all things
he might have the pre-eminence,” the prince of life,
existing before all, and going before all.

Christus Victor
- The Logic:
- Irenaeus in his own words:
- Q:What Biblical evidence is there for recapitulation?

Christus Victor
- Q:What Biblical evidence is there for recapitulation?
‣Eph. 1.10: It was God’s will “to unite [recapitulate]
all things in him, things in heaven and things on
earth.”
‣1 Cor. 15.22: “as in Adam all die, so in Christ all
will be made alive.” (also Romans 5.12-21).
‣Passages showing how Christ obediently re-lives
the Israel / Adam / Human story to our benefit.

Christus Victor
- Key: For Irenaeus, the Christus Victor exists under
the broader theme of recapitulation.
- The Victory is objective (Christ truly gains victory for
us through his work)…
- Yet it has subjective implications: Christ models
and teaches what means to be human.

Christus Victor
- Question: Does a strong view on recapitulation lead
naturally to Universalism?
‣Irenaeus seems to say “No.”
‣Origen and Barth do tend toward this.
Dangers of an imbalanced “recapitulation” doctrine:
(1) Defies an easy explanation.
(2) Difficult to say why not all would be saved.

Christus Victor
Gregory of Nyssa: Christus Victor and Ransom

GREGORY
OF NYSSA
335 - 395 AD
CAPPADOCIAN
CHURCH FATHER

Christus Victor
- Biblical Basis: Mk. 10.45: “The Son of Man did not
come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life
as a ransom for many.”
- Key: For Nyssan, ransom is paid to Satan, through
a kind of “fitting” trickery.

Gregory Nyssan: Great Catechism
The Enemy saw…an opportunity for an advance, in
the exchange…For this reason he chose [Jesus] as a
ransom for those who were shut up in the prison of
death.
The Deity was hidden under the veil of our nature,
that so, as with ravenous fish, the hook of the Deity
might be gulped down…and thus life introduced to the
house of death.

Christus Victor
- Key: For Nyssan, ransom is paid to Satan, through
a kind of “fitting” trickery.
- The deception is seen as fitting because Satan
employed trickery at the tree.
- Alongside Nyssan, Origen, Ambrose, Augustine
(and to a certain extent C.S. Lewis) would see
Christ as a Ransom paid to Satan.
- Reactions?

Christus Victor
Potential Problems with Ransom as trickery:
- In the Gospels, demons know precisely who Christ is
(and they try to keep him from the cross! - contra
Nyssan’s analogy).
- As we saw in Exodus 6.6 “ransom” sometimes simply
means “redeem” (no one must be paid).
- Anselm: A servant belongs to his original master (not
the one he chooses to follow).
- Deception may seem “un-Godlike”

Christus Victor
Modern Formulations (in addition to Aulen):
- C.S. Lewis:
๏https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YalkMHqs
cOQ (Clip from The Lion, the Witch, and the
Wardrobe).
- Greg Boyd:
๏https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAlPPz1_4
Bw (the Deeper Magic)

Christus Victor
A Broad Evaluation:
- Aulen was right to say that Christus Victor was the
most dominant view of the Atonement for the first
Millennium.
‣He’s wrong to imply that it’s the only view.
- He is also right that it faded somewhat after Anselm
(11th c.).
‣Though it re-appears, especially in Luther.

Christus Victor
A Broad Evaluation:
- Why did Christus Victor fade?
1.The shift from an age of persecution/conquest
(Rome),to an age of feudal honor (Anselm) and
modern law (post-Reformation).
2.The shift from an “enchanted” to a
“mechanized” (demythologized) world.
3.The recognition of other New Testament themes.

Christus Victor
A Broad Evaluation:
- The Danger in Christus Victor:
‣Giving Satan too much power.
- The Promise:
‣“We need not resort either to a deal with the devil
or to divine deception” to affirm this model
(Boersma)

Christus Victor
Questions / Comments on Christus Victor?

Penal Satisfaction:
Anselm of Canterbury

ANSELM OF
CANTERBUR
Y
1033-1109 AD
CUR DEUS HOMO

Penal Satisfaction:
Anselm’s Cultural Context:
- Medieval Feudalism (Feudal overlords / vassals).
- Giving proper “honor” to the overlords was crucial.
- Punishment depended not only on severity of crime,
but on the rank of the offended person.*
‣Jonathan Edwards on this point…

JONATHAN
EDWARDS
(1703-1758)
‘AMERICA’S GREATEST
THEOLOGIAN’

Jonathan Edwards
“It is requisite that God should punish all sin with infinite
punishment; because all sin, as it is against God is
infinitely heinous, and has infinite demerit…”
The Logic:
The greater the offended party, the greater the
offense/punishment.
Do you agree with this?
Is there any basis in Scripture for this assumption?

Penal Satisfaction:
Anselm’s Cultural Context:
- Medieval Feudalism (Feudal overlords / vassals).
- Giving proper “honor” to the overlords was crucial.
- Punishment depended not only on severity of crime,
but on the rank of the offended person.*
- In Catholic Church, penance is being developed as
a form of satisfaction.
๏In Jerome’s Vulgate, metanoia = “do penance”

Penal Satisfaction:
Anselm’s Argument (Cur Deus Homo):
- Sin is violation of God’s honor (it must be satisfied).
- God’s honor can only be satisfied by:
1.Condemning humans. [or…]
2.Accepting satisfaction made on their behalf.
In Catholic theology, on can accrue excess “merit” and
thus pass it on to others.

Penal Satisfaction:
Anselm’s Argument (Cur Deus Homo):
- Sin is violation of God’s honor (it must be satisfied).
- God’s honor can only be satisfied by:
1.Condemning humans.
2.Accepting satisfaction made on their behalf.
- Only a divine one can offer perfect satisfaction, only
a human can pay a human debt. (Thus the answer
to the question: Cur Deus Homo?)

Anselm: Cur Deus Homo
“Each sinner ought to repay the honor of which he
has robbed God: and this is the satisfaction which
every sinner ought to make to God” (1.11).
“If [sin] be not punished, it is unjustly forgiven…[And]
it is not fitting for God to forgive anything in his realm
illegally” (1.12).
“The satisfaction whereby humanity can be saved can
be effected only by One who is God and human”
(2.6).
KEY: Anselm says that God cannot forgive
unless the debt of honor is paid.

Penal Satisfaction:
Why Anselm’s Argument was so Successful:
- Fits with the logic of his culture (feudal honor).
- Fits with Catholic logic of penance / merit.
Major Question / Critique of Anselm:
- Is it true that God “cannot” forgive without
satisfaction being paid!?
๏And…if satisfaction is fully paid, it it really
“forgiveness”!?

Penal Satisfaction:
Major Questions / Critiques of Anselm:
๏Jesus declares (Mk. 2) that he has authority to
forgive sins apart from the sacrificial system.
Robin Collins attempts to show how this is
antithetical to God’s character by “re-telling”
the parable of the Prodigal Son.

Robin Collins:
Another version of the Prodigal Son (Understanding
Atonement)
Suppose a theologian told the following parable:
There was a man who had two sons. The younger
said to his father, "Father, give me my share of the
estate." So the father divided his property between
them. Not long after that, the younger son went off to
a distant country, squandered all he had in wild living,
and ended up feeding pigs in order to survive.
Eventually he returned to his father, saying, "Father, I
have sinned against heaven and you. I am no longer
worthy to be called your son. Make me one of your
hired servants."

Robin Collins:
Atonement)
But his father responded: "I cannot simply forgive you
for what you have done, not even so much as to
make you one of my hired men. You have insulted my
honor by your wild living. Simply to forgive you would
be to trivialize sin; it would be against the moral order
of the entire universe. For 'nothing is less tolerable in
the order of things than for a son to take away the
honor due to his father and not make recompense for
what he takes away. 'Such is the severity of my
justice that reconciliation will not be made unless the
penalty is utterly paid. My wrath--my avenging justice-
-must be placated.'"

Robin Collins:
Atonement)
"But father, please..." the son began to plead.
"No," the father said, "either you must be punished or
you must pay back, through hard labor for as long as
you shall live, the honor you stole from me."
Then the elder brother spoke up. "Father, I will pay
the debt that he owes and endure your just
punishment for him. Let me work extra in the field on
his behalf and thereby placate your wrath."

Robin Collins:
Atonement)
And it came to pass that the elder brother took on the
garb of a servant and labored hard year after year,
often long into the night, on behalf of his younger
brother. And finally, when the elder brother died of
exhaustion, the father's wrath was placated against
his younger son and they lived happily for the
remainder of their days.”

Penal Satisfaction:
๏Jesus declares (Mk. 2) that he has authority to
forgive sins apart from the sacrificial system.
- And…if satisfaction is fully paid, is it really
“forgiveness”!? (Boyd’s argument)
- Does Anselm’s model reflect a cruel / unjust culture?
(Leonardo Boff quote)

Leonardo Boff:
Passion of Christ, Passion of the World
A horrible cruelty prevailed in Saint Anselm’s time
regarding payment of debts. This sociological context
is reflected in Anselm’s theological text, unfortunately
contributing to the development of an image of a
cruel, sanguinary, vindictive God, an image still
present in many tortured, enslaved Christian minds.
Clarification:
Boff appears to confuse Anselm’s “Satisfaction” theology
with later “Penal Substitution” theology in which a
wrathful God punishes Christ in our place.

Penal Satisfaction:
- Is it true that God “cannot” forgive
without satisfaction being paid!?
๏Jesus declares (Mk. 2) that he has
authority to forgive sins apart from the
sacrificial system.
- And…if satisfaction is fully paid, is it really
“forgiveness”!? (Boyd’s argument)
- Does Anselm’s model reflect a cruel / unjust
culture? (Leonardo Boff quote)
Your thoughts?
We’ll return to
this discussion
when we look at
Penal
Substitution.

PETER
ABELARD
1079 - 1142 AD
MORAL INFLUENCE

Moral Influence
Peter Abelard
- Like Anselm, he rejects the notion of a “ransom”
paid to the devil.
๏“How unjust would it be that he who seduced the
other should deserve, as a result, to have any
special right or authority over him” (Abelard).
- He also rejects the notion that Christ’s death must
satisfy the Father’s wrath in order to redeem us.

Abelard: Commentary on Romans
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!

Moral Influence
Peter Abelard
- Like Anselm, he rejects the notion of a “ransom”
paid to the devil.
๏“How unjust would it be that he who seduced the
other should deserve, as a result, to have any
special right or authority over him” (Abelard).
- He also rejects the notion that Christ’s death must
satisfy the Father’s wrath in order to redeem us.
- KEY: Christ’s death demonstrates God’s love for us,
and thus enkindles our love response to Him.

Abelard: Commentary on Romans
We have been justified through the blood of Christ and
reconciled to God in this way: through his unique act of
grace manifested to us…he has more fully bound us to
himself by love; with the result that our hearts should
be enkindled by such a gift of divine grace, and true
charity should not now shrink from enduring anything
for him.
Our redemption through Christ’s suffering is that
deeper affection in us which not only frees us from
slavery to sin, but also wins for us the true liberty of
sons of God, so that we do all things out of love rather
than fear.

Moral Influence
Peter Abelard
- Christ’s death demonstrates God’s love for us, and
thus enkindles our love response to Him.
๏One Key Text: 1 Peter 2.21

1 Peter 2.21,23
Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example,
so that you might follow in his steps.
…When he was reviled, he did not revile in return;
when he suffered, he did not threaten

Moral Influence
Peter Abelard
- Christ’s death demonstrates God’s love for us, and
thus enkindles our love response to Him.
๏Sometimes called a “Subjective” model of
Atonement.
๏I.E.: It inspires a change in us (rather than
objectively doing something to God or Satan)
- Q: Did Abelard also believe in an objective model?
๏Scholars disagree.

Moral Influence
Peter Abelard
- Only Moral Influence (Subjective Atonement)?
๏Bernard of Clairvaux denounced Abelard for this.
๏Hastings Rashdall (liberal theologian) praised
Abelard for this.
๏Abelard himself affirmed that Christ died “for” our
sins and “bore” their “punishment” - yet his
emphasis was on what this act does in us
(enkindles love for God).

Moral Influence
Modern Appropriations of this Model:
- The preferred view of the Atonement at the height of
Protestant Liberalism (19-20th c.)
๏Adolf von Harnack (1851-1930).
The purpose of Christ death was to convince sinners
“that forgiving Love is mightier than the Justice before
which they tremble.”

Moral Influence
Modern Appropriations of this Model:
- The preferred view of the Atonement at the height of
Protestant Liberalism (19-20th c.)
๏Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834)
๏Albrecht Ritschl (1822-1889).
Christ’s life and death communicate rather than
enable the Father’s familial love.

Moral Influence
The Virtue of Moral Influence Models:
- Christ’s life is part of the Atonement also.
- Christ’s life/death shows us how to live.
- Redemption comes about through non-violent (non-
coercive) love (see Boersma).
The Danger of Moral Influence Models:
- By themselves they are insufficient.
Anselm: “You have not yet considered what a great weight sin is.”

Atonement victor_penal

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Atonement victor_penal

Similar to Atonement victor_penal (20)

More from drrevdev

More from drrevdev (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Atonement victor_penal