| About this site |
| About us |
| Our beliefs |
| Your first visit? |
| Contact us |
| External links |
| Good books |
| Visitor essays |
| Our forum |
| New essays |
| Other site features |
| Buy a CD |
| Vital notes |
| Spiritual/ethics |
| Spirituality |
| Morality/ethics |
| Absolute truth |
| Peace/conflict |
| Attaining peace |
| Religious tolerance |
| Religious hatred |
| Religious conflict |
| Religious violence |
| Laws and news |
| Religious laws |
| Religious news |
|
|
 |
"There have been several theories of the Atonement developed; some by God fearing upright men and others by servants of Satan himself." William W. Sasser 1 |
|
All 6 atonement theories "...have elements of truth in them but some are inadequate to stand alone." Ralph Wilson 2 |
|
"All of the historically important theories of the Atonement have serious problems. In particular, they either fail to explain why God sacrificed his son for the salvation of sinners or else make the sacrifice seem arbitrary." Michael Martin 3 |
Overview:
In a religious sense, atonement means "at-one-ment." This is the state of being "at one" -- or reconciled -- with God. 4
Christianity has historically taught that:
| A gulf was formed between God and humans because of the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden | ||||
| Either:
| ||||
| Yeshua's life, and particularly his death on the cross, allowed some humans to bridge the gulf and be reconciled with God. |
Early Christian theologians did not delve deeply into "how" the atonement came to be. Philip Schaff writes: "...the primitive church teachers lived more in the thankful enjoyment of redemption than in logical reflection upon it. We perceive in their exhibitions of this blessed mystery the language rather of enthusiastic feeling than of careful definition and acute analysis." 5
The Epistles of Paul and other writings in the Christian Scriptures do not explain exactly how the atonement actually works. Most of the theologians from Origen (185-254 CE) until the present time have believed that the atonement is related in some way to the sacrificial and/or voluntary torture-death of Jesus. They selected certain passages in the Scriptures that agreed with their beliefs, and ignored others. In this way, they arrived at very different, conflicting, yet bible-based theories. In recent decades, some theologians have rejected atonement theories based on Yeshua's death. They argue in favor of a non-violent explanation for the atonement. For them, atonement is based on Yeshua's life, not his death.
All of these theories are biblically based. All conflict with each other. There is little hope that a consensus will be reached in the foreseeable future on which theory is the "correct" one.
There is little standardization on terminology for the various theories. We have used what we believe to be the most common name(s) for each theory.
Various writers state that there are 4, 5, 6, 10, and probably more theories of the atonement. They often regard all but one as erroneous, and perhaps even inspired by Satan. Unfortunately, they don't agree on which is the true theory, or even if a true theory exists.
Broadly speaking, the current accepted theories are:
| Group | Most commonly accepted theory |
| Roman Catholic Church | Satisfaction Theory |
| Eastern Orthodox Churches | Ransom Theory |
| Conservative & some Mainline Protestants | Penal Substitution Theory |
| Protestant Word-faith Movement | Ransom Theory |
| Liberal Christians & post Christians | Moral Theory or a non-violent theory |
Theories described in this section are:
Major theories of the atonement are listed below in chronological order:
| The Ransom Theory (God deceitfully pays off Satan with a bribe)
Introduced by Origen in the third century CE. |
| The Satisfaction Theory (Jesus appeases God
by being a ritual human sacrifice) Introduced by Anselem, in the
late 11th century CE. |
| The Moral Theory: (Jesus' death is an example for the rest of humanity to emulate)
Introduced by Abelard in the 12th century CE.
|
| The Acceptance Theory (Atonement comes from the arbitrary choice of God) Introduced
by Scotus circa 1300 CE. |
| The Penal (a.k.a. Penal-Substitution) Theory (God's mercy replaces his
wrath after the infinite sacrifice of Jesus) Introduced by
Reformation theologians circa 1520 CE. |
| |
|
Narrative Christus Victor
Theory: Being written |
|
Non-violent atonement theories:
Recent theories primarily by African-American and feminist theologians
Being written |
|
References:
- William Sasser, "Erroneous theories of the Atonement," (1997) at: http://www.soundofgrace.com/ Sasser lists nine theories of the atonement that he doesn't like.
- Ralph Wilson, "Theories of the Atonement," Joyful Heart™ Renewal Ministries, at: http://www.jesuswalk.com/
- Michael Martin, "The Case Against Christianity," Temple University Press, (1991), Page 262. Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com online book store
- "Atonement," HyperDictionary.com, at: http://www.hyperdictionary.com/
- Philip Schaff, "History of the Christian Church, Vol. 2: Ante-Nicene Christianity (100-325)," Eerdmans, (Reprinted 1970) Pages 584-588.
- Gavin Kingsley, "Cathedral studies On Atonement," (1999), at: http://www.geocities.com/ Kingsley compares only four views of the atonement.
- William Sasser, "Two views of the Atonement," (1998), at: http://www.soundofgrace.com/ Sasser compares universal with particular atonement.
- Arthur Roberts, "The Atonement," QuakerInfo.com, at: http://www.quakerinfo.com
|
Home > Christianity > History, Beliefs, Trends, etc > Beliefs > Atonement > here |
Copyright © 2004 by Ontario Consultants on Religious
Tolerance
Originally written: 2004-APR-6
Latest update: 2004-SEP-07
Author: B.A. Robinson
|
|
|
Page Translator: