Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Substitutionary atonement, also called vicarious atonement, is a central concept within Western Christian theology which asserts that Jesus died for humanity, [1] as claimed by the Western classic and paradigms of atonement in Christianity, which regard Jesus as dying as a substitute for others.
Penal substitution, also called penal substitutionary atonement and especially in older writings forensic theory, [1] [2] is a theory of the atonement within Protestant Christian theology, which declares that Christ, voluntarily submitting to God the Father's plan, was punished (penalized) in the place of (substitution) sinners, thus satisfying the demands of justice and propitiation, so God ...
Both affirm the substitutionary and vicarious nature of the atonement, but penal substitution offers a specific explanation as to what the suffering is for: punishment. [citation needed] Augustine teaches substitutionary atonement. However, the specific interpretation differed as to what this suffering for sinners meant.
The governmental theory of the atonement prospered in 19th century Methodism, although John Wesley did not hold to it himself. John Wesley clearly held to the penal substitution view. [14] [15] This view has been notably detailed by Methodist theologian John Miley (1813–1895) in his Atonement in Christ and his Systematic Theology. [16]
Limited atonement (also called definite atonement) [12] asserts that Jesus's substitutionary atonement was definite and certain in its purpose and in what it accomplished. This implies that only the sins of the elect were atoned for by Jesus's death. Calvinists do not believe, however, that the atonement is limited in its value or power, but ...
Other theories include recapitulation theory, the "shared atonement" theory [12] and scapegoat theory. Additional views include the governmental view, penal substitution view, and substitutionary atonement; Prāyaścitta, the practice in Hinduism where a person practices rites to undo their sins, such as meditation and pilgrimages.
In his book, Aulén identifies three main types of atonement theories: [8] [9] The earliest was what Aulén called the "classic" view of the atonement, more commonly known as the ransom theory, or since Aulén's work, it is known sometimes as the "Christus Victor" theory: this is the theory that Adam and Eve made humanity subject to the Devil during the fall, and that God, in order to redeem ...
Methodists believe Jesus Christ died for all humanity, not a limited few: the doctrine of unlimited atonement. Wesleyan–Arminian theology falls squarely in the tradition of substitutionary atonement, though it is linked with Christus Victor and moral influence theories. [25]