Christus Victor - On what grounds are you saved?

zoidar said:

I have been thinking of the theory of Christus Victor. Jesus has won victory of satan, but on what ground is one saved? If penal substitution isn't true then doesn't that mean we need to live a sinless life or att least have all our sins repented of and forgiven to be saved? What about sins you never ask forgiveness for, sins you may not even know you have?

I hope you understand my thoughts or I will try to explain better.

Click to expand...

There's not much difference between the two options you described.

What you have described, zoidar, is essentially a summary of Catholic teaching on the subject, isn't it?

If penal substitution isn't true then doesn't that mean we need to live a sinless life or att least have all our sins repented of and forgiven to be saved?

Click to expand...

zoidar said:

I have been thinking of the theory of Christus Victor. Jesus has won victory of satan, but on what ground is one saved? If penal substitution isn't true then doesn't that mean we need to live a sinless life or att least have all our sins repented of and forgiven to be saved? What about sins you never ask forgiveness for, sins you may not even know you have?

I hope you understand my thoughts or I will try to explain better.

Click to expand...

No amount of sinless living will get "sins forgiven" if Christ's death is not paying the debt you owe.

(sorry for the long post, I just have a disease of rambling ;D)

Hello again, zoidar. I'll try my best to answer your questions and I totally understand what you're saying. Everyone in my local church believes in Penal substitution or some form of it so I'm quite alone in my beliefs! It took me a bit of time to get my head around the subject. I would recommend prayer and research into early church fathers if have not done so already to have a better understanding. If you've raised Christus Victor then I'm guessing you've already done so but nevertheless you should check them out. I dare say most people hear including myself not so long ago didn't even know such early sources existed so I think they're vastly important to read.

I'm assuming you have an understanding of the theory so I'll try not to bore you ;D. I think the core values of Christus Victor is true. I'm certain that Jesus died to free us from the slavery of sin. I'm not so sure about Christ being bait for Satan per say but that would appear to be the most earliest explanation about how the atonement was achieved. We need to realise the method of atonement doesn't matter but what it achieves does. That might be a stumbling block when researching the topic but I believe it's consistent with Scripture and with the early church.

Someone is saved when they're obedient to God. That doesn't mean that every single law is kept but that habitual sinning no longer occurs.

1 John 1:8 says that those who claim to be without sin lack the truth.
1 John 1:9 says that if we repent then I'll sin will be forgiven.
1 John 2:1 says that he writes such things so that you may not sin.

Though we all occasional sin since we are of the flesh, if we repent then they shall be forgiven. However if we constantly practice sins like the ones said in Ephesians 5:5 then we will not get into Heaven.

However such obedience like this was impossible without his spirit.

In the Old Testament only those that were anointed by God had his spirit such as the Kings and priests and prophets. This is due to their faith in God. No works could ever give you the spirit of God. Only trusting and believing the Lord. Not every member of Israel had such a spirit though because they lacked faith in the Lord. Now since the day of the Lord described in Joel 2 which is Pentecost, every Christian has such a spirit because they have faith in Christ. The Holy Spirit can not be gained without faith in Christ's death and resurrection and we can not be reconciled to God without that either.

Romans 8:3-4 says that what the law couldn't do, God can do by sending his Son for us. Now the righteous requirement could be met by those living in the spirit rather than the flesh.

Romans 6:14 says that Sin is no longer our masters for we have grace.

Titus 2:11-14 says that Grace teaches us to say no to worldly passions and to live Godly lives.

Romans 8:13 says that living according to the flesh leads to death but with God's spirit you put your misdeeds to death you will live.

Galatians 6:7-9 We reap what we sow. If we sow the flesh, we reap destruction. If we sow what pleases the Spirit, we gain eternal life.


And here are some Old Testament passages to think over too.

Jeremiah 7:22-23 suggests Gods cares about obedience not sacrifices.

Hosea 6:6 suggests God prefers mercy over sacrifices and burnt offerings. Sacrifices aren't necessary but obedience is.

Isaiah 55:7 says that those who turn to the Lord will be forgiven.

Ezekiel 18:21-23 says that if a Man turns from his sin and does what is just and merciful. All his past sins will be forgiven.

Psalm 51:16-17 shows that God doesn't delight in sacrifice and is merciful to those that break the law.


What God ultimately wants is obedience to him and he has been capable of that from the beginning because mercy is an intrinsic part of God. Exodus 34:6 God himself begins by saying he's merciful and gracious. He does not describe Justice until the verse later.

God wants us to be obedient to his commands.

My Biggest problem with the Penal Substitution theory is that it remove all mercy from God. Sin has to be punished. There is only punishment. No mercy without an innocent person bearing all the sins of humanity. Before Christ's sacrifice, even the smallest sin would send you to hell. What a terrifying God. Rather than dying to free us from sin, Christ died to solely faces the Father's Punishment.

To answer the part of sins that you do not ask forgiveness for I would say it comes down to if you're aware of them. If you are not aware of them it would be questionable for God to punish us for something we're not aware of. However I think such cases will be quite rare. The other case is that we just don't repent for such sins. Since our God is a God of exceptions he will of course be fine with sins now and again not being repented for. What he won't be okay with is a constant sin that isn't repented for.

I do understand the question. But you're evaluating Christus Victor under assumptions that don't fit it. Penal substitution assumes that it is God who is our accuser. Only Christ's death allows him not to accuse us. Christus Victor assumes that it is Satan who is our accuser. That is, after all, the original meaning of Satan. If Satan is defeated, then the whole system of law and accusation is defeated. This is starting to sound a lot like Paul, right?

"Who will bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? It is Christ Jesus, who died, yes, who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us." (Rom 8:33)

This does not mean there are no consequences for sin. For Paul's take on that, see 1 Cor 3:12

"Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw— the work of each builder will become visible, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each has done. If what has been built on the foundation survives, the builder will receive a reward. If the work is burned up, the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire."

Personally I don't think Christus Victor alone explains Christ's work. Jesus does see himself as defeating Satan. But I believe that through faith in him he transforms us.

"For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin. For whoever has died is freed from sin." (Rom 6:5)

The Words of Institution talk about Christ dying to establish the new covenant, in which the Law is written in our hearts. Heb 9 and 10 also see his death as a covenant sacrifice.

zoidar said:

I have been thinking of the theory of Christus Victor. Jesus has won victory of satan, but on what ground is one saved? If penal substitution isn't true then doesn't that mean we need to live a sinless life or att least have all our sins repented of and forgiven to be saved? What about sins you never ask forgiveness for, sins you may not even know you have?

I hope you understand my thoughts or I will try to explain better.

Click to expand...

Romans 5: ESV

9Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.

zoidar said:

I have been thinking of the theory of Christus Victor. Jesus has won victory of satan, but on what ground is one saved? If penal substitution isn't true then doesn't that mean we need to live a sinless life or att least have all our sins repented of and forgiven to be saved? What about sins you never ask forgiveness for, sins you may not even know you have?

I hope you understand my thoughts or I will try to explain better.

Click to expand...

Given what is revealed in Holy Scriptures the historic Atonement theories of Substituion, Satisfaction, Christ Victor and Ransom are not mutually exclusive.

Each address the attributes of the One Savior and Lord Jesus Christ.

zoidar said:

I have been thinking of the theory of Christus Victor. Jesus has won victory of satan, but on what ground is one saved? If penal substitution isn't true then doesn't that mean we need to live a sinless life or att least have all our sins repented of and forgiven to be saved? What about sins you never ask forgiveness for, sins you may not even know you have?

Click to expand...

We are saved because of God’s love and mercy. And by saved, I mean we are saved from the death that would come because of sin.

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23

And to have eternal life, we must be righteous, because:


These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Mat. 25:46

hedrick said:

I do understand the question. But you're evaluating Christus Victor under assumptions that don't fit it. Penal substitution assumes that it is God who is our accuser. Only Christ's death allows him not to accuse us. Christus Victor assumes that it is Satan who is our accuser. That is, after all, the original meaning of Satan. If Satan is defeated, then the whole system of law and accusation is defeated. This is starting to sound a lot like Paul, right?

"Who will bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? It is Christ Jesus, who died, yes, who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us." (Rom 8:33)

This does not mean there are no consequences for sin. For Paul's take on that, see 1 Cor 3:12

"Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw— the work of each builder will become visible, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each has done. If what has been built on the foundation survives, the builder will receive a reward. If the work is burned up, the builder will suffer loss; the builder will be saved, but only as through fire."

Personally I don't think Christus Victor alone explains Christ's work. Jesus does see himself as defeating Satan. But I believe that through faith in him he transforms us.

"For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin. For whoever has died is freed from sin." (Rom 6:5)

The Words of Institution talk about Christ dying to establish the new covenant, in which the Law is written in our hearts. Heb 9 and 10 also see his death as a covenant sacrifice.

Click to expand...

hedrick said:

Penal substitution assumes that it is God who is our accuser

Click to expand...

So why did God curse Adam Eve for beginning to have the forbidden knowledge of good and evil which only God had (Genesis3:22)?

zoidar said:

Hi again JAU!

As a new Christian I believed all sins had to be punished. Either it was punished on Jesus or you had to take eternal punishment. That's the penal substitution that all our sins are punished in Christ. But the idea that not all your sins have to be punished is a relatively new thinking for me. Of course in Christus Victor all sin is conquered, so Christ can forgive every sin, but you don't need to be free of sin or forgiven all sin before the day of judgement, but you need to be living in a faith/obedience relationship with Christ for him to set you free on judgement day.

Click to expand...

How did death come into mankind?

Why did Christ die to conquer sin?

zoidar said:

I have been thinking of the theory of Christus Victor. Jesus has won victory of satan, but on what ground is one saved? If penal substitution isn't true then doesn't that mean we need to live a sinless life or att least have all our sins repented of and forgiven to be saved? What about sins you never ask forgiveness for, sins you may not even know you have?

Click to expand...

Jesus declared sins forgiven, but he also said we must be born anew. When we are born anew, we become righteous and don’t have sin.

Jesus answered him, "Most assuredly, I tell you, unless one is born anew, he can't see the Kingdom of God." Nicodemus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born?" Jesus answered, "Most assuredly I tell you, unless one is born of water and spirit, he can't enter into the Kingdom of God! That which is born of the flesh is flesh. That which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Don't marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born anew.'
John 3:3-7

But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become God's children, to those who believe in his name: who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 1:12-13

It is the spirit who gives life. The flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and are life.
John 6:63

He who does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. To this end the Son of God was revealed, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whoever is born of God doesn't commit sin, because his seed remains in him; and he can't sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are revealed, and the children of the devil. Whoever doesn't do righteousness is not of God, neither is he who doesn't love his brother.
1 John 3:7-10

Si_monfaith said:

So why did God curse Adam Eve for beginning to have the forbidden knowledge of good and evil which only God had (Genesis3:22)?

Click to expand...

He didn't curse them. He removed them from the Garden, and possibly made them mortal. The problems describe in 17-19 are a result of that. Gen 3:22 shows neither anger nor punishment. Rather, God is afraid that if they continue they will eat from the other tree. A cynical view would be that this would make them just like God and he's jealous. I certainly hope that's not the implication, so I assume he's protecting them from doing something that will make them independent of God, and make it impossible for him to save them.

[I say possibly made them mortal because it's not clear whether they were originally immortal or not. The consequence of their sin was death, which would imply that without sin they wouldn't die. But Calvin speculates that the original plan was for them to pass into eternal life directly, and not through the scary process we know of as death, which wouldn't quite mean that they were immortal in human form. If that is right, then eating from the second tree would have made them deathless in human form, and prevented them from moving into the eternal life that God intended. But I may be reading too much theological depth into a story that may simply have been a folk story to explain the reason life is hard.]

I don't want to degrade God by acting like he is a stranger since he is ever keeping watch over me. So it is wrong for me to dehumanize God and pray to him like he is some kind of computer that needs a checkmark for every sin confession. Nor can i treat the one that loves me the most as if they don't know me because it denies my relationship with him. God loves me, so what does it matter what i define God's love for me as?

hedrick said:

I do understand the question. But you're evaluating Christus Victor under assumptions that don't fit it. Penal substitution assumes that it is God who is our accuser. Only Christ's death allows him not to accuse us. Christus Victor assumes that it is Satan who is our accuser. That is, after all, the original meaning of Satan. If Satan is defeated, then the whole system of law and accusation is defeated. This is starting to sound a lot like Paul, right?

Click to expand...

This is an interesting line of thought, would be cool to explore further.

Question: who gave the Law? It was Yahweh? Or Moses? And how does Satan fit into that picture? ("System of law...").

HatGuy said:

This is an interesting line of thought, would be cool to explore further.

Question: who gave the Law? It was Yahweh? Or Moses? And how does Satan fit into that picture? ("System of law...").

Click to expand...

Exodus says God gave the 10 commandments. Jesus speaks of divorce as being given by Moses, and Paul speaks of the Law as coming "through angels by a mediator." (Galatians 3:19) This was part of Paul's case that the Law is a temporary measure. What replaced it is the Holy Spirit.

But these things are never simple. The Holy Spirit applies to Christians. Traditional exegesis has said that the Law retains a use for restraining evildoers. That seems consistent with Paul.

In this life, I believe Paul sees Christians as free from the Law, and probably free from punishment, but because they are now in the new life through union with Christ and the Holy Spirit (though not completely, he recognizes).

In saying that I realize we have 1 Cor 6:9. My understanding is that this is exhortation, not a description of the judgement after death. I don't think it is intended to overrule 1 Cor 3:12 and set up a long (essentially universal) list of mortal sins.

The next life is more controversial. I think Paul sees sin as a power that enslaves us, and that when sin and death are defeated, eventually everyone will be in Christ. But that's not true now.

The next life is more controversial. I think Paul sees sin as a power that enslaves us, and that when sin and death are defeated, eventually everyone will be in Christ. But that's not true now.

Click to expand...

Beg to differ. All will be one in the Father but all His are in Him now.