This question has been fascinating to me since my further study into Catholicism revealed the view something like the "Satisfaction Theory" or that is the classic description that comes the closest to what I have come to understand. Christ's infinite love and obedience satisfied God's judgement not his pain and suffering.
through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross. Colossians 1:20
That is my personal view of Christ;s atonement, what is yours? I have looked up some popular theories or maybe you have your own? Let the board know what you believe, and what church you learned it in. Maybe you can leave some details as to what it means to you personally, why you believe that way, or how it affects your faith walk(?)
- The Ransom Theory: The earliest of all, originating with the Early Church Fathers, this theory claims that Christ offered himself as a ransom (Mark 10:45). Where it was not clear was in its understanding of exactly to whom the ransom was paid. Many early church fathers viewed the ransom as paid to Satan.
- The Recapitulation Theory: Originated with Irenaeus (125-202 AD). He sees Christ as the new Adam, who systematically undoes what Adam did. Thus, where Adam was disobedient concerning God's edict concerning the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, Christ was obedient even to death on the wood of a tree. Irenaeus is the first to draw comparisons between Eve and Mary, contrasting the faithlessness of the former with the faithfulness of the latter. In addition to reversing the wrongs done by Adam, Irenaeus thinks of Christ as "recapitulating" or "summing up" human life. See main page on Recapitulation
- The Satisfaction (or Commercial) Theory: The formulator of this theory was the medieval theologian Anselm of Canterbury (1034-1109), in his book, Cur Deus Homo (lit. Why the God Man). In his view, God's offended honor and dignity could only be satisfied by the sacrifice of the God-man, Jesus Christ. "Anselm offered compelling biblical evidence that the atonement was not a ransom paid by God to the devil but rather a debt paid to God on behalf of sinners."^ [1]^ Anselm's work established a foundation for the Protestant Reformation, specifically the understanding of justification by faith.
- The Penal-Substitution Theory: This view was formulated by the 16th century Reformers as an extension of Anselm's Satisfaction theory. Anselm's theory was correct in introducing the satisfaction aspect of Christ's work and its necessity, however the Reformers saw it as insufficient because it was referenced to God's honor rather than his justice and holiness and was couched more in terms of a commercial transaction than a penal substitution. This Reformed view says simply that Christ died for man, in man's place, taking his sins and bearing them for him. The bearing of man's sins takes the punishment for them and sets the believer free from the penal demands of the law: The righteousness of the law and the holiness of God are satisfied by this substitution.
- The Moral-Example Theory (or Moral-Influence Theory): Christ died to influence mankind toward moral improvement. This theory denies that Christ died to satisfy any principle of divine justice, but teaches instead that His death was designed to greatly impress mankind with a sense of God's love, resulting in softening their hearts and leading them to repentance. Thus, the Atonement is not directed towards God with the purpose of maintaining His justice, but towards man with the purpose of persuading him to right action. Formulated by Peter Abelard (1079-1142) partially in reaction against Anselm's Satisfaction theory, this view was held by the 16th century Socinians. Versions of it can be found later in F. D. E. Schleiermacher (1768-1834) and Horace Bushnell (1802-1876).
- The Governmental Theory: God made Christ an example of suffering to exhibit to erring man that sin is displeasing to him. God's moral government of the world made it necessary for him to evince his wrath against sin in Christ. Christ died as a token of God's displeasure toward sin and it was accepted by God as sufficient; but actually God does not exact strict justice. This view was formulated by Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) and is subsequently found in Arminianism, Charles Finney, the New England Theology of Jonathan Edwards (the younger), and Methodism.
Modern theories
- The Declaratory Theory: A version of the Moral Influence theory, wherein Christ died to show men how greatly God loves them. This view held by Albrecht Ritschl (1822-89).
- The Guaranty Theory: Reconciliation is based not on Christ's expiation of sin, but on His guaranty to win followers and thus conquer human sinfulness. This view held by J. C. K. von Hofmann (1810-77).
- The Vicarious Repentance Theory: by John McLeod Campbell (d. 1872). It assumes that a perfect repentance is sufficient to atone for sin. In his death, Christ entered into the Father's condemnation of sin, condemned sin, and by this, confessed it.
- The 'Christus Victor' or Dramatic Theory: by G. E. H. Aulén (1879-1977). The atonement is viewed as divine conflict and victory over the hostile powers that hold humanity in subjection. This is a modified form of the classic Ransom theory with the emphasis on Christ's victory over evil. See main article Christus Victor.
- The Accident Theory: Christ's death was an accident, as unforeseen and unexpected as that of any other victim of man's hatred. This view is usually found outside of mainstream Christianity.
- The Martyr Theory: Christ gave up His life for a principle of truth that was opposed to the spirit of His day. This view is usually found outside of mainstream Christianity.
My take on "Atonement" is this:
Prior to Jesus' becoming the LAST Atonement for sin; God had given Moses 'circa 3500 yrs ago; to give to the "Israelites"; the rigid, detailed and lengthy requirements (law); for the "Atonement" for sin.
IE:
1. EVERY day before sundown, a "High Israelite Priest (Levite)", had to slay and shed the blood of an UN blemished animal (usually Lamb), and then sprinkle that lamb's blood on the "alter of Incense" (for corporate sin); and then sprinkle the blood also on the "alter of Sin" (for individual sin).
2. ONCE a year on the "Feast of the Passover" (THE most sacred feast); ALL "Israelites" had to come to the Holy Temple and go through a special "Atonement," in addition to the daily sacrificial Atonement above. Where they had to bathe (called "cleansing" later-"Baptism") in the Jordan river; AND after that, they had to burn the clothes they were wearing. Because in order to be totally cleansed from sin, even their apparel was deemed "blemished" by God; and had to be burned. As did ALL sacrificial lambs (daily sacrifice) had to be burned IF not eaten BEFORE sundown.
This procedure HAD to be done once a day (and ONCE a year on the most Holy of "feasts" dubbed "The Feast of the Passover"). NO "If's", NO "and's" and NO "but's"! It was one of the MOST sacred and Holy laws God EVER gave to Moses to "Say to the children of Israel"!
However, when God (manifest IN the flesh* called Jesus-1 Timothy 3:16), died on the cross; 'circa 2,000 yrs ago, His shed blood and punishment while IN the Tomb; replaced ALL of the above. Thus He is called the (final sacrificial "Lamb of God"); and final Atonement for sin. And the ONLY requirement to receive this "everlasting" Atonement** from sin is to believe "IN" Jesus. This is why it is called "The NEW covenant"; where Jesus' "sacrifice" paid for ALL sins, past, present and future; AND it applies to "Jew OR Gentile, male OR female"; as Luke and St Paul, etc, preached.
Luke 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the "new covenant" (testament) in my blood, which is shed for you.
Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a "new covenant" with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Hebrews 8:13 In that he saith, A "new covenant", he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
* 1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was "manifest in the flesh", justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
** Believing "IN" Jesus does NOT mean you just believe He existed or walked on this planet, etc, etc and etc! Rather, it means: One MUST believe that Jesus WAS the prophesied "Messiah" (Savior) mentioned in a number of places in the Old Testament. In other words, Jesus WAS the true Messiah and DID come to save His own*** people, but when his people did NOT believe that; Jesus broadened the old covenant to include ANY one; that would believe that Jesus WAS truly THE "Messiah"; that had been prophesied ' circa 2,000 yrs before He came "in" the flesh. Thus:
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth "IN" him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
MOST of the "Jews" (as they were called then) vehemently did NOT believe Jesus was the "Messiah" (Savior). But ANY one that did, became saved instantly: just like the "thief on the cross". Believe it or not.
*** John 1:11 He came unto his "own", and his own received him not. John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that "believe on his name" (means believe "IN "Him as explained above).
In any case, May Jesus richly bless you always,
patdee