Theological Term of the Week

recapitulation theory of the atonement
The view, first emphasised by Iranaeus, that Christ came to the earth to reverse the curse of Adam by living the perfect human life, remaining obedient through all the phases of human life, succeeding where Adam failed, and thereby restoring those united with him to the state in which Adam existed before the fall.

• From Irenaeus, quoted from The Christian Theology Reader by Alister McGrath: 

  But when [Christ] was incarnate and became a human being, he recapitulated in himself the long history of the human race, obtaining salvation for us, so that we might regain in Jesus Christ what we had lost in Adam, that is, being in the image and likeness of God. 

• From Systematic Theology by Louis Berkhof:  

  Irenaeus, who also expresses the idea that the death of Christ satisfied the justice of God and thus liberated man, nevertheless gave prominence to the recapitulation theory, that is, to the idea, as Orr expresses it, “that Christ recapitulates in Himself all the stages of human life, including those which belong to our state as sinners.” By His incarnation and human life He reverses the course on which Adam by his sin started humanity and thus becomes a new leaven in the life of mankind. He communicates immortality to those who are united to Him by faith and effects an ethical transformation in their lives and by His obedience compensates for the disobedience of Adam.

Learn more:

1. Got Questions.org: What are the various theories on the atonement?
2. Frank Griffith: The Nature of the Atonement (pdf)
3. Reclaiming the Mind Ministries: What is the recapitulation theory of the atonement? (video)

Related terms:

• penal substitution
• Christus Victor
• governmental theory of the atonement
• moral influence theory of the atonement
• ransom to Satan theory of the atonement

1From Systematic Theology by Louis Berkhof

Filed under Defective Theology.

Do you have a term you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it, giving you credit for the suggestion and linking back to your blog when I do.

Clicking on the Theological Term graphic at the top of this post will take you to a list of all the previous theological terms in alphabetical order.

Theological Term of the Week

ransom to Satan theory of the atonement
The view of the atonement that maintained that “the death of Christ constituted a ransom paid to Satan, in order to cancel the just claims which the latter had on man”1; also called the classical theory of the atonement. 

• From Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem: 

  This view was held by Origen (c. A.D. 185—c. 254). a theologian from Alexandria and later Caesarea, and after him by some others in the early history of the church. According to this view, the ransom Christ paid to redeem us was paid to Satan, in whose kingdom all people were by virtue of sin. 

  This theory finds no direct confirmation in Scripture and has few supporters in the history of the church. It falsely thinks of Satan rather than God as the one who required that a payment be made for sin and thus completely neglects the demands of God’s justice with respect to sin. It views Satan as having much more power than he actually does, namely, power to demand whatever he wants from God, rather than as one who has been cast down from heaven and has no right to demand anything of God. Nowhere does Scripture way that we as sinners owe anything to Satan, but it repeatedly says that God requires of us a payment for our sins. This view also fails to deal with the texts that speak of Christ’s death as a propitiation offered to God the Father for our sins, or with the fact that God the Father represented the Trinity in accepting the payment for sins from Christ….

• From The Christian Faith by Michael Horton:  

  Assuming that the devil was the rightful owner of sinners, Origen taught that Christ was a trap: his humanity ws the necessary bait for luring Satan into thinking that he had at last won out over Yahweh, and then he conquered the devil by his deity.

Learn more:

1. Got Questions.org: What are the various theories on the atonement?
2. Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry: Ransom Theory of the Atonement
3. William Sasser: Erroneous Theories of the Atonement (pdf)
4. Jeffrey Waddington: Surveying the Wondrous Cross: The Atonement in Church History

Related terms:

• penal substitution
• Christus Victor
• governmental theory of the atonement
• moral influence theory of the atonement

1From Systematic Theology by Louis Berkhof

Filed under Defective Theology.

Do you have a term you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it, giving you credit for the suggestion and linking back to your blog when I do.

Clicking on the Theological Term graphic at the top of this post will take you to a list of all the previous theological terms in alphabetical order.

Theological Term of the Week

moral influence theory of the atonement
The view of the atonement that maintains that the purpose of the death of Christ was to show God’s love so that sinners will be moved to repentance; also called exemplarism.

• From Theories of the Atonement by Leon Morris: 

  Some form of the subjective or moral view is held widely today, especially among scholars of the liberal school. In all its variations this theory emphasizes the importance of the effect of Christ’s cross on the sinner. The view is generally attributed to Abelard, who emphasized the love of God, and is sometimes called the moral influence theory, or exemplarism. When we look at the cross we see the greatness of the divine love. this delivers us from fear and kindles in us an answering love. We respond to love with love and no longer live in selfishness and sin. Other ways of putting it include the view that the sight of the selfless Christ dying for sinners moves us to repentance and faith. If God will do all that for us, we say, then we ought not to continue in sin. So we repent and turn from it and are saved by becoming better people.

  The thrust in all this is on personal experience. The atonement, seen in this way, has no effect outside the believer. It is real in the person’s experience and nowhere else. This view has been defended in recent times by Hastings Rashdall in The Idea of Atonement (1919).

  It should be said in the first instance that there is truth in this theory. Taken by itself it is inadequate, but it is not untrue. It is important that we respond to the love of Christ seen on the cross, that we recognize the compelling force of his example.

  Probably the best known and best loved hymn on the passion in modern times is “When I Survey the Wondrous Cross,” a hymn that sets forth nothing but the moral view. Every line of it emphasizes the effect on the observer of surveying the wondrous cross. It strikes home with force. What it says is both true and important. It is when it is claimed that this is all that the atonement means that we must reject it. Taken in this way it is open to serious criticism. If Christ was not actually doing something by his death, then we are confronted with a piece of showmanship, nothing more. Someone once said that if he were in a rushing river and someone jumped in to save him, and in the process lost his life, he could recognize the love and sacrifice involved. But if he was sitting safely on the land and someone jumped into the torrent to show his love, he could see no point in it and only lament the senseless act. Unless the death of Christ really does something, it is not in fact a demonstration of love.

• From The Christian Faith by Michael Horton:  

  Already in the twelfth century, Abelard (1079-1142) challenged the interpretation of his contemporary, Anselm, by offering his own view, which has come to be called the moral influence theory. According to this theory, the purpose of Christ’s death was to provide a moving example of God’s love for sinners that would provoke repentance. The image of Christ’s death on the cross demonstrates God’s love in such a powerful way that only the coldest hearts could resist its lure and remain enemies of God. In fairness it must be observed that Abelard also included other elements (particularly in his Exposition of the Epistle to the Romans). However, the Pelagian tendency of modern theology adopted this model as the proper interpretation of Christ’s death. Already in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries the Socinian movement embraced this subjective view—and, not surprisingly, rejected the divinity of Christ’s person. A moral example of influence need hardly be God incarnate. Eventually, this view appealed to the leaders of the Enlightenment. Especially in Kant, Christ’s death can offer only a motive to repentance, but it is our own repentance that finally effects absolution.

Learn more:

1. Theopedia: Moral Influence Theory of the Atonement
2. Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry: Moral Influence Theory
3. William Sasser: Erroneous Theories of the Atonement (pdf)
4. Bible Doctrine: Essential Teachings of the Christian Faith: Other Views of the Atonement

Related terms:

• penal substitution
• Christus Victor
• governmental theory of the atonement

Filed under Defective Theology.

Do you have a term you’d like to see featured here as a Theological Term of the Week? If you email it to me, I’ll seriously consider using it, giving you credit for the suggestion and linking back to your blog when I do.

Clicking on the Theological Term graphic at the top of this post will take you to a list of all the previous theological terms in alphabetical order.