Atonement in Christianity

In western Christian theology, atonement describes how human beings can be reconciled to God. Atonement refers to the forgiving or pardoning of sin in general and original sin in particular through the death and resurrection of Jesus, enabling the reconciliation between God and his creation. Within Christianity there are, historically, three or four main theories for how such atonement might work:

• Ransom theory/Christus Victor (which are different, but generally considered together as Patristic or "classical", to use Gustaf Aulen's nomenclature, theories, it being argued that these were the traditional understandings of the early Church Fathers);
• Moral influence theory, which Aulen considered to be developed by Peter Abelard (called by him the "idealistic" view);
• Satisfaction theory developed by Anselm of Canterbury (called by Aulen the "scholastic" view);
  • The penal substitution theory (which is a refinement of the Anselmian satisfaction theory developed by the Protestant Reformers, especially John Calvin, and is often treated together with the satisfaction view, giving rise to the "three main types" of atonement theories - classical or patristic, scholastic, and idealistic - spoken of by Aulen).

Other theories include recapitulation theory, the "shared atonement" theory and scapegoat theory.

The English word 'atonement' originally meant "at-one-ment", i.e. being "at one", in harmony, with someone. It is used to describe the saving work that God did through Christ to reconcile the world to himself, and also of the state of a person having been reconciled to God. Throughout the centuries, Christians have used different metaphors and given differing explanations of the atonement to express how the atonement might work. Churches and denominations may vary in which metaphor or explanation they consider most accurately fits into their theological perspective; however all Christians emphasize that Jesus is the Saviour of the world and through his death the sins of humanity have been forgiven. The four most well known theories are briefly described below:

One of the earliest explanations for how the atonement works is nowadays often called the moral influence theory. In this view the core of Christianity is positive moral change, and the purpose of everything Jesus did was to lead humans toward that moral change. He is understood to have accomplished this variously through his teachings, example, founding of the Church, and the inspiring power of his martyrdom and resurrection. Some scholars suggest this view was universally taught by the Church Fathers in the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD, along with what is called by Aulen the classical or patristic view, which can be variously interpreted as Ransom or Recapitulation, or under the general heading of "Christus Victor". The moral influence theory also enjoyed popularity during the Middle Ages and is most often associated in that period with Peter Abelard. Since the Reformation it has been advocated by modern philosophers like Immanuel Kant, and many theologians such as Hastings Rashdall and Paul Tillich. It remains the most popular view of atonement among theologically liberal Christians. It also forms the basis for René Girard’s "mimetic desire" theory (not to be confused with meme theory). It would be a mistake, however, to read this theory, or any of the theories, in isolation from the others.

The second explanation, first clearly enunciated by Irenaeus, is the "ransom" or "Christus Victor" theory. "Christus victor" and "ransom" are slightly different from each other: in the ransom metaphor Jesus liberates humanity from slavery to sin and Satan and thus death by giving his own life as a ransom sacrifice (Matthew 20:28). Victory over Satan consists of swapping the life of the perfect (Jesus), for the lives of the imperfect (humans). The "Christus Victor" theory sees Jesus not used as a ransom but rather defeating Satan in a spiritual battle and thus freeing enslaved humanity by defeating the captor. This theory 'continued for a thousand years to influence Christian theology, until it was finally shifted and discarded by Anselm'.

The third metaphor, used by the 11th century theologian Anselm, is called the "satisfaction" theory. In this picture humanity owes a debt not to Satan, but to the sovereign God himself. A sovereign may well be able to forgive an insult or an injury in his private capacity, but because he is a sovereign he cannot if the state has been dishonoured. Anselm argued that the insult given to God is so great that only a perfect sacrifice could satisfy, and that Jesus, being both God and man, was this perfect sacrifice. Therefore, the doctrine would be that Jesus gave himself as a “ransom for many”, to God the Father himself.

The next explanation, which was a development by the Reformers of Anselm's satisfaction theory, is the commonly held Protestant "penal substitution theory," which, instead of considering sin as an affront to God’s honour, sees sin as the breaking of God’s moral law. Placing a particular emphasis on Romans 6:23 (the wages of sin is death), penal substitution sees sinful man as being subject to God’s wrath with the essence of Jesus' saving work being his substitution in the sinner's place, bearing the curse in the place of man (Galatians 3:13). A variation that also falls within this metaphor is Hugo Grotius’ "governmental theory", which sees Jesus receiving a punishment as a public example of the lengths to which God will go to uphold the moral order.

Compatibility of differing theories

Some theologians say that 'various biblical understandings of the atonement need not conflict'. Reformed theologian J. I. Packer, for example, although he maintains that 'penal substitution is the mainstream, historic view of the church and the essential meaning of the Atonement... Yet with penal substitution at the center', he also maintains that 'Christus Victor and other Scriptural views of atonement can work together to present a fully orbed picture of Christ's work'. J. Kenneth Grider, speaking from a governmental theory perspective, says that the governmental theory can incorporate within itself 'numerous understandings promoted in the other major Atonement theories', including ransom theory, elements of the 'Abelardian "moral influence" theory', vicarious aspects of the atonement, etc.

The Anglican theologian Oliver Chase Quick has said, 'if we start from the fundamental and cardinal thought of God's act of love in Jesus Christ ... I think we can reach a reconciling point of view, from which each type of theory is seen to make its essential contribution to the truth, although no one theory, no any number of theories, can be sufficient to express its fullness.'

Others say that some models of the atonement naturally exclude each other. James F. McGrath, for example, talking about the atonement, says that 'Paul ... prefers to use the language of participation. One died for all, so that all died (2 Corinthians 5:14). This is not only different from substitution, it is the opposite of it.' Similarly, Mark M. Mattison, in his article The Meaning of the Atonement says, 'Substitution implies an "either/or"; participation implies a "both/and." ' J. Kenneth Grider, quoted above showing the compatibility of various atonement models with the governmental theory, nevertheless also says that both penal substitution and satisfaction atonement theories are incompatible with the governmental theory.

Confusion of terms

Some confusion can occur when discussing the atonement because the terms used sometimes have differing meanings depending on the contexts in which they are used. For example:

• Sometimes 'substitutionary atonement' is used to refer to 'penal substitution' alone, when the term also has a broader sense including other atonement models that are not penal.
• Penal substitution is also sometimes described as a type of satisfaction atonement, but the term 'satisfaction atonement' functions primarily as a technical term to refer particularly to Anselm's theory.
• Substitutionary and penal themes are found within the Patristic (and later) literature, but they are not used in a penal substitutionary sense until the Reformed period.
• 'Substitution', as well as potentially referring to specific theories of the atonement (e.g. penal substitution), is also sometimes used in a less technical way—for example, when used in 'the sense that [Jesus, through his death,] did for us that which we can never do for ourselves'.
• The phrase 'vicarious atonement' is sometimes used as a synonym for 'penal substitution', and is also sometimes used to describe other, non-penal substitutionary, theories of atonement.

Care needs to be taken to understand what is being referred to by the various terms used in different contexts.

Main theories in detail

Moral influence

Main article: Atonement (moral influence view)

• Pierre Abélard
• Hastings Rashdall

Ransom and Christus Victor

Main articles: Atonement (ransom view) and Atonement (Christus Victor view)

• Gregory of Nyssa
• Gustaf Aulén
• Irenaeus of Lyons ("Recapitulation")
• Origen of Alexandria

Satisfaction

Main article: Atonement (satisfaction view)

• Divine satisfaction: Anselm of Canterbury and salvation in Catholicism

Penal substitution

Main articles: Substitutionary atonement and Penal substitution

• Penalty or punishment satisfaction: John Calvin, Calvinism, and imputed righteousness
• Vicarious repentance, John McLeod Campbell and Robert Campbell Moberly

Governmental

Main article: Atonement (governmental view)

• Hugo Grotius and John Miley
• Jonathan Edwards the younger and Charles Grandison Finney

Scapegoating

Main article: Scapegoating

• James Alison
• Gerhard Förde
• René Girard
• Mark Heim
• William Tyndale

Other Christian perspectives

Recapitulation

Main article: Recapitulation theory of atonement

An early theory of the atonement is the recapitulation view, first comprehensively expressed by Irenaeus. In it, Christ succeeds where Adam failed, undoing the wrong that Adam did and, because of his union with humanity, leads humanity on to eternal life, including moral perfection.

Eastern Christianity

Eastern Orthodoxy and Eastern Catholicism have a substantively different soteriology. Salvation is not seen as the acceptance of a legal exchange, but as participation in the renewal of human nature itself by way of the eternal Word of God assuming the human nature in its fullness. In contrast to Western branches of theology, Orthodox Christians tend to use the word "expiation" with regard to what is accomplished in the sacrificial act. In Orthodox theology, expiation is an act of offering that seeks to change the one making the offering. The Biblical Greek word which is translated both as "propitiation" and as "expiation" is hilasmos, which means "to make acceptable and enable one to draw close to God". Thus the Orthodox emphasis would be that Christ died, not to appease an angry and vindictive Father or to avert the wrath of God upon sinners, but to defeat and secure the destruction of sin and death, so that those who are fallen and in spiritual bondage may become divinely transfigured, and therefore fully human, as their Creator intended; that is to say, human creatures become God in his energies or operations but not in his essence or identity, conforming to the image of Christ and reacquiring the divine likeness (see theosis).

Roman Catholic views on atonement and reparation

As expressed by Pope Pius XI in his encyclical Miserentissimus Redemptor, in the Roman Catholic tradition the concepts of atonement and redemption are often seen as being inherently related. And atonement is often balanced with specific Acts of Reparation which relate the sufferings and death of Christ to the forgiveness of sins.

Moreover, in Miserentissimus Redemptor the Pontiff called acts of reparation a duty for Roman Catholics:

"We are holden to the duty of reparation and expiation by a certain more valid title of justice and of love." ... "Moreover this duty of expiation is laid upon the whole race of men"

Pope John Paul II referred to the concept as:

"the unceasing effort to stand beside the endless crosses on which the Son of God continues to be crucified".

Specific Roman Catholic practices such as the Rosary of the Holy Wounds (which does not include the usual rosary mysteries) focus on specific redemptive aspects of Christ's suffering in Calvary.

Non-trinitarian Christian theologies

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

See also: Plan of salvation (Latter Day Saints)

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints expands the doctrine of the atonement complementary to the substitutionary atonement concept, including the following:

• Suffering in Gethsemane. The Atonement began in Gethsemane and ends with Christ's resurrection. (Christ's agony at Gethsemane Luke 22:44; Doctrine and Covenants 19:16-19; Mosiah 3:7; Alma 7:11-13. Christ described this agony in the Doctrine and Covenants as follows: "[The] suffering caused myself, even God [Christ], the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit..." (Doctrine and Covenants 19:18).
• The relationship of justice, mercy, agency, and God's unconditional love. Christ's infinite atonement was required to satisfy the demands of justice based on eternal law, rendering Him Mediator, Redeemer, and Advocate with the Father. One eternal law states that "no unclean thing can enter into the Kingdom of God." To sin is to break God's law, symbolically leaving a "stain." Thus, he proffers divine mercy to the truly penitent who voluntarily come unto him, offering them the gift of his grace to "lift them up" and "be perfected in Him" through his merits (2 Nephi 2 and 9; Alma 12, 34, and 42; Moroni 9:25; 10:33; compare Isaiah 55:1-9). We are made perfect, first, through justification, followed by sanctification.
• No need for infant baptism. Christ's atonement completely resolved the consequence from the fall of Adam of spiritual death for infants, young children and those of innocent mental capacity who die before an age of self-accountability, hence all these are resurrected to eternal life in the resurrection. However, baptism is required of those who are deemed by God to be accountable for their actions (Moroni 8:10-22)
• Empathetic purpose. Christ suffered pain and agony not only for the sins of all people, but also to experience their physical pains, illnesses, anguish from addictions, emotional turmoil and depression, "that His bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities" (Alma 7:12; compare Isaiah 53:4).

"The word [atonement] describes the setting 'at one' of those who have been estranged, and denotes the reconciliation of man to God. Sin is the cause of the estrangement, and therefore the purpose of the atonement is to correct or overcome the consequences of sin" ("Atonement" entry of the Bible Dictionary in the LDS edition of the King James Bible).

Jehovah's Witnesses

According to Jehovah's witnesses, atonement for sins comes only through the life, ministry, and death of Jesus Christ. They believe Jesus was the "second Adam", being the pre-existent and sinless Son of God who became the human Messiah of Israel, and that he came to undo Adamic sin.

The Witnesses believe that salvation is possible only through Jesus' ransom sacrifice, and that individuals cannot be reconciled to God and be saved until they repent of their sins, and call on the name of God through Jesus. Salvation is described as a free gift from God, but is said to be unattainable without obedience to Christ and good works that are prompted by faith. According to their teaching, the works prove faith is genuine. "Preaching the good news" is said to be one of the works necessary for salvation, both of themselves and those to whom they preach. They believe that people in the "last days" can be "saved" by identifying Jehovah's Witnesses as God's theocratic organization, and by serving God as a part of it.

Emanuel Swedenborg

According to the doctrine of The New Church, as explained by Emanuel Swedenborg, there is no such thing as substitutionary atonement as is generally understood. Swedenborg's account of atonement has much in common with the Christus Victor doctrine, which refers to a Christian understanding of the Atonement which views Christ's death as the means by which the powers of evil, which held humanity under their dominion, were defeated. It is a model of the atonement that is dated to the Church Fathers, and it, along with the related ransom theory, was the dominant theory of the atonement for a thousand years.

The United Pentecostal Church

Oneness Pentecostals teach that the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ are the only means by which atonement can be obtained for dying humanity, and which makes the free gift of God's salvation possible. They believe that all must put faith in the propitiatory work of Christ to gain everlasting life. According to United Pentecostal theology, this saving faith is more than just mental assent or intellectual acceptance, or even verbal profession, but must include trust, appropriation, application, action, and obedience. They contend that water baptism is one of the works of faith and obedience necessary for Christ's sacrificial atonement to be efficacious.

See also

• Acts of Reparation to Jesus Christ
• Atonement in Judaism
• Blood atonement
• Divine grace
• Divine mercy
• Forgiveness
• Justification

• Mercy seat
• Pardon
• Propitiation
• Sacrifice
• Scapegoat
• Substitutionary atonement

External links and Bibliography

• Chalke, Steve. Cross Purposes: Biggest Christian conference splits amid growing atonement debate. In Christianity Today, July, 2007.
• Chalke, Steve. The Lost Message of Jesus (London: Zondervan; 2003)
• Chalke, Steve. The Redemption of the Cross. In The Atonement Debate: Papers From the London Symposium on the Theology of Atonement (eds. Tidball, Hilborn, and Thacker), 2008, pp. 34–45.
• Denney, James. The Atonement and the Modern Mind. London: Hodder and Stoughton (1903).
• Paul Fiddes, Past event and present salvation: the Christian idea of atonement (London: Darton, Longman, & Todd, 1989)
• Finlan, Stephen. The Background and Content of Paul's Cultic Atonement Metaphors. (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature (SBL); 2004)
• Finlan, Stephen. Options on Atonement in Christian Thought. (Minnesota: Liturgical Press; 2007)
• Finlan, Stephen. Problems With Atonement. (Minnesota: Liturgical Press; 2005)
• Finlan, Stephen. "Spiritualization of Sacrifice in Paul and Hebrew" in Ritual and Metaphor, edited by Christian A. Eberhart (Atlanta: SBL; 2011)
• Kim, Jintae. The Concept of Atonement in 1 John: A Redevelopment of the Second Temple Concept of Atonement (2003)
• Kim, Jintae. The Concept of Atonement in Hellenistic Thought and 1 John (2001)
• Kim, Jintae. The Concept of Atonement in Early Rabbinic Thought and the New Testament Writings (2001)
• Kim, Jintae. Targum Isaiah 53 and the New Testament Concept of Atonement (2008)
• Kim, Jintae. The Concept of Atonement in the Gospel of John (2009)
• Rashdall, Hastings. The Idea of Atonement in Christian Theology. (London: Macmillan, 1919)
• Nonviolent Atonement and the Victory of Christ
• Philosophy and Christian Theology > Atonement from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
• "Atonement" in the Jewish Encyclopedia
• "The Doctrine of Atonement" from the Catholic Encyclopedia
• "Atonement" from the Christian Cyclopedia (Lutheran)
• Articles on the Atonement (Calvinist/Reformed)
• Historical Opinions as to the Nature of Christ's Atoning Death (Arminian/Wesleyan)
• The Atonement of Christ (Latter-day Saint)
• Online academic articles on atonement
• The Relationship of the Atonement
• Wallace, A.J., Rusk, R.D. Moral Transformation: The Original Christian Paradigm of Salvation (New Zealand: Bridgehead, 2011) ISBN 978-1-4563-8980-2

Further reading

• Janowski, Bernd. "Atonement." In The Encyclopedia of Christianity, edited by Erwin Fahlbusch and Geoffrey William Bromiley, 152-154. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1999. ISBN 0802824137
• Thomas, G. Michael. The Extent of the Atonement: a Dilemma for Reformed Theology, from Calvin to the Consensus, in series, Paternoster Biblical and Theological Monographs (Carlisle, Scotland: Paternoster Publishing, 1997) ISBN 0-85364-828-X