Moral influence theory of atonement
Template:Short description Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote". Template:Atonement in Christianity Script error: No such module "Sidebar".
The moral influence or moral example theory of atonement, developed or most notably propagated by Abelard (1079–1142),Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:NoteTag is an alternative to Anselm's satisfaction theory of atonement.Template:Sfn Abelard focused on changing man's perception of God as not offended, harsh, and judgmental, but as loving.Template:Sfn According to Abelard, "Jesus died as the demonstration of God's love", a demonstration which can change the hearts and minds of the sinners, turning them back to God.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn
Doctrine
Abelard
It was not until Anselm, with his satisfaction theory of atonement, that a theory of atonement was specifically articulated.Template:Sfn The moral influence theory was developed, or most notably propagated, by Abelard (1079–1142),Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:NoteTag as an alternative to Anselm's satisfaction theory.Template:Sfn
Abelard not only rejected the idea of Jesus' death as a ransom paid to the devil,Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn which turned the Devil into a rival god,Template:Sfn but also objected to the idea that Jesus' death was a "debt paid to God's honor".Template:Sfn He also objected to the emphasis on God's judgment, and the idea that God changed his mind after the sinner accepted Jesus' sacrificial death, which was not easily reconcilable with the idea of "the perfect, impassible God [who] does not change".Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Abelard focused on changing man's perception of God as not offended, harsh, and judgmental, but as loving.Template:Sfn According to Abelard, "Jesus died as the demonstration of God's love", a demonstration which can change the hearts and minds of the sinners, turning back to God.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn
Beilby and Eddy note that Abelard was "challenged in his views by Bernard of Clairvaux, condemned by the Council of Sens (1140), and eventually excommunicated. His general approach to the atonement, however, has lived on in various forms throughout the last millennium".Template:Sfn
Moral example theory
Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".
A related theory, the "moral example theory", was developed by Faustus Socinus (1539–1604) in his work Script error: No such module "Lang". (1578). He rejected the idea of "vicarious satisfaction".Template:NoteTag According to Socinus, Jesus' death offers mankind "a perfect example of self-sacrificial dedication to God".Template:Sfn
A number of theologians see "example" (or "exemplar") theories of the atonement as variations of the moral influence theory.[1] Wayne Grudem, however, argues that "Whereas the moral influence theory says that Christ's death teaches us how much God loves us, the example theory says that Christ's death teaches us how we should live".[2] Grudem identifies the Socinians as supporters of the example theory.
Influence on Reformation thought
During the Protestant Reformation in Western Christianity, the majority of the Reformers strongly rejected the moral influence view of the atonement in favour of penal substitution, a highly forensic modification of the honor-oriented Anselmian satisfaction model. Fausto Sozzini's Socinian arm of the Reformation maintained a belief in the moral influence view of the atonement. Socinianism was an early form of Unitarianism, and the Unitarian Church today maintains a moral influence view of the atonement, as do many liberal Protestant theologians of the modern age.Template:Sfn
During the 18th century, versions of the moral influence view found overwhelming support among German theologians, most notably the Enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant.[3] In the 19th and 20th century, it has been popular among liberal Protestant thinkers in the Anglican, Methodist, Lutheran and Presbyterian churches, including the Anglican theologian Hastings Rashdall. A number of English theological works in the last hundred years have advocated and popularized the moral influence theory of atonement.[4][5]
A strong division has remained since the Reformation between liberal Protestants (who typically adopt a moral influence view) and conservative Protestants (who typically adopt the penal substitution theory). Both sides tend to believe that their position is taught by the Bible.Template:NoteTag
Notes
References
Citations
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Alister McGrath, 'The Moral Theory of the Atonement: An Historical and Theological Critique' in Scottish Journal of Theology, 38, pp 205–220.
- ↑ Hastings Rashdall, The Idea of Atonement in Christian Theology (London: Macmillan, 1919).
- ↑ David A. Brondos, Paul on the Cross: Reconstructing the Apostle's Story of Redemption (Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press, 2006).
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Sources
<templatestyles src="Refbegin/styles.css" />
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Stephen Finlan, Problems With Atonement: The Origins Of, And Controversy About, The Atonement Doctrine (Liturgical Press 2005) Template:ISBN
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Vincent Taylor, The Cross of Christ (Macmillan 1956)
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
Further reading
<templatestyles src="Refbegin/styles.css" />
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
External links
- "Historical Theories of Atonement" Theopedia gives a brief treatment of the historical and modern theories of atonement from a Calvinistic perspective.
- "The Moral Theory" section III.9.3 from Charles Hodge's Systematic Theology, describing the view and arguing against it.