C5: works of scholars

• Oblation: something being offered to God
• Propitiation: the act of appeasing God
• Expiation: the act of making amends or reparation for guilt or wrongdoing
• Satisfaction: the payment of a debt; in Christian theology, Christ's atonement for sin
• Substitution: the view that Christ was punished instead of us
• Justification: the act of God whereby a sinner is declared righteous
• Hick's atonement theory:


  • Jesus' sacrifice is symbolic revelation of God's love
  • Jesus = morally perfect person who scarifies himself for others out of love
  • example for us to follow - forgive others + sacrifice ourselves
• Barth's criticism of Hick's atonement theory:


  • anthropocentric - suggests Jesus' sacrifice just moral lesson for humans
  • Jesus' death is actually an active choice made by God to reconcile himself to the world --> internal satisfaction
• Swinburne's transaction atonement theory:


  • just as we need apology, reparation and penance (extra gift) when we have wronged others, we need the same for sin against God
  • nothing we can give can ever make up for sin --> need Jesus (God + human) as penance
• Hick's criticism of Swinburne's transaction atonement theory:


  • anthropomorphises God - our relation with God not the same as with other ppl
  • God can't be benefited through any gift/penance as he is perfect
  • we just need to benefit + make up to each other to follow Jesus' example + therefore make up to God
• Ransom atonement theory (Irenaeus, Augustine, Origen):


  • Jesus' death was the ransom God needed to pay to devil to release humans from sin
  • (Hick: this view is outdated + not held anymore)
• strength of Hick's atonement theory:

  • pluralism - if Jesus' sacrifice is an expression of how to be moral + sacrifice ourselves for other, all can access it + be saved, whatever their faith
• Hick + Anselm's criticism of ransom atonement theory:

  • devil should not have "any valid legal rights over against the infinite Creator" (Hick agrees)
• Bible verses supporting ransom theory:

  "Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all people" (1 Timothy)

  "Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness" (Hebrews)
• Ransom atonement theory (Irenaeus, Augustine, Origen):

  • Jesus' death was a ransom God paid devil to free humans from sin
• Christus Victor atonement theory (Gustav Aulén)

  • atonement = battle against evil
  • Christ's victory over Devil to free humans from sin + death
• Christus Victor atonement theory (Gustav Aulén)


  • atonement = battle against evil
  • Christ's victory over Devil to free humans from sin + death
• 3 criticisms of Christus Victor atonement theory

  • Anselm, Hick: too much power to Satan
  • takes responsibility from humans, who become victims of evil instead of free beings who chose sin
  • If Christ conquered evil, why do we still suffer?
• 3 strengths of Barth's atonement theory

  • biblically based - starts with God + Christ, not general principles or nat theo
  • clear role for Jesus - only possible bc of divinity + humanity
  • neo-orthodox: rediscover roots of Christianity - critical of free interpretation to defend human values which can be immoral, e.g. Nazis
• 3 weaknesses of Barth's atonement theory

  • Hick: pessimistic view of humans, vs lib Christians: can morally progress
  • Hick: exclusivist - salvation + God only through Jesus. Limits interfaith dialogue
  • Hick, Channing: logically impossible to be fully human + fully God
• give a defence against this criticism of Barth's atonement theory:

  Hick: pessimistic of human nature, vs lib Christians: can morally progress

  >> Barth: can't just accept lib Chris because more optimistic - wrong

  - atrocities in history suggest humans not naturally good, e.g. war, Nazis
• give a defence against this criticism of Barth's atonement theory:

  Hick, Channing: logically impossible to be fully human + fully God

  >> Barth, Augustine: we're flawed so don't understand God, possible for him
• give a defence against this criticism of Barth's atonement theory:

  Exclusivist - salvation + God only thru Jesus. Limits interfaith dialogue

  >> Barth: God reconciled w all through Christ so all saved - all will believe in Jesus
• Hick's atonement theory:

  • Jesus' sacrifice is symbolic revelation of God's love
  • Jesus = morally perfect person who scarifies himself for others out of love
  • example for us to follow - forgive others + sacrifice ourselves
• 2 criticisms of Hick's atonement theory:

  • Barth: anthrop - Jesus' death God's active choice to reconcile himself to the world --> internal satisfaction, not moral exemplar for humans
  • If Jesus only a human, teachings have less weight
• Swinburne's transaction atonement theory:

  • just as we need apology, reparation + penance (extra gift) when we wrong others, need same for sin against God
  • nothing we can give can ever make up for sin --> need Jesus (God + human) as penance
• Hick's criticism of Swinburne's transaction atonement theory:

  • anthropomorphises God - relation w God not same as w other ppl
  • God can't be benefited by any gift/penance as he is perfect
  • we need to benefit/make up to each other to follow Jesus' example + thus make up to God
• Give a response to this criticism of Hick's atonement theory:

  If Jesus just a human, his teachings have less weight

  Hick: chosen by God to give God's teachings