![]() ![]() Yet, we attend to PST in more detail because it’s here that we witness the fireworks. ![]() A theory, like penal substitution, refers to a more narrowly worked out, systematically detailed instance of an atonement model. “ A model of atonement is a broad category that is representative of how several theories of atonement function. “Penal substitution is a theory that belongs categorically (and prominently) to those so-called restitution models of atonement. William Lane Craig reminds us of this perspective. Just to reiterate, PST is one atonement model among many. Punishment becomes the fee paid for the ransom. Now, punishment becomes the means for satisfaction. When we get to the Reformation and John Calvin (1509-1564), this changes. Therefore, satisfaction becomes the preferable solution. God does not want to follow the road of punishment because God’s purpose is to bestow blessedness. Either punishment or satisfaction ( aut poena aut satisfactio). The imbalance in the cosmic order could be righted in one of two ways: either through punishment and denial of blessedness or through an act of satisfaction whereby an offering is rendered up that is greater than the act of disobedience. Recall how Anselm’s model led to an either/or decision on God’s part: either punishment or satisfaction ( aut poena aut satisfactio). The overlap is palpable even if the models are not fully identical. Yet, the slave-ransom-liberation motif relies on the same underlying logic as do Anselm’s Satisfaction Theory and Calvin’s Penal Substitution Theory. Who received payment? Was it Satan who held us in slavery to sin? When we turn to PST directly, it will be God who receives this payment.Ī systematic theologian could justify granting the ransom theory its own place on the list of atonement models, to be sure. 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.” Jesus paid for our freedom. “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. Stephen Morrison calls this biblical model the “Ransom Theory” of atonement. But, to whom was this ransom paid? Satan? God? Anybody else? The imagery in this motif is that we sinners were enslaved. Jesus “died as a ransom to set them free from the sins” (Hebrews 9:15). Jesus Christ, like a slave trader, has ransomed us sinners and set us free. The Ransom Motif “Crucifixion” by Bartolome Esteban Murillo 1675 Just a reminder, see where Penal Substitution Theory fits in our map of alternative atonement motifs. The systematic theologian maps the numerous models or motifs of atonement and then compares them. Scripture depicts the atoning work of Jesus Christ in numerous sets of metaphors. This is an exercise in systematic theology. What’s going on? Let’s turn to systematic theology on the doctrine of atonement. Moral objections to the God depicted by PST are rife. “What kind of God…? An all powerful God who, Christians say, ‘is love’ and ‘loves the world’, but who cannot, or will not, forgive human sin unless an innocent person–his own beloved son–is horribly tortured and slaughtered?” So, what’s the problem? Princeton religion scholar Elaine Pagels reports her moral agony over penal substitution theory (Pagels, 2020, Chapter 8). In the Christian Century, Anglican priest Rachel Mann detonates a theological bomb: “substitutionary atonement is an idolatrous account of redemption.”
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |