Atonement Theories

[Akita Suggagaki]

A couple views on atonement and what it might mean to us.

7 Theories of the Atonement Summarized - Stephen D. Morrison

7 Theories of the Atonement discussed and briefly explained. Article by Stephen D Morrison

www.sdmorrison.org

How West and East take it different directions.

https://swinzelerblog.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/pgs.-3-17understanding-franciscan-theology-fun-manual.pdf

 

[BobRyan]

I like God's view of it in Lev 16 "Day of Atonement"

There is a companion to that in 1 John 2:2
"He is the Atoning Sacrifice for our sins and NOT for OUR sins only but for the sins of the whole world"

In the Bible model it is God who pays our debt - providing the atoning sacrifice and it is God who then mediates as High Priest.

We accept His gift when we accept the Gospel , in the form of the Gospel covenant - the New Covenant. John 3:16

1 John 1 : 9 "if we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness"

1. In the bible model the sin problem is real, the debt is real, the solution is exact --- so moral influence idea is out.
2. In the Bible God gets tortured and satan gets condemned not "paid" - so ransom theory is out.
3. While it is true that Jesus rescues mankind as victor - but He also pays the penalty that His Law demands for sin, paying in our place the debt that we owe -- thus upholding the Law - Justice and also providing mercy. So this looks like a combination of some form of -- Satisfaction Theory, and Christ as Victor.

His is a substitutionary atoning sacrifice.

In Lev 16 the scapegoat is not "a sin offering" once the Lord's goat (Christ's symbol) is selected. All sin offerings are burnt offerings and the scapegoat in Lev 16 is not a burnt offering - it is not killed at all according to the text. The scapegoat represents Satan primarily and the wicked in general whose suffering and death isolation has no salvific benefit for themselves or others.


====================================

This is very different from the pagan "appeasement of pagan deity" model.
This is very different from the "grocery store" model where once my groceries are paid for -- I do as I wish with them.

 

[HIM]

Great thread and discussion. Our at one meant with God is what the gospel is all about

 

[HIM]

A couple views on atonement and what it might mean to us.

7 Theories of the Atonement Summarized - Stephen D. Morrison

7 Theories of the Atonement discussed and briefly explained. Article by Stephen D Morrison

www.sdmorrison.org

How West and East take it different directions.

https://swinzelerblog.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/pgs.-3-17understanding-franciscan-theology-fun-manual.pdf

So what does this resource say?

 

[Gregory Thompson]

There are 7 distinct theories, so it cannot be summed up in one sentence.

Though 4 of the theories all seem to be talking about the same thing.

 

[Clare73]

I like God's view of it in Lev 16 "Day of Atonement"

There is a companion to that in 1 John 2:2
"He is the Atoning Sacrifice for our sins and NOT for OUR sins only but for the sins of the whole world"

Keeping in mind the Day of Atonement was only for the people of God.

In the Bible model it is God who pays our debt - providing the atoning sacrifice and it is God who then mediates as High Priest.
We accept His gift when we accept the Gospel , in the form of the Gospel covenant - the New Covenant. John 3:16
1 John 1 : 9 "if we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness"

1. In the bible model the sin problem is real, the debt is real, the solution is exact --- so moral influence idea is out.
2. In the Bible God gets tortured and satan gets condemned not "paid" - so ransom theory is out.
3. While it is true that Jesus rescues mankind as victor - but He also pays the penalty that His Law demands for sin, paying in our place the debt that we owe -- thus upholding the Law - Justice and also providing mercy. So this looks like a combination of some form of -- Satisfaction Theory, and Christ as Victor.

His is a substitutionary atoning sacrifice.

In Lev 16 the scapegoat is not "a sin offering" once the Lord's goat (Christ's symbol) is selected. All sin offerings are burnt offerings and the scapegoat in Lev 16 is not a burnt offering - it is not killed at all according to the text. The scapegoat represents Satan primarily and the wicked in general whose suffering and death isolation has no salvific benefit for themselves or others.


====================================

This is very different from the pagan "appeasement of pagan deity" model.
This is very different from the "grocery store" model where once my groceries are paid for -- I do as I wish with them.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

So what does this resource say?

Did you try to read it?

 

[HIM]

Did you try to read it?

No sir I’ve studied this extensively. Never have been too concerned about what a commentator says. Mind you I think they have a purpose, but too many rely on other men’s studies. And it is dangerous there in many get led astray. I was just curious what you found so if you’re willing please share.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

In the Bible model it is God who pays our debt

Thanks BobRyan and HIM, but who is God paying the debt to? Himself? It doesn't make much sense, except that we are dealing with the mystery of the Trinity, where there is diversity in unity. And I think they can all have something helpful to say about atonement. Don't have to be mutually exclusive.

 

[BobRyan]

Thanks BobRyan and HIM, but who is God paying the debt to? Himself?

God pays by being tortured so he does not get paid nor does the devil get paid.

The "payment" is in the form "Law says the criminal gets death penalty for this crime" so then someone "pays that death penalty by being killed". Nobody 'gets paid' in that scenario. What happens is "justice".

1. The Law is upheld - because its penalty is upheld. Our death is paid by one who is our substitute
2. The criminal is removed -- death to self and the new birth
3. The removal of the criminal is done in such a way that is a dissincentive to any more crime in the future. The solution requires the death of our Lord and Savior. Something no one would wish to see repeated or to be the cause of.

I agree that some pieces of various ones in the list all get applied ...

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Nobody 'gets paid' in that scenario. What happens is "justice".

I like that. Good answer.

 

[Clare73]

Thanks BobRyan and HIM, but who is God paying the debt to? Himself? It doesn't make much sense, except that we are dealing with the mystery of the Trinity, where there is diversity in unity. And I think they can all have something helpful to say about atonement. Don't have to be mutually exclusive.

The debt is "paid" to God's justice, just as prison time is the debt "paid" to the law (justice).

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The debt is "paid" to God's justice, just as prison time is the debt "paid" to the law (justice).

So it is clearly a metaphor since Justice is not a person who can receive anything. It is an abstract concept.

 

[Clare73]

So it is clearly a metaphor since Justice is not a person who can receive anything. It is an abstract concept.

Justice is a principle (law), with a penalty attached for its violation, as the Mosaic law had penalty attached, and as the natural principle of gravity has natural penalty attached for its violation.
There is nothing abstract about prison time, death on a cross nor plunging to earth.

 

[Soyeong]

A couple views on atonement and what it might mean to us.

7 Theories of the Atonement Summarized - Stephen D. Morrison

7 Theories of the Atonement discussed and briefly explained. Article by Stephen D Morrison

www.sdmorrison.org

How West and East take it different directions.

https://swinzelerblog.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/pgs.-3-17understanding-franciscan-theology-fun-manual.pdf

Atonement is about bringing a remembrance before God.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Justice is a principle (law), with a penalty attached for its violation, as the Mosaic law had penalty attached, and as the natural principle of gravity has natural penalty attached for its violation.
There is nothing abstract about prison time, death on a cross nor plunging to earth.

Good point. But Justice is not a person who can receive any payment.

If I walk on a beam and fall we can say I paid the price for testing my balance against gravity. But Gravity receives nothing. It is a metaphor. There is no check writing nor cash handover.

I only make this point because through the centuries some have claimed a price was payed to Satan.

#2 The Ransom Theory​

The Ransom Theory of the Atonement is one of the first major theories for the Atonement. It is often held alongside the Moral Influence Theory, and usually deals more with the actual death of Jesus Christ, what it actually means and the effect it has upon humanity. This theory finds its roots in the Early Church, particularly in Origen from the 3rd century. This theory essentially teaches that Jesus Christ died as a ransom sacrifice, paid either to Satan (the most dominant view) or to God the Father. Jesus’ death then acts as a payment to satisfy the debt on the souls of the human race, the same debt we inherited from Adam’s original sin.

 

[Dan Perez]

Good point. But Justice is not a person who can receive any payment.

If I walk on a beam and fall we can say I paid the price for testing my balance against gravity. But Gravity receives nothing. It is a metaphor. There is no check writing nor cash handover.

I only make this point because through the centuries some have claimed a price was payed to Satan.

#2 The Ransom Theory​

The Ransom Theory of the Atonement is one of the first major theories for the Atonement. It is often held alongside the Moral Influence Theory, and usually deals more with the actual death of Jesus Christ, what it actually means and the effect it has upon humanity. This theory finds its roots in the Early Church, particularly in Origen from the 3rd century. This theory essentially teaches that Jesus Christ died as a ransom sacrifice, paid either to Satan (the most dominant view) or to God the Father. Jesus’ death then acts as a payment to satisfy the debt on the souls of the human race, the same debt we inherited from Adam’s original sin

I believe that ATONEMENT began with Adam !

If you disagree, HOW , then was Adam SAVED ?

Or do you believe that Adam was LOST ?

dan p

 

[bling]

A couple views on atonement and what it might mean to us.

7 Theories of the Atonement Summarized - Stephen D. Morrison

7 Theories of the Atonement discussed and briefly explained. Article by Stephen D Morrison

www.sdmorrison.org

How West and East take it different directions.

https://swinzelerblog.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/pgs.-3-17understanding-franciscan-theology-fun-manual.pdf

I love the author's conclusion:
"I personally believe that we need to move beyond some of these theories and progress into a more robust theory of atonement. But thankfully, at the end of the day, we aren’t saved by theories. We’re saved by Jesus!"
I have studied and could write a book on atonement since it is a huge subject and I have tried like the author suggested to progress into a more robust theory of atonement.

If “Christ has already paid the price for their sins” then there is nothing left for God to forgive.

Did God forgive your debt 100%, because if God did there is nothing left to pay?

There is a huge ransom payment being offered, but to who is it being offered to?

God is not an undeserving criminal kidnapper, so it cannot be Him.

God does not need to pay satan anything since God can easily and safely take anything satan might possess.

Death, sin and other intangibles cannot change with a payment.

When you go up to a nonbelieving sinner, what are you trying to get him/her to accept: A doctrine, a denomination, a book, a theology, a church or something else. NO, you want the nonbeliever to accept “Jesus Christ and Him Crucified” and if he does accept a child of God is released to enter the Kingdom and be with God, but if the sinner rejects “Jesus Christ and Him crucifies” a child is kept out of the Kingdom.

Does this not sound very much like a kidnapping scenario with a ransom being offered?

“Jesus Christ and Him crucified” is described in scripture as the ransom payment?

Could the sinner holding a child of God out of the Kingdom of God, be described as a criminal kidnapper?

“Jesus Christ and Him crucified” is a huge sacrificial payment, like you find with children being ransomed?

Parents will make huge sacrificial payments to have their children released.

The Bible refers to Jesus’ sacrifice as a literal ransom payment:

Mark 10:45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

1 Timothy 2:6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time

Heb. 9: 15…now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

We do have the blood specifically mentioned in Revelation 5:9 They sing a new song: “You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slaughtered and by your blood you ransomed for God saints from every tribe and language and people and nation;

 

[Clare73]

Good point. But Justice is not a person who can receive any payment.

Nothing burger. . .contrived inconsistency.

Who "receives" the payment of prison time for breaking our law?

It's not about a contrived "receiving," it's about justice being exercised.

 

[bling]

No sir I’ve studied this extensively. Never have been too concerned about what a commentator says. Mind you I think they have a purpose, but too many rely on other men’s studies. And it is dangerous there in many get led astray. I was just curious what you found so if you’re willing please share.

I to have studied this subject extensively and find all the theories I know about to have lots of issues. Like this author said with just the seven he looked at:
"I personally believe that we need to move beyond some of these theories and progress into a more robust theory of atonement. But thankfully, at the end of the day, we aren’t saved by theories. We’re saved by Jesus!"
I have studied and could write a book on atonement since it is a huge subject and I have tried like the author suggested to progress into a more robust theory of atonement.

Like I said, I could write a book on Atonement, so I cannot post my issues and conclusions to every verse on atonement, but I like to start with Lev. 5, because it talks about an individual's sin (a minor unintentional sin) and the atonement process which is more than just the sacrifice. To begin with think about this:

If “Christ has already paid the price for their sins” then there is nothing left for God to forgive.

Did God forgive your debt 100%, because if God did there is nothing left to pay?

There is a huge ransom payment being offered, but to who is it being offered to?

God is not an undeserving criminal kidnapper, so it cannot be Him.

God does not need to pay satan anything since God can easily and safely take anything satan might possess.

Death, sin and other intangibles cannot change with a payment.

When you go up to a nonbelieving sinner, what are you trying to get him/her to accept: A doctrine, a denomination, a book, a theology, a church or something else. NO, you want the nonbeliever to accept “Jesus Christ and Him Crucified” and if he does accept a child of God is released to enter the Kingdom and be with God, but if the sinner rejects “Jesus Christ and Him crucifies” a child is kept out of the Kingdom.

Does this not sound very much like a kidnapping scenario with a ransom being offered?

“Jesus Christ and Him crucified” is described in scripture as the ransom payment?

Could the sinner holding a child of God out of the Kingdom of God, be described as a criminal kidnapper?

“Jesus Christ and Him crucified” is a huge sacrificial payment, like you find with children being ransomed?

Parents will make huge sacrificial payments to have their children released.

The Bible refers to Jesus’ sacrifice as a literal ransom payment:

Mark 10:45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

1 Timothy 2:6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time

Heb. 9: 15…now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

We do have the blood specifically mentioned in Revelation 5:9 They sing a new song: “You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slaughtered and by your blood you ransomed for God saints from every tribe and language and people and nation;