Ransom theory of atonement

Part of a series on
Atonement in Christianity
Moral influence Recapitulation Substitutionary Ransom Christus Victor Satisfaction Penal substitution Governmental Limited Unlimited
v · d · e

The ransom view of the atonement,^[1] is one of several doctrines in Christian theology related to the meaning and effect of the death of Jesus Christ. The first major theory of the atonement, the ransom theory of atonement originated in the early Church, particularly in the work of Origen. The theory teaches that the death of Christ was a ransom, usually said to have been paid to Satan, in satisfaction of his just claim on the souls of humanity as a result of sin. Christian philosopher Robin Collins summarized it as follows:

Essentially, this theory claimed that Adam and Eve sold humanity over to the Devil at the time of the Fall; hence, justice required that grace pay the Devil a ransom to free us from the Devil's clutches. God, however, tricked the Devil into accepting Christ's death as a ransom, for the Devil did not realize that Christ could not be held in the bonds of death. Once the Devil accepted Christ's death as a ransom, this theory concluded, justice was satisfied and God was able to free us from Satan's grip.^[2]

"Redeeming" in this case literally means "buying back," and the ransoming of war captives from slavery was a common practice in the era. The theory was also based in part on Mark 10:45: "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many"; and 1 Timothy 2:5-6: "For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time". The ransom theory was the main view of atonement through the first thousand years of Christian history, though it was never made a required belief.^[2] There were some who held different positions, however. The commentary on Romans attributed to Pelagius (who was declared a heretic, though for his view of grace, not his view of atonement) gives a description of the atonement which states that a person's sins have "sold them to death," and not to the devil, and that these sins alienate them from God, until Jesus, dying, ransomed people from death.^[3] The orthodox St. Athanasius proposed a theory of the atonement which similarly states that sin leads to death and God warned Adam about this, and so, to remain consistent with Himself must have Jesus die for sins, or have humankind die. This has some similarity to the Satisfaction view, although St. Athanasius emphasized the fact that this death is effective because of our unity with Christ, rather than emphasizing a legal substitution and that when Jesus descended into the Hades he eliminated death with His own death (since no power can hold Jesus's soul in the Hades) .^[4]

St. Anselm, the 11th century Archbishop of Canterbury, argued against the ransom view, saying that Satan, being himself a rebel and outlaw, could never have a just claim against humans.^[2] The Catholic Encyclopedia calls the idea that God must pay the Devil a ransom "certainly startling, if not revolting."^[5] Philosopher and theologian Keith Ward, among others, pointed out that, under the ransom view, not only was God a debtor but a deceiver as well, since God only pretended to pay the debt.

Others, such as Gustaf Aulén, have suggested that the meaning of the Ransom theory should not be taken in terms of a business transaction (who gets paid), but rather understood as a liberation of human beings from the bondage of sin and death. Aulén's book, Christus Victor, maintained that the Early Church view had been mischaracterized, and proposed a reevaluated Ransom Theory as a superior alternative to Satisfaction Theory.

Anselm himself went on to explicate the satisfaction view of atonement.

Today, the ransom view of atonement is not widely accepted in the West, except by some Anabaptist peace churches and a few theologians in the Word of Faith movement. The Eastern Orthodox Church holds a position which is in some ways similar to it. However, the Orthodox do not have a fully dogmatic view of the atonement. They hold that Christ became Incarnate to restore the Image of God in humanity and to defeat death and sin in the flesh. However, while St. Gregory of Nyssa taught a view similar to the Ransom position, others, such as St. Gregory the Theologian, vigorously denied that Christ was a ransom to the devil.^[6] A catechism of the Orthodox Church in America states:

In Orthodox theology generally it can be said that the language of 'payment' and 'ransom' is rather understood as a metaphorical and symbolical way of saying that Christ has done all things necessary to save and redeem mankind enslaved to the devil, sin and death, and under the wrath of God. He 'paid the price, not in some legalistic or juridical or economic meaning. He "paid the price" not to the devil whose rights over man were won by deceit and tyranny. He 'paid the price' not to God the Father in the sense that God delights in His sufferings and received 'satisfaction' from His creatures in Him. He 'paid the price' rather, we might say, to Reality Itself. He 'paid the price' to create the conditions in and through which man might receive the forgiveness of sins and eternal life by dying and rising again in Him to newness of life. (See Romans 5:8 and Galatians 2:4 By dying on the cross and rising from the dead, Jesus Christ cleansed the world from evil and sin. He defeated the devil 'in his own territory' and on 'his own terms.' The 'wages of sin is death'.Romans 6:23 So the Son of God became man and took upon Himself the sins of the world and died a voluntary death. By His sinless and innocent death accomplished entirely by His free will—and not by physical, moral, or juridical necessity—He made death to die and to become itself the source and the way into life eternal."^[7]

See also

• Christus Victor
• Atonement (satisfaction view)

References

1. ^ "The Ransom Theory". ReligiousTolerance.org. http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_atone7.htm. Retrieved 2006-11-20. 
2. ^ ^{a b c} Collins, Robin. "Understanding Atonement: A New and Orthodox Theory". http://home.messiah.edu/~rcollins/Philosophical%20Theology/Atonement/AT7.HTM. 
3. ^ Pelagius's Commentary on St Paul's Epistle to the Romans, Theodore De Bruyn tr., Clarendon Paperbacks, 1993, 2002
4. ^ On the Incarnation, St. Athanasius, http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204.vii.ii.html
5. ^ "The Doctrine of Atonement". The Catholic Encyclopedia. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02055a.htm. 
6. ^ John S. Romanides, The Ancestral Sin, Zephyr, 1998
7. ^ Fr. Thomas Hopko, http://www.oca.org/OCchapter.asp?SID=2&ID=20