Atonement victor_penal

THE DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENTLECTURE 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 LYONSC. 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).

- Anakephalaío̱si̱s - “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 NYSSA335 - 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)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YalkMHqscOQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAlPPz1_4Bw

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 CANTERBURY1033-1109 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):



1.Condemning humans.


- 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:Anselm’s Argument (Cur Deus Homo):



1.Condemning humans.


- 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?)

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."


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.'"

"But father, please..." the son began to plead.


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."


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.”




๏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.


- 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.

Moral InfluenceAbelard

PETER ABELARD1079 - 1142 AD

MORAL INFLUENCE

Moral InfluencePeter 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!


- 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.


- 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


- 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.


- 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 InfluenceModern 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 InfluenceModern 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 InfluenceThe 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.”

Education

Atonement victor_penal