Gregory's Atonement Theory

[JonC]

Rather than lump this in with another thread, let's examine it here.

@Martin Marprelate and a few others are convinced that Gregory believed the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement.

This is how Gregory described the Atonement itself:

"When the enemy (Satan) saw the power, he recognized Christ as a bargain which offered him more than he had. For this reason he (Satan) chose him (Christ) as the random for those he (Satan) had shut up in death's prison."

For all you Penal Substitution Theory experts, exactly how is this the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement ?

I believe it is not. And I believe Gregory was wrong in his view of Atonement. Believe Augustine was also wrong when he expressed a similar view.

But I'm a minority on this forum, so let's discuss exactly how this is Penal Substitution Theory.

 

[DaveXR650]

All I'm saying is that you can see a transfer of guilt and disobedience. (A taking from us and putting on Christ). That there was an understanding of that happening at a deep level and you could probably make a case for it being a building block for the ideas about the atonement, even the wrong or partially wrong ones like the idea of a ransom paid to Satan.

As far as you being a minority on this forum, that's no problem as long as you promise you aren't having fun. If you are then the Puritans are coming for you.

 

[JonC]

All I'm saying is that you can see a transfer of guilt and disobedience. (A taking from us and putting on Christ). That there was an understanding of that happening at a deep level and you could probably make a case for it being a building block for the ideas about the atonement, even the wrong or partially wrong ones like the idea of a ransom paid to Satan.

As far as you being a minority on this forum, that's no problem as long as you promise you aren't having fun. If you are then the Puritans are coming for you.

Definitely not in Gregory's belief. You are reading that into his words.

If you look at the quote in the previous thread (which was from this same writing) you will see that Gregory does not view sin as being transferred from us.

He views our sin as being shared with Christ and Christ's divine character as being shared with us. It is a type of solidarity.

I'm not saying Gregory is correct (I believe his theology of Atonement is very problematic). But his actual statements reject the idea of Penal Substitution Theory.

The Classic View is simply another way of viewing the Cross. I believe it is the correct way, you disagree. What is important to me is not that you agree with my view but that you are able to understand opposing positions based on their own context rather than within your own context.

It is difficult, I know. For about a year I had the uncomfortable problem of knowing the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement was unbiblical while still seeing that "bat" in the ink blot.

I had read the writings of the Early Church and like @Martin Marprelate believed them to be undeveloped and embryonic. But the more I read Scripture without using a Reformed lens the more I came to appreciate their writings (and the writings of non-Reformed scholars).