Introduction
About two thousand years ago, Jesus Christ died for all humanity’s sins. It is called the crucifixion of Jesus, by which he produces the atonement for the whole of humankind. Despite the fact of this event and the clarity of its consequences, there are many theories and interpretations of the meaning of the atonement. First of all, the objective theory or theory of satisfaction of Anselm of Canterbury. Secondly, the subjective one of Peter Abelard, Anselm’s young contemporary. Finally, the classic or dynamic interpretation is the primary one and is described in the Patristic literature. These approaches have some differences from each other, as well as their strengths and weaknesses.
Main body
Described approaches have crucial distinctions that are important for believers because it is about their posthumous existence. This theory “has become commonplace in English-language theology as a term for “a way of understanding the work of Christ’” (McGrath, 2016). To begin, they differ from each other in how they accent the influence of the atonement and Jesus Christ’s sacrifice. Anselm of Canterbury, the founder of the objective theory of atonement, underlines that Christ’s crucifixion has the foremost objective nature and influence. He saw a God as The Great King and people as his subordinates and citizens of His kingdom. Sins against God are so severe that a man cannot redeem them; only God can do this, but only by becoming a man, for He has no sin as a God. God Himself atoned for humanity’s sins and gave us a chance to attain salvation.
Peter Abelard’s theory of atonement in diametrically other way interprets this issue. He sees Christ’s sacrifice as an act that aims to awaken the love in people’s hearts to God. That is, crucifixion has a moral influence, and objectivity is not as critical as it. “The concept of “atonement is widely used to refer to the transformation of the human situation through Christ” (McGrath, 2017). However, it is necessary to admit that Abelard did not radically reduce the atonement to a subjective dimension, but his texts came down to modern times that way. The classic theory of atonement is the primary one. The main idea is about Christus Victor, Christ as a victor over Satan that subjugated a man. Jesus, as second Adam, gave a ransom for the atonement to God or Satan; this detail varies. This point of view differs from objective and subjective because it looks at the issue in another dimension; it interprets the atonement as a ransom and Christ as a victor over cosmic forces.
These described theories have their strengths and weaknesses, just like any other. They do not consider each other, and this is their main common weakness because they are limited by their interpretations whenever they may be only one aspect or side or dimension of the issue. When it comes to strengths, the main point of each approach is that it claims. Moral or subjective influences are as important and necessary as objective or ontological ones, and Christus Victor is a powerful and fulfilling image in a mythological and archetypal sense. Chan (2014) notes, “The ontological status of Christ is presupposed, but the question in the foreground is his work as Savior” (p. 91). Therefore, the most vital point of these theories is that they focus on the work of Christ as Savior.
Conclusion
To conclude, three theories of atonement were described and discussed. First of all, the objective approach of Anselm of Canterbury, who saw a God as The Great King. Secondly, the subjective one of Peter Abelard, who looked at the issue from a moral, inner point of view. Thirdly, the classic theory interprets Christ as a victor over cosmic forces and the one who gave the ransom for the atonement. Each of these approaches has strengths in what it claims and weaknesses in what it fails to take into account, and they are all necessary to see the complete picture of the problem.
References
McGrath, A. (2017). Christian Theology. An introduction. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
Chan, S. (2014). Grassroots Asian Theology. Thinking the Faith from the Ground Up. IVP Academic, Downers Grove Illinois.