Wikipedia: Atonement

20 views

Skip to first unread message

Premise Checker

unread,

Feb 8, 2010, 6:13:20 PM2/8/10

Atonement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atonement

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 (Kohen)
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 death of Jesus Christ by crucifixion, which made possible
the reconciliation between God and creation. Within Christianity there are
three main theories for how such atonement might work: the ransom theory,
the satisfaction theory and the moral influence theory.

Contents

* 1 Etymology
* 2 Atonement in Christianity
* 3 Main theories in detail
o 3.1 Ransom & Christus Victor
o 3.2 Satisfaction
+ 3.2.1 Substitution
+ 3.2.2 Governmental
o 3.3 Moral influence
+ 3.3.1 Scapegoating
* 4 Other denominational perspectives
o 4.1 Eastern Christianity
o 4.2 Roman Catholic views on atonement and reparation
* 5 Non-trinitarian theologies
o 5.1 The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon)
o 5.2 The New Church (Emanuel Swedenborg)
* 6 See also
* 7 References
* 8 External links and Bibliography

Etymology

The word atonement was invented in the sixteenth century by William
Tyndale who recognized that there was not a direct English translation of
the biblical Hebraic concept. The word is composed of two parts "at" and
"onement" in order to reflect the dual aspect of Christ's sacrifice: the
remission of sin and reconciliation of man to God. Tyndale's concept
overcomes the limitations of the word reconciliation whilst incorporating
aspects of propitiation and forgiveness.[1][2][3]
Atonement in Christianity
Question book-new.svg

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 emphasize 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 able to
forgive an insult or an injury in his private capacity, but because he is
a sovereign he cannot if the state has been dishonored. 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, bearing the curse in the place of man (Gal. 3:13). Another
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 humankind 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 articles: Atonement (ransom view) and Christus Victor

* Origen of Alexandria
* Gregory of Nyssa
* Gustaf Aulén
* Irenaeus of Lyons ("Recapitulation")

Satisfaction
Main article: Atonement (satisfaction view)

* Divine satisfaction: Anselm of Canterbury and salvation in Catholicism

Substitution
Main articles: Substitutionary atonement and Penal substitution

* Penalty or punishment satisfaction: John Calvin, Calvinism, and imputed
righteousness
* Vicarious repentance, John McLeod Campbell and Robert Campbell Moberly

Governmental
Main article: Atonement (governmental view)

* Hugo Grotius, James Arminius and John Miley
* Jonathan Edwards and Charles Grandison Finney

Moral influence
Main article: Atonement (moral influence view)

* Pierre Abélard
* Hastings Rashdall

Scapegoating

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

Other denominational perspectives

Eastern Christianity

Eastern Orthodoxy and Eastern Catholicism have a substantively different
soteriology; this is sometimes cited as the core difference between
Eastern and Western Christianity. Salvation is not seen as legal release,
but transformation of the human nature itself in the Son taking on human
nature. In contrast to other forms of Christianity, the Orthodox tend to
use the word "expiation" with regard to what is accomplished in the
sacrificial act. In Orthodox theology, expiation is an act of offering
that seeks to change the one making the offering. The Greek word that is
translated both into propitiation and expiation is "hilasmos" which means
"to make acceptable and enable one to draw close to God". Thus the
Orthodox emphasis would be that Christ died, not to appease an angry and
vindictive Father, or to avert the wrath of God, but to change people so
that they may become more like God (see Theosis).[6]
Roman Catholic views on atonement and reparation

As expressed by Pope Pius XI in his encyclical Miserentissimus Redemptor,
in the Roman Catholic tradition the concepts of atonement and redemption
are often seen as being inherently related. And atonement is often
balanced with specific Acts of Reparation which relate the sufferings and
death of Christ to the forgiveness of sins.[7]

Moreover, in Miserentissimus Redemptor the Pontif called acts of
reparation a duty for Roman Catholics:

"We are holden to the duty of reparation and expiation by a certain more
valid title of justice and of love." ... "Moreover this duty of expiation
is laid upon the whole race of men"[8]

Pope John Paul II referred to the concept as:

"the unceasing effort to stand beside the endless crosses on which the Son
of God continues to be crucified".[9]

Specific Roman Catholic practices such as the Rosary of the Holy Wounds
(which does not include the usual rosary mysteries) focus on specific
redemptive aspects of Christ's suffering in Calvary.[10]

Non-trinitarian theologies

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon)

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).

"The word (atonement) describes the setting 'at one' of those who have
been estranged, and denotes the reconciliation of man to God. Sin is the
cause of the estrangement, and therefore the purpose of the atonement is
to correct or overcome the consequences of sin." (Bible Dictionary in the
LDS version of the King James Bible.)

The New Church (Emanuel Swedenborg)

According to the doctrine of The New Church, as explained by Emanuel
Swedenborg, there is no such thing as Substitutionary atonement. According
to New Church doctrine, God Himself descended in the form of Divine Truth
to incarnate into a human body, which is Jesus Christ or the Son of God.
In this human form he conquered Hell by resisting all temptation against
evil, until he made his very human body Divine. Thus in Jesus Christ God
became man, and man became God, in one person.[11] Redemption was a
subjugation of the hells and a reordering of heaven which was accomplished
by Jesus resisting temptation. The passion of the cross was not in itself
redemption, instead it was the last temptation which Jesus Christ endured
before his human was made Divine.[12] From the union of God and man in
Jesus Christ proceeded the Holy Spirit, which regenerates all people who
make an effort to resist temptation and reform their lives.[13] It is only
through actual repentance whereby sins can be remitted.[14] This doctrine
is similar to the Eastern Orthodox view of the atonement (see Theosis).

Swedenborg uses the Latin words for expiation and propitiation rather than
the word "atonement" which was an invention of the 16th century. The
Hebrew word translated as atonement literally means "to cover" or
"covering" and first appears in Gen. 6:14 as the word "pitch" which was
used to cover the ark of Noah to protect it from the waters of the flood
(see Atonement in Judaism). In Swedenborg's commentary on Genesis 6:14 he
stated, "In the original text it is not indeed said that it was to be
"pitched with pitch" but a word is used which denotes "protection" derived
from "expiate" or "propitiate" and therefore it involves the same. The
expiation or propitiation of the Lord is protection from the inundation of
evil." [15] Simply put, following a state of temptation and repentance,
man will reach a state where he will be protected by the Lord from further
temptation and evil.