Atonement Vs Anslem

It affirms that God attributed the sins and guilt of humankind to Jesus, Who in place of man, received that punishment that humanity would have otherwise deserved. Jesus’ actions signified the payment of the sins of humankind, which settled both the righteousness and wrath of God so that sinners could be forgiven without God Himself compromising His holy standard. In essence, according to the penal substitution theory of the reformers, Jesus died in place of man, in the process accounting for the sins of man and bearing them. The act of Jesus taking the sins of man indicates that Jesus carried the cross of every believer, setting him free and safe from all the penal demands of God’s law. In this context, the holiness of God and the righteousness of His law are accounted for by the substitution. Notably, in modern theology, the penal aspect has been a stumbling block despite being regarded as one of the dominant atonement in the bible. According to the model, Jesus paid man’s ransom on his crucifixion. However, this view only works because Christ was paying man’s penalty. Therefore, Christians should be inspired by the self-sacrifice acts of Jesus on the cross. In addition, Jesus’ death and resurrection implied significant victories over death, hell, and sin in our union with him and God. Lastly, God accomplished his mission to reconcile the world with Him despite various trespasses by

The concept of forgiveness remains to be a debatable issue in the field of philosophy and morality. For some, to forgive someone who has wronged you considers you as a person with morally good characteristics e.g. having a kind and merciful heart. Forgiving is somewhat a way of undoing what has been done, but for Kant, such concept is impossible. This is because he believes that even God cannot undo what has been done, because we do not have the ability to change what He thinks of us or plead for His mercy (North 1987, p. 500). It seems that the only way to wipe our slate clean is to compensate for the harm that we have caused or receive punishment for our sins. If this is so, then it is possible for God to forgive the wrongdoers and be willing

The expiation view of atonement states that the problem that plagues humanity is sin and death, rather than the view that forgiveness from sin is not available. In other words, the issue keeping Christians from God and from salvation is sin, death, and the devil, rather than God’s wrath. The view of expiation is one that is common among Eastern Orthodoxy,

“Limited atonement” is a term that is used to summarize what the Bible teaches about the purpose

In Dante’s Purgatory and Augustine’s The Confessions the theme of evil is brought up in different ways. Both believe that all humans are evil or fall short of God. However, their works differ in the way that the theme of evil drives the plot throughout the book and how they write their journeys.

The Catholic Sacrament of Reconciliation is a foundation of the Catholic faith and of Christ’s teaching on earth, that forgiveness is vital to the ministry of God. This sacrament, however, is not the first occurrence of a forgiveness ritual in history. In fact, forgiveness itself can be found in cultures before Christ came down to earth. Three cultural groups, the Jews, the Taoists, and the Jains each have their own version of an atonement ritual. However great these rituals are, the Catholic ritual of Reconciliation/Penance/Confession is the best atonement ritual, and celebrates one of the central human tenants of forgiveness of wrongdoings.

The word “Atonement” is frequently used in the Old Testament. Nevertheless, in regards to the New Testament, the King James Version of the Bible mentions “Atonement,” only once, which is found in (Rom. 5:11.) Furthermore, other versions, such as, the NRSVA, NIV, ASV and others uses the word “Reconciliation” as an alternative. Perhaps, when one seeks the etymology and the meaning of the word, this phrase simply can be seen as at-one-ment, which can be translated as the state of oneness of two who had been alienated from each other, or reconciled, in other words, two entities, in this case, God and humanity who was separated once, together again. In reality, atonement is reconciliation. Thus, it is used to denote the effect that resulted from the death of Christ on the Cross of Calvary.

Thorsen describes four motifs, which are classically used to describe how the life, death and resurrection of Christ satisfy God’s requirement for justice and bring salvation. While the New Testament does not clearly define atonement, the early Church fathers worked out their understanding, thus counselors are wise to gain a basic understanding to guide our therapeutic approach. The ransom theory or “Christus Victor” (Thorsen, 2010, p. 206) provides an appealing image for those wounded in that a conquering Christ will vanquish the one who caused their suffering. This metaphor may confuse clients for two reasons. First, it places God in the position of the debtor or captive and only one who can pay that debt or rescuer. In freeing humanity from sin, Satan required payment and only a perfect payment would suffice. The metaphor of ransom requires identification of the captor, Satan and goes on to reason that as the kidnapped humanity is freed; Satan takes Jesus as the new captive. However, this metaphor implies a duplicity or trickery on God’s behalf, neither of which are a part of His character as He is unable to be held by Satan. For the counseling client this raises questions of trust and reliability where God is concerned. Second, the power differential rests solely in the hands

The 21st century has had a strong influence on how people understand particular ideas and religion has come to be confusing for some people in the contemporary society. Salvation is one of the most important concepts in the Christian world, but society's condition in the present makes it difficult for individuals to have a complex understanding of this idea. Salvation is basically meant to save the soul from committing sins and from experiencing consequences characteristic to sinners. The fact that Christianity is divided into several branches further bring confusion to the issue, as each branch has a different understanding of the idea of sin and concerning sins that people need to be saved from.

In Christian theology, one of the some basic yet important doctrine is that of atonement. It is believed that Jesus through his death and resurrection saved the souls of humanity and took on the weight of humanity’s sins. However, though believed to have happen, how Jesus was able to accomplish this tremendous and history changing feet is only speculated. There are many theories, call the theories of salvation or atonement, that try to explain how Jesus was able to an achieve all that he did, but each theory has their pros and cons. One such theory is The Penal Substitution Theory. This theory states that Christ took humanities place in receiving punishment for our sins. In Hodge’s Systematic Theology Volume ii he explains

The central place that the cross plays in Christian soteriology does not perpetuates violence in society and in the christian community, but Violence does play a role in salvation. The cross is not only a case of celestial equity; it is a delineation of God 's affection that requires a human response. This paper is about how different models for atonement (what is accomplished on the cross) affect our understanding of human justice, particularly with regard to the punishment of crimes. Nonviolent elucidations of the atonement go against a large portion of the strands of reparation philosophy found in contemporary American churches. That is, in most American particularly reformed and outreaching evangelical assemblies, expiation has regularly been dealt with as synonymous with corrective substitution. The story of reparation told in these pulpits concentrates less on Jesus ' energy to free individuals from the stranglehold of corrupt frameworks and all the more on the route in which the cross puts an end to lawful blame and the outcomes of that blame before God. In its most restrictive and reductive details, punitive substitution thinks about all transgression as something like the transgressing against of God 's law. Damaging God 's law obliges compensation something that simple mortals can 't give a vast God. Hence, in God 's unending affection and kindness, the everlasting word incarnates as the man Jesus of Nazareth and, at the cross, persists through capital punishment

What is the Atonement? The word atonement isn 't used as much in the local, contemporary church as it once was in the Early Church. The Atonement is the perfect sacrifice that Jesus Christ made to help mankind defeat sin and death. Jesus’s atoning sacrifice took place in the Garden of Gethsemane and on the cross at Calvary. He was the ransom for all of mankind, taking the very sinful nature of humanity onto Himself, and dying on behalf of man. It is the expression of the love that God the Father and Jesus Christ has for His children, shown in a way that can never be repaid. Without this expression of love and sacrifice, the Christian faith would be as it was in the Old Testament, led by The Law. But the unexplainable love of God paved a

Anselm developed this theory in Cur Deus Homo, summarised by Brian Davies, ‘in brief, only someone who is both God and man can save us because, while it is human beings who owe recompense to God for sin, it is only God who has the power and ability to make such recompense’. These images align themselves with the sacrifices made in the old testament, Jesus is the ultimate sacrifice for sin. This understanding of atonement fits the transformative mission of the church because it can provide a personal feeling of a burden lifted, Trevor Hart affirms this idea, ‘thus the atoning thing here has an irreducibly moral dimension: it is the offering of a perfect reciprocal holiness from the human side of the covenant relation, a fulfilment of the demand to ‘be holy, for I am holy’. The testimony of Darrell Tunningly can bear witness to the successful missional use of this model of atonement: ‘[sic] God reminding him, you’re not that way anymore’, The language he uses to describe his transformation, whether deliberate or not matches up to an understanding of God’s sacrifice and the transformative nature of understanding that sacrifice. Robert Jenson analyses the ‘Anselmian theory of atonement’, and provides a strength which suits the mission of the church: ‘God accomplishes by averting a regime of

The first concept I will discuss is forgiveness. Forgiveness is an important part of the doctrine of Christianity and is mentioned many times in the Bible. The Biblical principle is that God forgave our wrongs and so we are to follow the example and forgive each other. Jesus forgave sins, Matthew 9v2 (NIV Bible) is an account of how forgiveness of sin healed a man of paralysis. Even if you don’t believe that Jesus actually physically healed the man, it is a beautiful story of how unforgiveness can paralyse a person and render them unable to move in a certain way (Pritchard, 2005). Personally, I have found that forgiveness came from understanding (Journal Entry 1). I was able to forgive my mother for her many (in my immature eyes) faults.

One of the single most difficult emotions and behaviors of life for most human being is the act of forgiveness. To forgive someone who has offended you and the pain it causes in your life by their offense requires more than we are humanly possible to do alone. To truly forgive and heal can only be done with the power of Jesus. Jesus taught to forgive those that hurt us so that our heavenly would forgive us as well. This paper will evaluate the case study of forgiveness. In examining the teachings of Jesus, we can learn how to work through the problem from two sides; the side of being offended and the side of causing the offense, to reach a place of biblical forgiveness through way Jesus would respond.