atonement

 

the reconciliation, or “at-one-ment,” of sinful humanity with God. In Judaism both the Bible and rabbinical thought reflect the belief that God's chosen people must be pure to remain in communion with God. The Bible prescribed Temple sacrifice for the removal of sin and uncleanliness. The prophets taught that outward sacrifice must be accompanied by interior purification to be complete. With the destruction of the Temple and the consequent cessation of the sacrifice focus came to be placed on the religious life of the individual who sought to be reconciled with God through prayer, repentance, charity, and suffering. In the Jewish calendar, atonement for all but very serious sins came on the Day of Atonement (see Yom Kippur). In Christian theology, various doctrines of atonement have been advanced in history, all of which give central place to the life and death of Jesus. The classical theory of atonement, widely accepted in the early Church, depicted Jesus as the divine victor in a cosmic struggle with the devil for rights over the human soul. In medieval Latin theology emphasis shifted from the divine to the human side of Jesus. The most widely held theory at this time, often called vicarious atonement, was first stated by St. Anselm in Why God Became Human (1197–98): only human beings can rightfully repay the debt which was incurred through their willful disobedience to God, although only God can make the infinite satisfaction necessary to repay it; therefore God must send the God-man, Jesus Christ, to satisfy both these conditions. Anselm's doctrine, slightly altered or elaborated, has become part of Roman Catholic theology and of that of many Protestant churches. In another theory of atonement emphasis is placed on God's unconditional mercy and on the gradual growth toward union with God as inspired by Christ's selfless example. This theory was given its standard form by Peter Abelard in the 12th cent. Here the juridical concept is replaced by an organic and social concept. The tendency today in the Church is not to regard any single interpretation of atonement as all-embracing but to view Christ's atoning work from a variety of vantage points.

Bibliography

See G. Aulén, Christus Victor (tr. 1931); F. W. Dillistone, The Christian Understanding of Atonement (1968).

Part of a series of articles on Christianity

Foundations Jesus Christ Church · Theology New Covenant Dispensationalism Covenant Theology New Covenant Theology Apostles · Kingdom · Gospel History of Christianity · Timeline Bible Old Testament · New Testament Books · Canon · Apocrypha Septuagint · Decalogue Birth · Resurrection Sermon on the Mount Great Commission Translations (English) Inspiration · Hermeneutics Christian theology Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) History of · Theology · Apologetics Creation · Fall of Man · Covenant · Law Grace · Faith · Justification · Salvation Sanctification · Theosis · Worship Church · Sacraments · Eschatology History and traditions Early · Councils Creeds · Missions Great Schism · Crusades · Reformation Great Awakenings · Great Apostasy Restorationism · Nontrinitarianism Thomism · Arminianism Congregationalism Eastern Christianity Eastern Orthodox · Oriental Orthodox · Syriac Christianity · Eastern Catholic Western Christianity Western Catholicism · Protestantism · Anabaptism · Lutheranism · Calvinism · Anglicanism · Baptist · Methodism · Evangelicalism · Fundamentalism · Unitarianism · Liberalism · Pentecostalism · Christian Science · Unity Church Restorationism Adventism · Christadelphians · Jehovah's Witnesses · Latter-day Saint movement (Mormonism) Topics in Christianity Movements · Denominations · Other religions Ecumenism · Preaching · Prayer Music · Liturgy · Calendar Symbols · Art · Criticism Important figures Apostle Paul · Church Fathers Constantine · Athanasius · Augustine Anselm · Aquinas · Palamas · Luther Calvin · Wesley Arius · Marcion of Sinope Archbishop of Canterbury · Catholic Pope Coptic Pope · Ecumenical Patriarch

Christianity Portal

The atonement is a doctrine found within both Christianity and Judaism. It describes how sin can be forgiven by God. In Judaism, Atonement is said to be the process of forgiving or pardoning a transgression. This was originally accomplished through rituals performed by a High Priest on the holiest day of the Jewish year: Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement). In Christian theology the atonement refers to the forgiving or pardoning of sin through the crucifixion of Jesus Christ which made possible the reconciliation between God and creation. Within Christianity there are numerous technical theories for how such atonement might work, including the ransom theory, the Abelardian theory, and the Anselmian satisfaction theory.

Etymology

The word atonement gained widespread use in the sixteenth century after William Tyndale recognized that there was not a direct translation of the concept into English. In order to explain the doctrine of Christ's sacrifice, which accomplished both the remission of sin and reconciliation of man to God, Tyndale invented a word that would encompass both actions. He wanted to overcome the inherent limitations of the word "reconciliation" while incorporating the aspects of "propitiation" and forgiveness. It is interesting to note that while Tyndale labored to translate the 1526 English Bible, his proposed word comprises two parts, 'at' and 'onement,' which also means reconciliation, but combines it with something more. Although one thinks of the Jewish Fast of Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement), the Hebrew word is 'kaper' meaning 'a covering', so one can see that 'reconciliation' doesn't precisely contain all the necessary components of the word atonement. Expiation means "to atone for." Reconciliation comes from Latin roots re, meaning "again"; con, meaning "with"; and ultimately, 'sol', a root meaning "seat". Reconciliation, therefore, literally means "to sit again with." While this meaning may appear sufficient, Tyndale thought that if translated as "reconciliation," there would be a pervasive misunderstanding of the word's deeper significance to not just reconcile, but "to cover," so the word was invented.^[1][2][3]

Atonement in Christianity

Christians have used three different metaphors to understand how the atonement might work^[4]. Churches and denominations may vary in which metaphor they consider most accurately fits into their theological perspective, however all Christians emphasise that Jesus is the Saviour of the world and through his death the sins of mankind have been forgiven.^[5]

The first metaphor, epitomised by the “ransom to Satan” theory, was used by the fourth-century theologian Gregory of Nyssa based on verses such as Mark 10:45 – "the Son of Man came … to give his life as a ransom for the many". In this metaphor Jesus liberates mankind from slavery to Satan and thus death by giving his own life as a ransom. Victory over Satan consists of swapping the life of the perfect (Jesus), for the lives of the imperfect (mankind). A variation of this view is known as the “Christus Victor” theory, and sees Jesus not used as a ransom but rather defeating Satan in a spiritual battle and thus freeing enslaved mankind by defeating the captor.

The second metaphor, used by the eleventh century theologian Anselm, is called the “satisfaction” theory. In this picture mankind owes a debt not to Satan, but to sovereign God himself. A sovereign may well be 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 Jesus, being both God and man, was this perfect sacrifice. A variation on this 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, baring the curse in the place of man (Gal. 3:13). A third 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.

The third metaphor is that of healing, associated with Pierre Abélard in the eleventh century, and Paul Tillich in the twentieth. In this picture Jesus’ death on the cross demonstrates the extent of God’s love for us, and moved by this great act of love mankind responds and is transformed by the power of the Holy Spirit. This view is favoured by most liberal theologians as the moral influence view, and also forms the basis for Rene Girard’s “mimetic desire” theory (not to be confused with meme theory).

Main theories in detail

Ransom & Christus Victor

Main article: Christus Victor

Main articles: Atonement (ransom view) and Ransom

• Origen
• Gregory of Nyssa

Satisfaction & Governmental

Main articles: Satisfaction and Atonement (satisfaction view)

• Divine satisfaction: Anselm of Canterbury & salvation in Catholicism
• Penalty or punishment satisfaction: John Calvin, Calvinism, & imputed righteousness
• Vicarious repentance, John Mcleod Campbell, R. C. Moberly

Main articles: Governmental and Atonement (governmental view)

• Hugo Grotius, James Arminius, John Miley
• Substitutionary atonement & Atonement (Governmental view)
• Jonathan Edwards & Charles Grandison Finney

Moral influence

Main article: Atonement (moral influence view)

• Pierre Abélard (It is questionable whether Abélard himself taught this model of atonement)
• Hastings Rashdall

Scapegoating: William Tyndale (who invented the word from Hebrew and Greek manuscripts), René Girard, James Alison, Gerhard Förde see 'In Christianity' in Scapegoat

Other denominational perspectives

Eastern Orthodox

Eastern Orthodoxy has a substantively different soteriology; this is sometimes cited as the core difference between Eastern and Western Christianity. The Orthodox view^[6] is closely related to the Incarnation and is thus closest to the Physical redemption theory.^{[citation needed]}

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon) 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. (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: "...how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not.... Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit..." (19:15,18).
• 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. 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).
• 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.
• Empathetic purpose. Christ suffered pain and agony not only for the sins of all men, 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).

Christian versus New Age

One of the more interesting debates on the Atonement can be experienced between those espousing traditional Chrisitan interpretations of the Atonement and those who may be considered New Agers. ^[7]

See also

Blood atonement Divine grace Divine mercy Forgiveness Justification Mercy seat

Pardon Propitiation Scapegoat Sin Substitutionary atonement

References

External links

• Nonviolent Atonement and the Victory of Christ
• Atonement Theories in Current Philosophical Theology 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

Donate to Wikimedia