How do you see the Atonement of Christ then?
- Thread starter YeshuaFan
- Start date
paid in full
Christus Victor is also called as the ransom theory of the atonement. (Damages owed).
The Ransom theory treats the enmity between God and men as if it were a civil lawsuit, much like a legal contention which can only be resolved through the payment of damages, or better said, a "ransom". It says that Men owe God a ransom (damages) in order to compensate for their sins (which of course they are unable to pay) and Christ "foots the bill" by dying on the cross.
Penal substitutionary atonement focuses on the death of Christ and the moral influence model focuses on the life of Christ, Christus Victor focuses on Jesus’ resurrection.
Penal substitution treats the same enmity between God and men as if it were a penal lawsuit, or better said, one which will lead to a punishment for the guilty party which of course is all men. Christ is a substitute for men as he takes on himself the penalty for the sins of mankind, which would otherwise have fallen upon men, by dying on the cross.
Allow me to give you an example that is more easily understood.
For example, in most tribal societies, there is no penal justice because there is no state. In such a context, even murder is a civil matter, to be decided by tribal elders, council, or such. For people of such background, the Ransom theory is more easily understandable than the Penal one.
Then for us who live in a society, or a country where penal justice is more prominent than its civil counterpart (how many civil law shows are there on TV?), it is probably the opposite.
The major problem that I have with the Christ is victor view is still do not see on what basis the wraith of God we all deserved was propiated in full?
And those against the Psa view always seem to satte not fair to have God pour His wrath upon His Son, almost like a form of "cosmic child abuse?"
But Romans 5:6-8 says the opposite...........
"For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us."
Who are the ungodly and wicked people Jesus died for? Paul spent the first two-and-a-half chapters of the Book of Romans telling us that we all are those people.
Paul mentioned the idea of a substitutionary sacrifice with the word propitiation in Romans 3:25. Here, he makes the point again by saying that Christ died for the ungodly. The ancient Greek word for is the word huper, which means “for the sake of, in behalf of, instead of.”
" But God demonstrates His own love".......
How does the death of the Son demonstrate the love of the Father? Because it was harder for the Father to send His only Son, and because God [the Father] was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself (2 Corinthians 5:19).
The work of Jesus on the cross for us is God’s ultimate proof of His love for you. He may give additional proof, but He can give no greater proof. If the cross is the ultimate demonstration of God’s love, it is also the ultimate demonstration of man’s hatred. It also proves that the height of man’s hatred can’t defeat the height of God’s love.
The demonstration of God’s love isn’t displayed so much in that Jesus died, but it is seen in whom Jesus died for – undeserving sinners and rebels against Him like YOU AND ME!
makes sense to me, but that would seem to support Psa view, correct?