| Part ofa series on |
| Salvation in Christianity |
|---|
 |
| General concepts |
| Particular concepts |
| Punishment |
| Reward |
InChristianity,salvation (also called deliverance orredemption) is the saving of human beings from sin and its consequences[a]—which include death and separation fromGod—byChrist's death andresurrection,[1] and thejustification entailed by this salvation.
The idea of Jesus' death as anatonement for humansin was recorded in theChristian Bible, and was elaborated inPaul's epistles and in theGospels.Paul saw the faithful redeemed by participation in Jesus' death and rising.Early Christians regarded themselves as partaking in anew covenant with God, open to both Jews and Gentiles, through the sacrificial death and subsequentexaltation of Jesus Christ.
Early Christian beliefs of the person and sacrificial role of Jesus in human salvation were further elaborated by theChurch Fathers, medieval writers and modern scholars in various atonement theories, such as theransom theory,Christus Victor theory,recapitulation theory,satisfaction theory,penal substitution theory andmoral influence theory.
Variant views on salvation (soteriology) are among the main fault lines dividing the variousChristian denominations, including conflicting definitions of sin anddepravity (the sinful nature of mankind),justification (God's means of removing the consequences of sin), and atonement (theforgiving or pardoning of sin through the suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus).
Salvation in Christianity, or deliverance or redemption, is the "saving [of] human beings from death and separation from God" byChrist's death and resurrection.[web 1][a][b][c]
Christian salvation not only concerns the atonement itself, but also the question of how one partakes of this salvation, by faith, baptism, or obedience; and the question of whether this salvation is individual[2][3] oruniversal.[2][4] It further involves questions regarding the afterlife, e.g. "heaven,hell,purgatory,soul sleep, andannihilation."[2] The fault lines between the various denominations include conflicting definitions of sin, justification, and atonement.
In the West (differentiating from Eastern Orthodoxy) Christianhamartiology describes sin as an act of offence against God by despising hispersons andChristian biblical law, and by injuring others.[5] It is anevil human act, which violates therational nature of man, as well asGod's nature and hiseternal law. According to the classical definition ofAugustine of Hippo, sin is "a word, deed, or desire in opposition to the eternal law of God".[6]
Christian tradition has explained sin as a fundamental aspect of human existence, brought about byoriginal sin—also calledancestral sin,[d] thefall of man stemming fromAdam's rebellion inEden by eating theforbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.[7] Paul espouses it in Romans 5:12–19,[8] and Augustine of Hippo popularized his interpretation of it in theWest, developing it into a notion of "hereditary sin," arguing that God holds all the descendants ofAdam and Eve accountable for Adam's sin of rebellion, and as such all people deserveGod's wrath and condemnation—apart from any actual sins they personally commit.[9]
Total depravity (also called "radical corruption" or "pervasive depravity") is a Protestanttheological doctrine derived from the concept of original sin. It is the teaching that, as a consequence of the fall of man, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin as a result of their inherent fallen nature and, apart from theirresistible orprevenientgrace of God, is utterly unable to choose to follow God, refrain from evil, or accept the gift of salvation as it is offered. It is advocated to various degrees by many Protestant confessions of faith and catechisms, including those of someLutheran synods,[10] andCalvinism, teaching irresistible grace.[11][12][13][14]Arminians, such asMethodists, also believe and teach total depravity, but with the distinct difference of teaching prevenient grace.[15][16]
In Christian theology, justification is God's act of removing the guilt and penalty ofsin while at the same time making a sinnerrighteous through Christ's atoning sacrifice. The means of justification is an area of significant difference among Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Protestantism.[web 2][e] Justification is often seen as being the theological fault line that divided the Catholic from the Lutheran, Anglican and Reformed traditions of Protestantism during theReformation.[17][18]
Broadly speaking,Eastern Orthodox andCatholic Christians distinguish between initial justification, which in their view ordinarily occurs atbaptism; and final salvation, accomplished after a lifetime of striving to doGod's will (theosis ordivinization).[19]
Theosis is a transformative process whose aim is likeness to or union with God, as taught by the Eastern Orthodox Church andEastern Catholic Churches. As a process of transformation,theosis is brought about by the effects ofcatharsis (purification of mind and body) andtheoria ('illumination' with the 'vision' of God). According to Eastern Christian teaching,theosis is very much the purpose of human life. It is considered achievable only through asynergy (or cooperation) between human activity and God's uncreated energies (or operations).[20][21] The synonymous termdivinization is the transforming effect ofdivine grace,[22] theSpirit of God, or the atonement of Christ.Theosis anddivinization are distinguished fromsanctification, "being made holy," which can also apply to objects;[23] and fromapotheosis, also "divinization,"lit. 'making divine').
Catholics believe faith which is active in charity and good works (fides caritate formata) can justify, or remove the burden of guilt in sin, from man. Forgiveness of sin exists and is natural, but justification can be lost by mortal sin.[24][web 3]
In the Protestant doctrine, sin is merely "covered" and righteousness imputed. In Lutheranism, Anglicanism and Reformed Christianity, righteousness from God is viewed as being credited to the sinner's account throughfaith alone, withoutworks.[18] Protestants believe faith without works can justify man because Christ died for sinners, but anyone who truly has faith will produce good works as a product of faith, as a good tree produces good fruit. For Lutherans, justification can be lost with the loss of faith or mortal sin.[24][web 3][25][26]
| Part ofa series on |
| Atonement in Christianity |
|---|
.JPG) |
Theories
|
| Ransom (Patristic) |
| Christus Victor (20th century) |
Recapitulation
|
| Satisfaction (Scholastic / Anselmian) |
| Penal substitution (Scholastic / Reformed / Arminian) |
Governmental
|
| Moral influence (Mixed) |
| Moral example (Socinian) |
| Types |
| Limited (Scholastic / Reformed) |
| Unlimited (Amyraldism / Arminianism / Protestantism) |
| See also |
| Christian universalism |
The word "atonement" often is used in theOld Testament to translate theHebrew wordskippur[f] andkippurim[g], which mean "propitiation" or "expiation";[web 4] the English wordatonement is derived from the original meaning of "at-one-ment" (i.e., being "at one" or in harmony, with someone).[27] According toCollins English Dictionary,atonement is used to describe the saving work that God granted (through Christ) to reconcile the world to himself, and also of the state of a personhaving been reconciled to God.[28][29] According toThe Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, atonement in Christian theology is "man's reconciliation with God through the sacrificial death of Christ."[30]
Many Christians believe inunlimited atonement; however, some Christians teachlimited atonement to those who arepredestined unto salvation, as its primary benefits are not given to all of mankind but rather to believers only.[web 5]
A number of metaphors (and Old Testament terms) and references have been used in New Testament writings to understand the person[web 6][31][h] and death of Jesus.[32][33] Starting in the 2nd century AD, various understandings of atonement have been put forth to explain the death and resurrection of Jesus, as well as the metaphors applied by the New Testament to understand his death. Over the centuries, Christians have held different ideas regarding how Jesus saves people, with different views still existing within various Christian denominations. According to the biblical scholar C. Marvin Pate, "...there are three aspects to Christ's atonement according to the early Church: vicarious atonement [substitutionary atonement],[i] the eschatological defeat of Satan [Christ the Victor], and the imitation of Christ [participation in Jesus' death and resurrection]."[35] Pate further notes that these three aspects were intertwined in the earliest Christian writings but that this intertwining was lost since the Patristic times.[36] Because of the influence ofGustaf Aulén's 1931Christus Victor study, the various theories or paradigms of atonement which developed after the New Testament writings are often grouped under the "classic paradigm," the "objective paradigm," and the "subjective paradigm".[37][38][39][j]
In the Hebrew writings, God is absolutely righteous, and only pure and sinless persons can approach him.[30] Reconciliation is achieved by an act of God, namely by his appointment of the sacrificial system,[k] or, in the prophetic view, "by the future Divine gift of a new covenant to replace the old covenant which sinful Israel has broken."[30] The Old Testament describes three types of vicarious atonement which result in purity or sinlessness: thePaschal Lamb;[41] "thesacrificial system as a whole," with theDay of Atonement as the most essential element;[41][30] and the idea of thesuffering servant (Isaiah 42:1–9, 49:1–6, 50:4–11, 52:13–53:12),[41][web 7] "the action of a Divinely sentServant of the Lord who was 'wounded for our transgressions' and 'bear the sin of many'."[30] TheOld Testament Apocrypha adds a fourth idea, namely the righteous martyr (2 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Wisdom 2–5).[41][30]
These traditions of atonement offer only temporary forgiveness,[41] andkorbanot (offerings) could only be used as a means of atoning for the lightest type of sin, that is sins committed in ignorance that the thing was a sin.[l][k] In addition,korbanot have no expiating effect unless the person making the offering sincerely repents of their actions before making the offering, and makes restitution to any person who was harmed by the violation.[30]Marcus Borg notes that animal sacrifice inSecond Temple Judaism was not a "payment for sin", but had a basic meaning as "making something sacred by giving it as a gift to God," and included a shared meal with God. Sacrifices had numerous purposes, namely thanksgiving, petition, purification, and reconciliation. None of them was a "payment or substitution or satisfaction", and even "sacrifices of reconciliation were about restoring the relationship."[web 9]James F. McGrath refers to 4 Maccabees 6,[42] "which presents a martyr praying “Be merciful to your people, and let our punishment suffice for them. Make my blood their purification, and take my life in exchange for theirs” (4 Macc. 6:28-29). Clearly there were ideas that existed in the Judaism of the time that helped make sense of the death of the righteous in terms of atonement."[web 10]
1 Corinthians 15:3–8[43] contains thekerygma of the early Christians:[44]
[3] For I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, [4] and that he was buried, and that he wasraised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, [5] and that heappeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. [6] Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. [7] Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. [8] Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.
In the Jerusalemekklēsia, from which Paul received this creed, the phrase "died for our sins" probably was an apologetic rationale for the death of Jesus as being part of God's plan and purpose, as evidenced in the scriptures.[45] The phrase "died for our sins" was derived fromIsaiah, especially Isaiah 53:1–11,[46] and 4 Maccabees, especially 4 Maccabees 6:28–29.[47][m] "Raised on the third day" is derived from Hosea 6:1–2:[49][50]
Come, let us return to the Lord;
for he has torn us, that he may heal us;
he has struck us down, and he will bind us up.
After two days he will revive us;
on the third day he will raise us up,
that we may live before him."[n]
Soon after his death, Jesus' followers believed he was raised from death by God and exalted to divine status as Lord (Kyrios) "at God's 'right hand',"[53] which "associates him in astonishing ways with God."[54][o] According to Hurtado, powerfulreligious experiences were an indispensable factor in the emergence of this Christ-devotion.[56] Those experiences "seem to have included visions of (and/or ascents to) God's heaven, in which the glorified Christ was seen in an exalted position."[57][p] Those experiences were interpreted in the framework of God's redemptive purposes, as reflected in the scriptures, in a "dynamic interaction between devout, prayerful searching for, and pondering over, scriptural texts and continuing powerful religious experiences."[60] This initiated a "new devotional pattern unprecedented in Jewish monotheism," that is, the worship of Jesus next to God,[61] giving a central place to Jesus because his ministry, and its consequences, had a strong impact on his early followers.[62] Revelations, including those visions, but also inspired and spontaneous utterances, and "charismatic exegesis" of the Jewish scriptures, convinced them that this devotion was commanded by God.[63]
The meaning of thekerygma of 1 Corinthians 15:3–8 for Paul is a matter of debate, and open to multiple interpretations. For Paul, "dying for our sins" gained a deeper significance, providing "a basis for the salvation of sinful Gentiles apart from the Torah."[45]
Traditionally, thiskerygma is interpreted as meaning that Jesus' death was an "atonement" for sin, or a ransom, or a means of propitiating God or expiating God's wrath against humanity because of their sins. With Jesus' death, humanity was freed from this wrath.[64][web 11][q] In the classical Protestant understanding humans partake in this salvation by faith in Jesus Christ; this faith is a grace given by God, and people are justified by God through Jesus Christ and faith in him.[65]
A predecessor researcher for the New Perspective on Paul (in 1963) raised several concerns regarding these interpretations. The traditional interpretation sees Paul's understanding of salvation as involving "an exposition of the individual's relation to God." According toKrister Stendahl, the main concern of Paul's writings on Jesus' role, and salvation by faith, is not the individual conscience of human sinners, and their doubts about being chosen by God or not, but the problem of the inclusion of Gentile (Greek) Torah observers into God's covenant.[66][67][68][69][70][r] Paul draws on several interpretative frames to solve this problem, but most importantly, his own experience and understanding.[71] Thekerygma from 1 Cor.15:3-5 refers to two mythologies: the Greek myth of the noble dead, to which the Maccabean notion of martyrdom and dying for ones people is related;[m] and the Jewish myth of the persecuted sage orrighteous man, in particular the "story of the child ofwisdom."[72][73] For Paul, the notion of 'dying for' refers to this martyrdom and persecution.[74][k] According toBurton Mack, 'Dying for our sins' refers to the problem of Gentile Torah-observers, who, despite their faithfulness, cannot fully observe commandments, including circumcision, and are therefore 'sinners', excluded from God's covenant.[75] Jesus' death and resurrection solved this problem of the exclusion of the Gentiles from God's covenant, as indicated by Romans 3:21–26.[76]
According toE.P. Sanders, who initiated theNew Perspective on Paul, Paul saw the faithful redeemed by participation in Jesus' death and rising. But "Jesus' death substituted for that of others and thereby freed believers from sin and guilt," a metaphor derived from "ancientsacrificial theology,"[web 13][k] the essence of Paul's writing is not in the "legal terms" regarding the expiation of sin, but the act of "participation in Christ throughdying and rising with him."[77][s] According to Sanders, "those who are baptized into Christ are baptized into his death, and thus they escape the power of sin [...] he died so that the believers may die with him and consequently live with him."[web 13] James F. McGrath notes that Paul "prefers to use the language of participation. One died for all, so that all died (2 Corinthians 5:14).[78] This is not only different fromsubstitution, it is the opposite of it."[web 10] By this participation in Christ's death and rising, "one receives forgiveness for past offences, is liberated from the powers of sin, and receives the Spirit."[79] Paul insists that salvation is received by the grace of God; according to Sanders, this insistence is in line with Judaism ofc. 200 BCE until 200 CE, which saw God's covenant with Israel as an act of grace of God. Observance of the Law is needed to maintain the covenant, but the covenant is not earned by observing the Law, but by the grace of God.[web 16]
Several passages from Paul, such as Romans 3:25,[t] are traditionally interpreted as meaning that humanity is saved by faithin Christ. According toRichard B. Hays,[82] who initiated the "Pistis Christou debate,"[83][u] a different reading of these passages is also possible.[84][76][85][web 12] The phrasepistis Christou can be translated as 'faith in Christ', that is, salvation by believing in Christ, the traditional interpretation; or as 'faithfulness of Christ', that is, belief "through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ."[86][v][web 12] In this view, according to Cobb, Jesus' life and death was not seen by Paul as an atonement, but as a means to participate in faithfulness.[web 12] In this interpretation, Romans 3:21–26 states that Jesus was faithful, even to the cost of death, and justified by God for this faithfulness.[76] Those who participate in this faithfulness are equally justified by God, both Jews and Gentiles.[76][web 12][w] While this view has found support by a range of scholars, it has also been questioned and criticized.[83]
In the Gospels, Jesus is portrayed as calling forrepentance from sin, and saying that God wants mercy rather than sacrifices (Matthew 9:13). Yet, he is also portrayed as "giving His life [as] a ransom for many" and applying the "suffering servant" passage ofIsaiah 53 to himself (Luke 22:37). The Gospel of John portrays him as the sacrificialLamb of God, and compares his death to the sacrifice of thePassover Lamb atPesach.[30]
Christians assert that Jesus was predicted by Isaiah, as attested in Luke 4:16–22,[87] where Jesus is portrayed as saying that the prophecies in Isaiah were about him.[x] The New Testament explicitly quotes from Isaiah 53[88] in Matthew 8:16–18[89] to indicate that Jesus is the fulfillment of these prophecies.
The classic paradigm entails the traditional understandings of the earlyChurch Fathers,[37][38] who developed the themes found in the New Testament.[30]
The ransom theory of atonement says that Christ liberated humanity from slavery to sin andSatan, and thus death, by giving his own life as aransomsacrifice to Satan, swapping the life of the perfect (Jesus), for the lives of the imperfect (other humans). It entails the idea that God deceived the devil,[90] and that Satan, or death, had "legitimate rights"[90] over sinfulsouls in theafterlife, due to the fall of man andinherited sin. During the first millennium AD, the ransom theory of atonement was the dominant metaphor for atonement, both in eastern and western Christianity, until it was replaced in the west byAnselm's satisfaction theory of atonement.[91]
In one version of the idea of deception, Satan attempted to take Jesus' soul after he had died, but in doing so over-extended his authority, as Jesus had never sinned. As a consequence, Satan lost his authority completely, and all humanity gained freedom. In another version, God entered into a deal with Satan, offering to trade Jesus' soul in exchange for the souls of all people, but after the trade, God raised Jesus from the dead and left Satan with nothing. Other versions held that Jesus'divinity was masked by his human form, so Satan tried to take Jesus' soul without realizing that his divinity would destroy Satan's power. Another idea is that Jesus came to teach how not to sin and Satan, in anger with this, tried to take his soul.[citation needed]
The ransom theory was first clearly enunciated byIrenaeus (c. 130 – c. 202),[92] who was an outspoken critic ofGnosticism, but borrowed ideas from their dualistic worldview.[93] In this worldview, mankind is under the power of theDemiurge, a lesser god who created the world. Yet, humans have a spark of the true divine nature within them, which can be liberated bygnosis (knowledge) of this divine spark. This knowledge is revealed by theLogos, "the very mind of the supreme God," who entered the world in the person of Jesus. Nevertheless, the Logos could not simply undo the power of the Demiurge, and had to hide his real identity, appearing in a physical form, thereby misleading the Demiurge, and liberating mankind.[93] In Irenaeus' writings, the Demiurge is replaced by the devil.[93]
Origen (184–253) introduced the idea that the devil held legitimate rights over humans, who were bought free by the blood of Christ.[94] He also introduced the notion that the Devil was deceived in thinking that he could master the human soul.[95]
Gustaf Aulén reinterpreted the ransom theory in his studyChristus Victor (1931),[96] calling it theChristus Victor doctrine, arguing that Christ's death was not a payment to the Devil, but defeated the powers of evil, particularlySatan, which had held mankind in their dominion.[97] According to Pugh, "Ever since [Aulén's] time, we call these patristic ideas theChristus Victor way of seeing the cross."[98]
The recapitulation view, first comprehensively expressed byIrenaeus,[99] went "hand-in-hand" with the ransom theory.[98] It says that Christ succeeds whereAdamfailed,[100] undoing the wrong that Adam did and, because of his union with humanity, leads humanity on toeternal life, includingmoral perfection.[101]Theosis ("divinisation") is a "corollary" of the recapitulation.[102]
In the 11th century,Anselm of Canterbury rejected the ransom view and proposed thesatisfaction theory of atonement. He allegedly depicted God as afeudal lord[103] whose honor had been offended by the sins of mankind. In this view, people needed salvation from thedivine punishment that these offences would bring, since nothing they could do could repay the honor debt. Anselm held that Christ had infinitely honored God through his life and death and that Christ could repay what humanity owed God, thus satisfying the offence to God's honor and doing away with the need for punishment. When Anselm proposed the satisfaction view, it was immediately criticized byPeter Abelard.
In the 16th century, theProtestant Reformers reinterpreted Anselm's satisfaction theory of salvation within a legal paradigm. In the legal system, offences required punishment, and no satisfaction could be given to avert this need. They proposed a theory known aspenal substitution, in which Christ takes the penalty of people's sin as their substitute, thus saving people fromGod's wrath against sin. Penal substitution thus presents Jesus saving people from the divine punishment of their past wrongdoings. However, this salvation is not presented as automatic. Rather, a person must havefaith in order to receive this free gift of salvation. In the penal substitution view, salvation is not dependent upon human effort or deeds.[104]
The penal substitution paradigm of salvation is widely held among Protestants, who often consider it central to Christianity. However, it has also been widely critiqued,[105][106][107][108] and is rejected by liberal Christians as un-Biblical, and an offense to the love of God.[web 17][web 18][web 19] According to Richard Rohr, "[t]hese theories are based onretributive justice rather than therestorative justice that the prophets and Jesus taught."[web 20] Advocates of theNew Perspective on Paul also argue that many New Testament epistles ofPaul the Apostle, which used to support the theory of penal substitution, should be interpreted differently.
The "governmental theory of atonement" teaches that Christ suffered for humanity so that God could forgive humans without punishing them while still maintaining divine justice. It is traditionally taught inArminian circles that draw primarily from the works ofHugo Grotius.[citation needed]
The "moral influence theory of atonement" was developed, or most notably propagated, byAbelard (1079–1142),[109][110][y] as an alternative to Anselm's satisfaction theory.[109] Abelard not only "rejected the idea of Jesus' death as a ransom paid to the devil",[109][110] which turned the Devil into a rival god,[110] but also objected to the idea that Jesus' death was a "debt paid to God's honor".[109] 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".[109][113] Abelard focused on changing man's perception of God – not to be seen as offended, harsh, and judgemental, but as loving.[109] 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.[109][114]
During theProtestant Reformation inWestern Christianity, the majority of the Reformers strongly rejected the moral influence view of the atonement in favor ofpenal substitution, a highly forensic modification of the honor-oriented Anselmiansatisfaction model.Fausto Sozzini'sSocinian arm of the Reformation maintained a belief in the moral influence view of the atonement. Socinianism was an early form ofUnitarianism, and the Unitarian Church today maintains a moral influence view of the atonement, as do manyliberal Protestant theologians of the modern age.[115]
During the 18th century, versions of the moral influence view found overwhelming support among German theologians, most notably the Enlightenment philosopherImmanuel Kant.[116] In the 19th and 20th century, it has been popular amongliberal Protestant thinkers in the Anglican, Methodist, Lutheran, and Presbyterian churches, including the Anglican theologianHastings Rashdall. A number of English theological works in the last hundred years have advocated and popularized the moral influence theory of atonement.[117][106]
A strong division has remained since the Reformation between liberal Protestants (who typically adopt a moral influence view) and conservative Protestants (who typically adopt a penal substitutionary view). Both sides believe that their position is taught by the Bible.[117][118][z]
A related theory, the "moral example theory", was developed byFaustus Socinus (1539–1604) in his workDe Jesu Christo servatore (1578). He rejected the idea of "vicarious satisfaction".[aa] According to Socinus, Jesus' death offers us a perfect example of self-sacrificial dedication to God."[114]
A number of theologians see "example" (or "exemplar") theories of the atonement as variations of the moral influence theory.[119]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."[120] Grudem identifies theSocinians as supporters of the example theory.
![[icon]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.wikipedia.org%2fwiki%2fFile%3aWiki_letter_w_cropped.svg) | This sectionneeds expansion. You can help byadding to it.(December 2022) |
Hong Kong Baptist University Department of Religion and Philosophy lecturer Domenic Marbaniang,[121] drawing onFriedrich Nietzsche, sees the Divine voluntary self-giving as the ultimate embracement of humanity in its ultimate act of sin, viz,deicide, or the murder of God, thus canceling sin on the cross.[ab]
Southern Baptist theologianDavid Jeremiah writes that in the "shared atonement" theory the atonement is spoken of as shared by all. To wit, God sustains theUniverse. Therefore, ifJesus was God in human form, when he died, the entirety of humanity died with him, and when he rose from the dead, the entirety of humanity rose with him.[122]
Some theologians maintain that "various biblical understandings of the atonement need not conflict".[web 21]Reformed theologianJ. I. Packer, for example, although he maintains that "penal substitution is the mainstream, historic view of the church and the essential meaning of the Atonement... Yet with penal substitution at the center", he also maintains that "Christus Victor and other Scriptural views of atonement can work together to present a fully orbed picture of Christ's work".[web 21]J. Kenneth Grider, speaking from a governmental theory perspective, says that the governmental theory can incorporate within itself "numerous understandings promoted in the other major Atonement theories", including ransom theory, elements of the "Abelardian 'moral influence' theory", vicarious aspects of the atonement, etc.[web 18]
Anglican theologianOliver Chase Quick described differing theories as being of value, but also denied that any particular theory was fully true, saying, "if we start from the fundamental and cardinal thought of God's act of love in Jesus Christ [...] I think we can reach a reconciling point of view, from which each type of theory is seen to make its essential contribution to the truth, although no one theory, no any number of theories, can be sufficient to express its fullness."[123]
Others say that some models of the atonement naturally exclude each other. James F. McGrath, for example, talking about the atonement, says that "Paul [...] prefers to use the language of participation. One died for all, so that all died (2 Corinthians 5:14). This is not only different from substitution, it is the opposite of it."[web 22] Similarly, Mark M. Mattison, in his articleThe Meaning of the Atonement says, "Substitution implies an "either/or"; participation implies a "both/and.""[web 23] J. Kenneth Grider, quoted above showing the compatibility of various atonement models with the governmental theory, nevertheless also says that both penal substitution and satisfaction atonement theories are incompatible with the governmental theory.[web 18]
Some confusion can occur when discussing the atonement because the terms used sometimes have differing meanings depending on the contexts in which they are used.[124] For example:
According toEastern Christian theology, based upon their understanding of the atonement as put forward by Irenaeusrecapitulation theory, Jesus' death is aransom. This restores the relation with God, who is loving and reaches out to humanity, and offers the possibility oftheosis ordivinization, becoming the kind of humans God wants us to be.
InEastern Orthodoxy andEastern Catholicism salvation is seen as participation in the renewal of human nature itself by way of the eternalWord of God assuming the human nature in its fullness. In contrast toWestern branches of theology, Eastern Orthodox Christians tend to use the word "expiation" with regard to what is accomplished in the sacrificial act. In Orthodox theology, expiation is an act of offering that seeks to change the one making the offering. TheBiblical Greek word which is translated both as "propitiation" and as "expiation" ishilasmos (I John 2:2, 4:10), which means "to make acceptable and enable one to draw close to God". Thus the Orthodox emphasis would be that Christ died, not to appease an angry and vindictive Father or to avert thewrath of God upon sinners, but to defeat and secure the destruction of sin and death, so that those who arefallen and in spiritual bondage may become divinelytransfigured, and therefore fully human, as their Creator intended; that is to say, human creatures become God in hisenergies or operations but not in his essence or identity, conforming to the image of Christ and reacquiring the divine likeness (seetheosis).[134][135]
The Orthodox Church further teaches that a person abides in Christ and makes his salvation sure not only by works of love, but also by his patient suffering of various griefs, illnesses, misfortunes and failures.[web 25][ac][web 25]
The Catholic Church teaches that the death of Jesus on the Cross is a sacrifice that redeems man and reconciles man to God.[web 26] The sacrifice of Jesus is both a "gift from God the Father himself, for the Father handed his Son over to sinners in order to reconcile us with himself" and "the offering of the Son of God made man, who in freedom and love offered his life to his Father through the Holy Spirit in reparation for our disobedience."[web 26]
Catholic theologians often explain salvation by dividing it intojustification—which relates toinfused faith and how justice is satisfied—andsanctification—which relates toinfused charity and our capacity for happiness at thebeatific vision,[136] some emphasizing their intertwinedness more than others.[137][138] Catholic theology also affirms that salvation is communal: the salvation of any one individual is "inseparable from the salvation of others".[139]
A separate usage is "salvation fromPurgatory" (i.e., related to sanctification) rather than salvation from sin and punishment (i.e., related to justification):[140] this usage is rarer but examples are found by Catholics,[141] Protestants,[142]: 304 and academics.[143]
The Catholic view of Christ's redemptive work was set forth formally at the Sixth Session of theCouncil of Trent.[144] The council stated that Jesus merited the grace of justification, which is not only the remission of sin but the infusion of the virtues of faith, hope, and charity into the Christian. A justified Christian is then said to be in the state of grace, which state can be lost by committing amortal sin, entering a state of sin.[145]
The view which prevailed at the Council of Trent has been described as a "combination of the opinions of Anselm and Abelard".[146] Catholic scholars have noted that Abelard did not teach that Jesus was merely a good moral example, but that Christians are truly saved by His sacrifice on the Cross.[146]
The moral transformation of the Christian is not the result of merely following Christ's example and teachings, but a supernatural gift merited by the sacrifice of Jesus, for "by one man's obedience many will be made righteous".[web 26]
While the initial grace of justification is merited solely by the sacrifice of Jesus, the Catholic Church teaches that a justified Christian can merit an "increase" in justification and the attainment of eternal life by cooperating with God's grace.[web 26] The grace of final perseverance preserves a justified Christian in the state of grace until his or her death.[147]
The practical manner of salvation is expounded on by St.Alphonsus Liguori, aDoctor of the Church:
"... to gain Heaven, it is necessary to walk in the straight road that leads to eternal bliss. This road is the observance of the divine commands. Hence, in his preaching, the Baptist exclaimed: "Make straight the way of the Lord." In order to be able to walk always in the way of the Lord, without turning to the right or to the left, it is necessary to adopt the proper means. These means are, first, diffidence in ourselves; secondly, confidence in God; thirdly, resistance to temptations."[148]
— Sermons for all the Sundays in the year, Sermon III. Third Sunday of Advent: On the means necessary for salvation
The Catholic Church shares the Eastern Christian belief indivinization, teaching that "the Son of God became man so that we might become God."[web 27] However, in contrast with the Eastern Orthodox notion of theosis in which the divinized Christian becomes God in his energies or operations, the Catholic Church teaches that the ultimate end of divinization is thebeatific vision, in which the divinized Christian will see God's essence.[web 28]
The Catholic Church does not believe in Christian universalism (i.e., all or most people go to heaven), in double predestination (i.e., some, most, or all people are destined to sin and hell), inFeeneyism (i.e., non-Catholics and excommunicated Catholics cannot be saved), or in how many people will go to heaven or hell (either most or few or some people).[149] But the Church does say that dying in the state of final impenitence—which is refusing to repent of sin at the moment of death, the consequence of which is eternal punishment—leads to hell.[149] The church also says that dying in the state of perfection (being without sin and punishment) leads to heaven,[150] while dying in the state of either original sin (which is not a sin but the lack ofsanctifying grace) or repentant sin (whether mortal or venial sin) lead to purgatory[151]—unless the unbaptized sinful soul receives baptism or the baptized sinful soul receivesanointing of the sick and theApostolic Pardon, in which case, the soul goes to heaven.[152][153]
| If one dies in | Then one goes to | For a duration of |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Final impenitence, with or without original sin | Hell | Eternity |
| 2. Original sin only | Hell | Limbo |
| 3. No original sin, but repentant sin | Purgatory | Temporary before going to heaven (see #6) |
| 4. No sin at all, but temporary punishment | Purgatory | Temporary before going to heaven (see #6) |
| 5. No sin at all and no punishment at all | Heaven | Eternity |
Salvation in Catholic theology is intended for the whole of creation, not just for angels and people.[154] The Universe's salvation—i.e., being freed from evil and filled with all good things—will come at the end of time, as the Universe is unconditionally predestined for deification at theLast Judgment.[155] Only humans and angels' predestination for deification is conditioned, and that on moral behavior, because of their freewill.[156] By deification, all of creation (save for the demons and the damned) will be perfect and happy beyond comprehension[157] because everything will share in God's own perfection and happiness.[155] This deification cannot be obtained, experienced, or foretasted before the Last Judgment because there is nothing in the Universe that is infinitely and supernaturally perfect and happy—only finitely and naturally perfect or happy.[158] Nonetheless, baptism grants a foretaste of eternal life, which is the beginning of deification and a pledge of the Universe's future salvation, viasanctifying grace.[159] Eternal life in heaven entails the deification of the soul and, via theuniversal resurrection at the Last Judgment, the deified soul will be permanently reunited with its body, which itself will be deified.[160] While the deified soul in heaven experiences the beatific vision with its whole self (personality, imagination, intellect, will, conscience, reason, virtue, self-image, relationship with others, etc.),[161] the deified body will also experience the beatific vision with its whole self (all five senses, life, activity, presence, movement, appearance, talents, attire, needs, etc.), so that the whole person—body and soul—will be saved, i.e., deified and experience the beatific vision.[162] As part of its deification, the deified body will be like Jesus' own deified resurrected body, which means being endowed with impassibility (immunity to evil, including temptation, sin, demons, inconvenience, error, boredom, fear, suffering, and death), subtility (freedom from the restraint of spacetime, meaning the saint can shapeshift, time travel, control nature, teleport, and have superhuman senses and prowess), agility (obedience to the soul, just as the soul is obedient to God), and clarity (resplendent beauty and thefive crowns).[163] With the Last Judgment, the demons will no longer be allowed to act outside of hell (such as temptation and possession), the Universe will be made immune to evil, evil will no longer be possible, and the Universe will be infinitely greater than the most idyllic paradise conceivable.[156]
| Protestant beliefs about salvation | |||
| This table summarizes the classical views of threeProtestant beliefs about salvation.[164] | |||
| Topic | Calvinism | Lutheranism | Arminianism |
|---|---|---|---|
| Human will | Total depravity:[165] Humanity possesses "free will",[166] but it is in bondage to sin,[167] until it is "transformed".[168] | Total depravity:[165][169][170] Humanity possesses free will in regard to "goods and possessions", but is sinful by nature and unable to contribute to its own salvation.[171][172][173] | Total depravity: Humanity possesses freedom fromnecessity, but not "freedom from sin" unless enabled by "prevenient grace".[174] |
| Election | Unconditional election. | Unconditional election.[165][175] | Conditional election in view of foreseen faith or unbelief.[176] |
| Justification and atonement | Justification by faith alone. Various views regarding the extent of the atonement.[177] | Justification for all men,[178] completed at Christ's death and effective throughfaith alone.[179][180][181][182] | Justification madepossible for all through Christ's death, but only completed uponchoosing faith in Jesus.[183] |
| Conversion | Monergistic,[184] through the means of grace,irresistible. | Monergistic,[185][186] through themeans of grace,resistible.[187] | Synergistic, resistible due to the common grace of free will.[188][189] |
| Perseverance and apostasy | Perseverance of the saints: the eternally elect in Christ will certainly persevere in faith.[190] | Falling away is possible,[191] but God gives gospelassurance.[192][193] | Preservation is conditional upon continued faith in Christ; with the possibility of a finalapostasy.[194] |
InProtestantism, justifying grace is the result of God's initiative without any regard whatsoever to the one initiating the works, and no one can merit the justifying grace of God by performingrituals,good works,asceticism, ormeditation. Broadly speaking,Protestants hold to thefivesolae of theReformation, which declare thatjustification is attained bygrace alone inChrist alone throughfaith alone for theGlory of God alone as told inScripture alone.[195] Magisterial Protestants, such as Lutherans, Anglicans and the Reformed, believe that justification is achieved through God's grace alone, and once justification is secured in the person, good works will be a result of this, allowing good works to often operate as a signifier for salvation (cf.sanctification).[18] Some Protestants, such asLutherans,Anglicans, and theReformed, understand this to mean that God justifies solely by grace, and that works follow as a necessary consequence of justifying grace.[18] Lutheranism holds that salvation can be forfeited with a loss of faith or through mortal sin, in contrast to the Reformed tradition that teaches that believers willpersevere.[25][26] Others, such asMethodists (and other Arminians), believe that justification is by faith alone, but that salvation can be forfeited if it is not accompanied by continued faith, obedience, and the works that naturally follow from it.[196]Anabaptist theology holds to a "faith that works" as being salvific.[197] Those who adhere toFree Grace theology firmly believe that salvation is accomplished byfaith alone without any reference to works whatsoever, including the works that may follow salvation ).
Lutherans believe that Christ, through His death and resurrection, has obtained justification and atonement for all sinners. Lutheran churches believe that this is the central message in theBible upon which the very existence of the churches depends. In Lutheranism, it is a message relevant to people of all races and social levels, of all times and places, for "the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men" (Romans 5:18). All need forgiveness of sins before God, and Scripture proclaims that all have been justified, for "the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men" (Romans 5:18).[web 29]
Lutheranism teaches that individuals receive this free gift of forgiveness and justification not on the basis of their own works, but only through faith (Sola fide):[web 30]
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.
Saving faith is the knowledge of,[198] acceptance of,[199] and trust[200] in the promise of the Gospel.[201] Even faith itself is seen as a gift of God, created in the hearts of Christians[202][203] by the work of the Holy Spirit through the Word[204][205] and Baptism.[206][207] Faith is seen as an instrument that receives the gift of salvation, not something that causes salvation.[208][203] Thus, Lutherans reject the "decision theology" which is common among modernevangelicals, such as Baptists and Methodists.[web 31]
At the time of the justification of an individual, Lutherans teach that the process ofsanctification commences, which is defined as "the Holy Spirit’s work which follows justification through faith and consists of renewing the believer and bringing forth in him works of renewal."[209] In Lutheranism, sanctification has two components, including: "1.) The inner renewal of the Holy Spirit in the Christian, and 2.) the living out of that inner renewal in the Christian’s new life of good works."[209] The Lutheran Confessions hold that it is "necessary to exhort people to Christian discipline and good works, and to remind them how necessary it is that they exercise themselves in good words as an evidence of their faith and their gratitude toward God".[209] For Christians, "good works are necessary fruits of faith in the life of a Christian and that they proceed from a renewed heart that is thankful to God for His mercy and love".[209] These good works done by Christians are rewarded by God, with "each one receiving his/her own reward according to his/her labour".[210] Those individuals who commit mortal sin "render themselves subject to divine wrath and eternal death unless, turned again, they are reconciled to God through faith."[25][26]
Reformed Christians (Continental Reformed,Presbyterians,Reformed Anglicans, andCongregationalists) believe in thepredestination of the elect before the foundation of the world in accordance with Reformed (Calvinist) theology. All of the elect necessarilypersevere in faith because God keeps them from falling away. Calvinists understand the doctrines of salvation to include thefive points of Calvinism, typically arranged in English to form theacrostic "TULIP".[ad]
Arminian soteriology—held by Christian denominations such as theGeneral Baptists (Freewill Baptists) and theMethodist Church—is based on the theological ideas of the Dutch Reformed theologianJacobus Arminius (1560–1609). Like Calvinists, Arminians agree that all people are born sinful and are in need of salvation. Classical Arminians emphasize that God's free grace (orprevenient grace) enables humans to freely respond to or to reject the salvation offered through Christ. Classical Arminians believe that a person's saving relationship with Christ isconditional upon faith, and thus, a person can sever his or her saving relationship with Christ through persistent unbelief. The relationship of "the believer to Christ is never a static relationship existing as the irrevocable consequence of a past decision, act, or experience."[ae]
TheFive Articles of Remonstrance that Arminius's followers formulated in 1610 state the beliefs regarding (I) conditional election, (II) unlimited atonement, (III) total depravity, (IV) total depravity and resistible grace, and (V) possibility of apostasy. However, the fifth article did not completely deny the perseverance of the saints; Arminius said that "I never taught that a true believer can… fall away from the faith… yet I will not conceal, that there are passages of Scripture which seem to me to wear this aspect; and those answers to them which I have been permitted to see, are not of such a kind as to approve themselves on all points to my understanding."[213] Further, the text of the Articles of Remonstrance says that no believer can be plucked from Christ's hand, and the matter of falling away, "loss of salvation", required further study before it could be taught with any certainty.
Methodism falls squarely in the tradition ofsubstitutionary atonement, though it is linked with Christus Victor andmoral influence theories.[214] Methodism also emphasizes a participatory nature in atonement, in which the Methodist believer spiritually dies with Christ as He dies for humanity.[214]
Methodism affirms the doctrine of justification by faith, but inWesleyan theology, justification refers to "pardon, the forgiveness of sins", rather than "being made actually just and righteous", which Methodists believe is accomplished throughsanctification.[af][web 35]John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Churches, taught that the keeping of the moral law contained in theTen Commandments,[215] as well as engaging in theworks of piety and theworks of mercy, were "indispensable for our sanctification".[web 36]
Methodist soteriology emphasizes the importance of the pursuit of holiness in salvation,[216] a concept best summarized in a quote by Methodist evangelistPhoebe Palmer who stated that "justification would have ended with me had I refused to be holy."[217] Thus, for Methodists, "true faith...cannot subsist without works".[web 36]
While "faith is essential for a meaningful relationship with God, our relationship with God also takes shape through our care for people, the community, and creation itself."[218] Methodism, inclusive of theholiness movement, thus teaches that "justification [is made] conditional on obedience and progress in sanctification",[217] emphasizing "a deep reliance upon Christ not only in coming to faith, but in remaining in the faith."[web 37]
Anabaptist theology emphasizes a "faith that works"; Anabaptists teach that "justification [began] a dynamic process by which the believer partook of the nature of Christ and was so enabled to live increasingly like Jesus."[219][220][197]
Anabaptist denominations such as theMennonites teach:[221]
...that we are saved by grace through faith. But we go on to say that true faith must lead to repentance and the beginning of a transformed life. Salvation has not become a full reality until our genuine faith expresses itself in a Christ-centered life. Mennonites tend to agree that salvation is not merely a personal relationship with God, but a communal relationship with each other. We experience salvation by living it out together.[221]
Obedience toJesus and a careful keeping of theTen Commandments, in addition to loving one another and being at peace with others, are seen as "earmarks of the saved".[222]
Holiness Pentecostalism maintains that God extends salvation through theNew Birth and holds that "If a person walks within the framework of God’s Word, he will be kept by the power of God."[223] Those who experience the New Birth should seek for thesecond work of grace, entire sanctification.[223]
Oneness Pentecostals believe that salvation is attained through faith in Jesus Christ. According to their theology, this saving faith is more than just mental assent, intellectual acceptance, or verbal profession, but must include obedience, demonstrated by repentance,water baptism in Jesus' name, and the baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence ofspeaking in tongues.[224][225]
Churches of Christ are strongly anti-Calvinist in their understanding of salvation, and generally present conversion as "obedience to the proclaimed facts of the gospel rather than as the result of an emotional, Spirit-initiated conversion."[226] Some churches of Christ hold the view that humans of accountable age are lost because of their sins.[227] These lost souls can be redeemed because Jesus Christ, the Son of God, offered himself as the atoning sacrifice.[227] Children too young to understand right from wrong, and make a conscious choice between the two, are believed to be innocent of sin.[227][228] The age when this occurs is generally believed to be around 13.[228]
Beginning in the 1960s, many preachers began placing more emphasis on the role of grace in salvation, instead of focusing exclusively implementing all of the New Testament commands and examples.[229]
The Churches of Christ argue that since faith and repentance are necessary, and that the cleansing of sins is by the blood of Christ through the grace of God, baptism is not an inherently redeeming ritual.[230][231][232] One author describes the relationship between faith and baptism this way, "Faith is thereason why a person is a child of God;baptism is thetime at which one is incorporated into Christ and so becomes a child of God" (italics are in the source).[233] Baptism is understood as a confessional expression of faith and repentance,[233] rather than a "work" that earns salvation.[233]
There are some who believe in theFree Grace Theology. They believe people use their free will to receive imputed righteousness and eternal life in Heaven, simply by Grace through faith alone on The Lord Jesus Christ. Once saved, the individual will always be saved as they believe God promised them eternal life the moment they believe on Him. It's important to note they don't believe a person is saved by good works, neither do they teach good works would automatically follow salvation as any kind of evidence. After salvation, a Christian is instructed to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ to the lost and live a good life as a good testimony for Jesus Christ and to please God the Father. The belief here is that doing good works will earn a believer Heavenly treasures and Earthly blessings, whereas committing sins and bad works will cause earthly punishments from God, chastisement from a loving Father, towards his children in the faith. It's worth a note they believe a person cannot lose their salvation at any time.[234]
Christian universalism is the doctrine or belief that all people will ultimately be reconciled to God.[2][4] The appeal of the idea of universal salvation may be related to the perception of aproblem of Hell, standing opposed to ideas such as endless conscious torment in Hell, but may also include a period of finite punishment similar to a state ofpurgatory.[235] Believers in universal reconciliation may support the view that while there may be a real "Hell" of some kind, it is neither a place of endless suffering nor a place where the spirits of human beings are ultimately 'annihilated' after enduring the just amount ofdivine retribution.[235]
According to the doctrine ofThe New Church, as explained byEmanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772), there is no such thing assubstitutionary atonement as is generally understood. Swedenborg's account of atonement has much in common with the Christus Victor doctrine, which refers to a Christian understanding of the Atonement which views Christ's death as the means by which the powers of evil, which held humanity under their dominion, were defeated.[97] It is a model of the atonement that is dated to theChurch Fathers,[236] and it, along with the relatedransom theory, was the dominant theory of the atonement for a thousand years.
According toJehovah's Witnesses, atonement for sins comes only through the life, ministry, and death of Jesus Christ. They believe Jesus was the "second Adam", being the pre-existent and sinlessSon of God who became the humanMessiah of Israel, and that he came to undo Adamic sin.[237][238][239][web 38]
Witnesses believe that the sentence of death given to Adam and subsequently his offspring by God required an equal substitute orransom sacrifice of a perfect man. They believe that salvation is possible only through Jesus' ransom sacrifice,[240] and that individuals cannot be reconciled to God until they repent of their sins, and then call on the name of God through Jesus.[241] Salvation is described as a free gift from God, but is said to be unattainable without obedience toChrist as King andgood works, such asbaptism,confession of sins,evangelizing, andpromoting God's Kingdom, that are prompted by faith. According to their teaching, the works prove faith is genuine.[242][243] "Preaching the good news" is said to be one of the works necessary for salvation, both of those who preach and those to whom they preach.[244] They believe that people in the "last days" can be "saved" by identifying Jehovah's Witnesses asGod's theocratic organization, and by serving God as a part of it.[245]
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that the atonement of Jesus Christ is infinite and the central principle that enables the "plan of redemption" which is often also called the "plan of salvation". In theBook of Mormon the prophetAmulek teaches that the "great and last sacrifice will be the Son of God, yea, infinite and eternal. And thus he shall bring salvation to all those who shall believe on his name"[web 39] There are two parts of salvation, conditional and unconditional. Unconditional salvation means that the atonement of Jesus Christ redeems all humanity from the chains of death and they are resurrected to their perfect frames.[web 40] Conditional salvation of the righteous comes by grace coupled with strict obedience to Gospel principles, in which those who have upheld the highest standards and are committed to thecovenants andordinances of God, will inherit thehighest heaven. There is no need for infant baptism. Christ's atonement completely resolved the consequence from the fall of Adam ofspiritual death for infants, young children and those of innocent mental capacity who die before an age of self-accountability, hence all these are resurrected to eternal life in the resurrection. However, baptism is required of those who are deemed by God to be accountable for their actions (Moroni 8:10–22)
The doctrine of justification by faith alone was the central teaching of the Lutheran Reformation and is fully accepted by Anglicans.
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)"Total Depravity – Lutherans and Calvinists agree." Yes this is correct. Both agree on the devastating nature of the fall and that man by nature has no power to aid in his conversions...and that election to salvation is by grace. In Lutheranism the German term for election isGnadenwahl, election by grace--there is no other kind.
[P]eople by nature are dead in their transgressions and sin and therefore have no ability to decide of Christ (Ephesians 2:1, 5). We do not choose Christ, rather he chose us (John 15:16) We believe that human beings are purely passive in conversion.
Arminians accepts divine election, [but] they believe it is conditional.
Romans 3:23-24, 5:9, 18 are other passages that lead us to say that it is most appropriate and accurate to say that universal justification is a finished fact. God has forgiven the sins of the whole world whether people believe it or not. He has done more than "made forgiveness possible." All this is for the sake of the perfect substitutionary work of Jesus Christ.
We believe that God has justified all sinners, that is, he has declared them righteous for the sake of Christ. This is the central message of Scripture upon which the very existence of the church depends. It is a message relevant to people of all times and places, of all races and social levels, for "the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men" (Romans 5:18]). All need forgiveness of sins before God, and Scripture proclaims that all have been justified, for "the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men" (Romans 5:18). We believe that individuals receive this free gift of forgiveness not on the basis of their own works, but only through faith (Ephesians 2:8–9). ... On the other hand, although Jesus died for all, Scripture says that "whoever does not believe will be condemned" (Mark 16:16). Unbelievers forfeit the forgiveness won for them by Christ (John 8:24).
Christ paid for all our sins. God the Father has therefore forgiven them. But to benefit from this verdict we need to hear about it and trust in it. If I deposit money in the bank for you, to benefit from it you need to hear about it and use it. Christ has paid for your sins, but to benefit from it you need to hear about it and believe in it. We need to have faith but we should not think of faith as our contribution. It is a gift of God which the Holy Spirit works in us.
Faith is a condition of justification
In full accord with Scripture the Lutheran Confessions teach monergism. "In this manner, too, the Holy Scriptures ascribe conversion, faith in Christ, regeneration, renewal and all the belongs to their efficacious beginning and completion, not to the human powers of the natural free will, neither entirely, nor half, nor in any, even the least or most inconsiderable part, but in solidum, that is, entirely, solely, to the divine working and the Holy Ghost" (Trigl. 891, F.C., Sol. Decl., II, 25).
Arminian synergism" refers to "evangelical synergism, which affirms the prevenience of grace.
[Arminius]' evangelical synergism reserves all the power, ability and efficacy in salvation to grace, but allows humans the God-granted ability to resist or not resist it. The only "contribution" humans make is nonresistance to grace.
People can fall from faith. The Bible warns, "If you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don't fall" (1 Corinthians 10:12). Some among the Galatians had believed for a while, but had fallen into soul-destroying error. Paul warned them, "You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace" (Galatians 5:4). In his explanation of the parable of the sower, Jesus says, "Those on the rock are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in time of testing they fall away" (Luke 8:13). According to Jesus a person can believe for a while and then fall away. While they believed they possessed eternal salvation, but when they fell from faith they lost God's gracious gift.
We cannot contribute one speck to our salvation, but by our own arrogance or carelessness we can throw it away. Therefore, Scripture urges us repeatedly to fight the good fight of faith (Ephesians 6 and 2 Timothy 4 for example). My sins threaten and weaken my faith, but the Spirit through the gospel in word and sacraments strengthens and preserves my faith. That's why Lutherans typically speak of God's preservation of faith and not the perseverance of the saints. The key isnot our perseverance but the Spirit's preservation.
Many Arminians deny the doctrine of theperseverance of the saints.
They dismissed the Lutheran doctrine of justification, a dead faith as they called it, which was unable to produce Christian love and good works.
(Schaff, Philip (1919).Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical notes. Vol. II. The History of Creeds. New York: Harper & Brothers – via Christian Classics Ethereal Library.
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)This hurtful image of God is largely based on a way of understanding the cross that is known as "Vicarious Atonement", "Penal Substitution", or "Satisfaction-Doctrine"
The forgiveness of sins is proclaimed in the gospel as a ready and complete blessing, won by Christ Jesus. Yet, no one receives the benefits of this gospel message without faith. By faith, the individual receives the forgiveness of sins and eternal life.
Reformed Arminianism's understanding of apostasy veers from the Wesleyan notion that individuals may repeatedly fall from grace by committing individual sins and may be repeatedly restored to a state of grace through penitence.
| Bible (Scriptures) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Foundations | |||||||||
| History (timeline) (spread) |
| ||||||||
| Denominations (list,members) |
| ||||||||
| Theology |
| ||||||||
| Philosophy | |||||||||
| Other features |
| ||||||||
