A Christus Victor AND Penal Substitution View of the Atonement?

Hello fellow spiritual pilgrims,

Just flew back from a two day visit to Whitworth University in Spokane Washington. Twenty years ago I almost entered a 50 mile trail race in Spokane that’s held every fall, but a lingering knee injury kept me out. The race was billed as the most beautiful trail race in the States, and now I can see why. What a beautiful area — especially this time of year! I loved the campus and staff as well. Everyone was friendly, fun and engaging. Thank you Whitworth!

In the two days I was there, I participated in a debate over Open Theism, had dinner with some staff and students discussing faith and politics, gave a talk on “The Myth of a Christian Nation,” taught a fun class on Open Theism and then gave the chapel sermon on Being the Church.

The debate on Open Theism was especially fun and, it turned out, informative for me. At one point my sparring partner (a very nice professor of philosophy named Keith) raised an issue over the atonement, claiming that Open Theology doesn’t do justice to Christ’s work on the cross because God doesn’t foreknow with certainty what particular people will exist in the future and what particular sins they’ll commit. I expressed sincere bewilderment over how that could possibly matter for a God whose love and willingness to forgive is unlimited. The cross is like a blank check, I argued, backed up with unlimited funds and thus more than sufficient to cover every possible sin anyone could ever commit. Where sin did abound, Paul says, grace did much more abound (Romans 5). What more do we need to say? It’s not like God is on a conservative economic plan by which he needs to ensure that Jesus’ blood isn’t “wasted” on sins that aren’t actually committed!

Well, to my surprise, my answer seemed to hit a nerve and the moderator (a professor named Adam) jumped in and pressed me further on my view of the atonement. This then got us talking about the Penal Substitution view of the atonement and my problems with it. Among other things, I don’t think it’s particularly helpful, or biblical, to think that the Father had to vent his wrath against sin on Jesus in order to forgive us. (For other criticisms, see my response to the Penal Substitution view in the “Jesus: Atonement” category of the Q & A section of this web site). We bantered back and forth a bit, but it’s the discussion I had with Adam after the debate that I found especially enlightening.

It turned out that Adam, who had defended the view that Jesus’ work on the cross appeased the Father’s wrath, agreed with me that the Father wasn’t wrathful toward Jesus. It’s just that God’s wrath against sin was expressed by him delivering Christ up to the Powers in our place. Sin was judged and Christ was our substitute — hence, Penal Substitution. Adam informed me that this is basically the view of Karl Barth, expressed in his Church Dogmatics (which I will now certainly have to look into). Well, I replied, if that’s what you mean by the Penal Substitution view of the atonement, consider me a card carrying member!

And notice, this version of Penal Substitution is not only compatible with the Christus Victor view of the atonement (the view that the main thing Jesus did on Calvary was defeat the devil and free us from his oppression): it actually presupposes it. So, without retracting any of my criticism of the view that God needs to vent his wrath against Jesus in order to forgive us, maybe I can now espouse a Christus Victor Penal Substitution view of the atonement.

Thanks Adam for that helpful clarification. And thank you Whitworth for an exceedingly fun couple of days.

Greg

Category:
Tags:
Topics:

Related Reading

Transported

What did Jesus do on the cross that we couldn’t do for ourselves? Jesus stood in our place. God stepped in to bear the consequences of our sin. And in doing so, Christ defeated the powers, in principle, ending the cosmic war. If we will yield to God, he transports us from the kingdom of darkness into the…

Atonement, Christus Victor, & Aslan Pt 2: Who Demands a Kill?

For part 1 of 2, click here. It’s important to notice that it was the wicked Queen, not Aslan, who demands that Edmund be killed in accordance with the Deep Magic of justice. Christian’s have often assumed it is God, not Satan, who demands “a kill” in response to sin. In this view, Jesus offered…

What Changed on the Cross? (podcast)

Greg talks the sin economy and if sin actually threatens God. Episode 473 The Interview: http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_CH_0473.mp3

God’s Aikido Way of Defeating Evil

Greg continues his thoughts on the atonement with this installment highlighting the way God uses the evil intentions and actions of his enemies to bring about good. And because this strategy is based in love, the demons who encountered Christ could not possibly imagine what he was up to. They ended up participating in their…

Penal Substitution View of Atonement: Did God the Father Just Need to Vent?

In this video blog, Greg outlines the penal substitution view of atonement which says that the Father poured out his wrath on Jesus instead of us so that we could be forgiven. This view is very common and you might even be nodding your head in agreement with that description. However, this view creates some…

Cheap Grace and Consumer Christianity

The “cheap grace” Gospel sells well in America. We live in a culture of consumerism that conditions us to habitually look for “the best deal.” We’re more or less trained from birth to live in the question; “How can we get the most for the least?” We think this way about our houses, cars, clothes,…