# Substitionary Atonement and Christus Victor



## bpkantor (Jun 8, 2011)

Does anyone know much about the debate between substitutionary atonement and Christus Victor as understanding what the gospel/the cross is primarily about? People like me would describe the primary function of the cross as substitutionary atonement, but that it is through substitutionary atonement that Christ is victor over death and hell and the works of the devil (primarily sin). However, there are many (often in ministries which emphasize miracles and the supernatural) which would see Christ as Victor as the primary purpose of the cross and maybe not have as developed a theory of substitutionary atonement.

What do you guys think about this debate? What are the central issue? What is at stake now and what do you think it will lead to in the future?

thanks and God bless,
--Ben


----------



## Andres (Jun 8, 2011)

Ben, I am very limited in my knowledge here, but my understanding is that the Christus Victor view is that Christ simply "beat" the devil so he essentially won back our freedom. This seems to suppose that humanity is actually enslaved to the devil or that he is our main enemy. Of course the biblical understanding of the fall sees that our enemy is God. This is our biggest problem - that fallen, sinful humanity needs to be reconciled to God. The Christus Victor understanding also seems to de-emphasize Christ's perfect obedience, His fullfillment of the covenant, etc which made the atonement all possible.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jun 8, 2011)

I think the real problem is in failing to reckon that all these different "motifs" relating to the Atonement have some validity, instead of absolutizing a single aspect.

The penal-substitutionary view (PSA), we would argue, is perhaps the strongest and principal alignment for viewing and balancing the Death of Christ. It sees in Christ's cross-work a principally God-ward focus, with benefits that accrue to the undeserving. PSA is the _gospel_-view of the Atonement.

Other angles on the Atonement (CristusVictor, moral-government, etc) are best understood as annexes or corollaries, supporting buttresses to the main idea. PSA is simply the best understanding, because it is gospel and because it fits with the trajectory of the whole revelation, going back to the OT sacrificial offerings, of which Christ is the final Lamb of God, substituted (voluntarily) for us to take away the sin of the world. Other ideas have unjustly taken centrality away from PSA whenever the "Hebrew" orientation to the Bible has been eclipsed.

Our natural (non-believing) inclination is to get squeamish around the notion of suffering, of death-as-penalty for our sins and richly deserved, and we resent the idea that someone else takes our place and does our work. There's a lot of pride that dies when PSA is exalted. The CV model sees man first of all as a victim of circumstances. He is, no doubt about it. But when this angle is made the main axis, *why *we are such victims can often be almost entirely forgotten. It's "just our lot." Well, no, it isn't; but it became so because of Adam's first transgression, and the sorry fruit of Original Sin.


----------



## bpkantor (Jun 8, 2011)

I appreciate your guys' responses. I think this is an important issue because I have noticed a recent surge in the CV emphasis. I agree that an understanding of all of these things is important, like Rev. Buchanan mentioned but that the PSA is essential and central to the gospel.

How would you respond to the argument that is often brought up that the CV is the view of the early church whereas the PSA is the view of the reformation (because I have heard that argued a number of times)?


----------



## VictorBravo (Jun 8, 2011)

bpkantor said:


> How would you respond to the argument that is often brought up that the CV is the view of the early church whereas the PSA is the view of the reformation (because I have heard that argued a number of times)?


 
Seems like the place to start would be Scripture. For example, Romans Chapter 5 is "early-church." Paul speaks of the Christian being justified by Christ's blood, in his death--not in his victory. 



> Rom 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.



To be sure, Paul also speaks of Christ's victory--"O death, where is thy sting?" But, as Bruce noted well, that is a consequence of Christ's atoning work.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jun 8, 2011)

CV isn't *the* view of the early church. That motif is certainly present (although no "named" view can properly be said to be there, inasmuch as it is a description). It grows more prevalent over time, and could be said to marginalize PSA motif as the Hebrew/Jewish character of the basic religion is also marginalized in the "gentilification" of the church, especially in the eastern church. Elements of the PSA motif could be said to remain stronger in the western church, possibly due to the Latin juridical tradition in that branch of the church. And it is within the western tradition that Anslem revitalizes the substitutionary motif in the 11th century with his "satisfaction" theory (_Cur Deus Homo)_.

It would be inaccurate to represent Anselm's formulation as identical to the Reformed, even as it would be anachronistic to map the Reformed view one-to-one to the ECFs. However, it is quite legitimate to find many statements in the ECFs and Anselm that cleary anticipate the Reformed expression of substitution. The emphasis in the Reformation turns toward the greatest expressions of God's acts on man's behalf, and places the emphasis there, in the realm of grace.

If the ECFs (really and truly) emphasize the *love* of God in the atonement, and Anselm emphasizes the *innocence* and righteousness of Christ in the atonement, the Reformed view emphasizes the *purpose* of God to make something wonderful for his own pleasure out of things that are _less than_ nothing (nihilo) and hell-deserving. At each step, the focus is taken further off the human element (as love-recipient, as that which should have been but for the fall), until it is entirely put toward the self-glorification of God, and man in creation is the role player upon the stage of this grand demonstration of the glory of God.


----------



## MW (Jun 8, 2011)

John Eadie on Colossians 2:15,



> Most glorious is the thought that the church is released from the bond that held it, and delivered from the hellish powers that tyrannized over humanity — a deliverance achieved for it by Him alone “whose right hand and holy arm” could get Him the victory. *Redemption is a work at once of price and power*, *of expiation and conquest*. On the cross was the purchase made; on the cross was the victory gained. The blood that wipes out the sentence was there shed, and the death which was the death-blow of Satan's kingdom was there endured. Those nails which killed Christ pierced the sentence of doom — gave egress to the blood which cancelled it, and inflicted at the same time a mortal wound on the hosts of darkness. That power which Satan had exercised was so prostrated, that every one believing on Christ is freed from his vassalage. Christ's death was a battle, and in it God achieved an immortal victory. The conflict was a furious one, mighty and mysterious in its struggle. The combatant died; but in dying He conquered. Hell might be congratulating itself that it had gained the mastery, and might be wondering what should be the most fitting commemoration and trophy, when He who died arose the victor — no enemy again daring to dispute His power or challenge His right, and then God exhibited His foes in open triumph. “The prince of this world is cast out.”
> 
> All this teaching bore upon the Colossian church and its crisis. Let not the ritual law — which exhibits the condemning power of the whole law — be enacted among you, for it has been fully and formally abrogated. Let not your minds be dazzled or overawed by esoteric teaching about the spirit-world. All those spirits are beneath the Divine Master; if good, they are His servants; if evil, they are conquered vassals.


----------

