• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Recapitulation

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Irenaeus (130-202 AD) was an early Christian leader and student of Polycarp (a generation separated from the Apostles). Working from the ideas of Justin Martyr (Justin the Philosopher), Irenaeus developed the theory of Recapitulation.

The focus of Recapitulation is the desire of God for the reconciliation of mankind in the person of Jesus Christ with a focus on Jesus as the Last Adam.

Recapitulation falls under the general idea of "Christus Victor" in that there is an overlying theme of Adam selling mankind into the bondage of sin and death which is under the dominion of Satan. Christ suffers and died under Satan's power to free man from his grasp. This is accomplished through Jesus' active obedience in all points where Adam failed.


"He has therefore, in His work of recapitulation, summed up all things, both waging war against our enemy, and crushing him who had at the beginning led us away captives in Adam, and trampled upon his head, as you can perceive in Genesis that God said to the serpent, “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall be on the watch for your head, and you on the watch for His heel.” For from that time, He who should be born of a woman, from the Virgin, after the likeness of Adam, was preached as keeping watch for the head of the serpent. This is the seed of which the apostle says in the Epistle to the Galatians, “that the law of works was established until the seed should come to whom the promise was made.” This fact is exhibited in a still clearer light in the same Epistle, where he thus speaks: “But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman.” For indeed the enemy would not have been fairly vanquished, unless it had been a man [born] of a woman who conquered him. For it was by means of a woman that he got the advantage over man at first, setting himself up as man’s opponent. And therefore does the Lord profess Himself to be the Son of man, comprising in Himself that original man out of whom the woman was fashioned, in order that, as our species went down to death through a vanquished man, so we may ascend to life again through a victorious one; and as through a man death received the palm [of victory] against us, so again by a man we may receive the palm against death.". (Irenaeus, Against Heresies).
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Sounds like something from Bizarro world.[emoji846]

Recapitulation is a recount. It’s not in the Bible.
Well....it is in the Bible....kinda... (in Jesus as the last Adam, obedient where Adam was not)....just maybe not how Irenaeus and Justin Martyr interpreted it to be. :Wink


Recapitulation is seen in the Eastern Orthodox Church, and in Augustine's Atonement (Augustine held Recapitulation and Ransom Theory, and we see Recapitulation and Moral Influence Theory in the Orthodox Church).

To be fair, they would have considered Penal Substitution Theory (the most common theory among evangelicals) bizarre. We simply think very differently.
 

MrW

Well-Known Member
I simply believe the Lord Jesus died for the sins of the world to reconcile all to Gospel that will repent and trust in Christ.

My “theory” is Jesus Died and Resurrected For Me”. I don’t complicate things too much.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I simply believe the Lord Jesus died for the sins of the world to reconcile all to Gospel that will repent and trust in Christ.

My “theory” is Jesus Died and Resurrected For Me”. I don’t complicate things too much.
Mine too.

And, to be fair, theirs as well.

When we say "reconciliation" the obvious question is "how?".

When we say "died for our sins" the idea often needs explaining. What do we mean by "died for our sins"? How did that accomplish reconciliation?

That is what they were trying to articulate.

I believe they arrived at incorrect conclusions. But they were trying to understand what those ideas meant.


I guess an illustration would be trying to explain to someone what you mean by Jesus died and was resurrected for you. Or Jesus died for your sins. Within our faith we have ideas, but those not exposed to Christianity may need a bit more information.
 

Deacon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Modern Christian's tend to think that they have the interpretation of Scripture all figured out;
HINT: We don't! ...and won't, until it is made clear to us 'when the perfect comes' (1 Cor 13:10).

Recapitulation (mentioned by Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian and, Athanasius) was an early attempt to explain the atonement offered by Christ's death and resurrection.

Penal substitution is also a truth emphasized in the patristic era. For starters, substitution is part of the recapitulation and ransom views, but in penal substitution, the accent is placed on Christ’s death paying our debt in our place before God. It is this emphasis that Anselm later develops in the satisfaction view and the Reformers teach in penal substitution. At this point in church history, the why and how of the cross still require further clarification, yet what develops later is in continuity with the embryonic insights of the early church. (Emphasis mine)

Stephen Wellum and Matthew Barrett, Christ Alone—the Uniqueness of Jesus as Savior: What the Reformers Taught…and Why It Still Matters, The 5 Solas Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017), 165.​

Rob
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Modern Christian's tend to think that they have the interpretation of Scripture all figured out;
HINT: We don't! ...and won't, until it is made clear to us 'when the perfect comes' (1 Cor 13:10).

Recapitulation (mentioned by Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian and, Athanasius) was an early attempt to explain the atonement offered by Christ's death and resurrection.

Penal substitution is also a truth emphasized in the patristic era. For starters, substitution is part of the recapitulation and ransom views, but in penal substitution, the accent is placed on Christ’s death paying our debt in our place before God. It is this emphasis that Anselm later develops in the satisfaction view and the Reformers teach in penal substitution. At this point in church history, the why and how of the cross still require further clarification, yet what develops later is in continuity with the embryonic insights of the early church. (Emphasis mine)

Stephen Wellum and Matthew Barrett, Christ Alone—the Uniqueness of Jesus as Savior: What the Reformers Taught…and Why It Still Matters, The 5 Solas Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017), 165.​

Rob
Another point is our environment. We live (or think we live) in a world where Christianity is known.

But think of the terms we use and the ideas we express as if we had no exposure to Christianity.

Christ died for our sins. He died and was resurrected for me.

Those things really would need explaining if one was unaware of Christian belief in general.


I was surprised when in my 20's working in D.C. to find a coworker had absolutely no idea of Christianity (other than it existed).

Sometimes we take things for granted.
 

MrW

Well-Known Member
Mine too.

And, to be fair, theirs as well.

When we say "reconciliation" the obvious question is "how?".

When we say "died for our sins" the idea often needs explaining. What do we mean by "died for our sins"? How did that accomplish reconciliation?

That is what they were trying to articulate.

I believe they arrived at incorrect conclusions. But they were trying to understand what those ideas meant.


I guess an illustration would be trying to explain to someone what you mean by Jesus died and was resurrected for you. Or Jesus died for your sins. Within our faith we have ideas, but those not exposed to Christianity may need a bit more information.

He traded places with me. Another way to look at it is what Scripture says, that I am crucified with Christ. When He died, I died with Him because we are joined together spiritually, 1st Corinthians 6:17.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
He traded places with me. Another way to look at it is what Scripture says, that I am crucified with Christ. When He died, I died with Him because we are joined together spiritually, 1st Corinthians 6:17.
Yes, I agree that Recapitulation affirms this solidarity. The unity between God and man is an important aspect of all the early Atonement theories.

Recapitulation means heavily on Ephesians 1:10 (Recapitulation means "summed up").

Ephesians 1:10 with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth.

It is an interesting theory. I am unaware of any group today that holds Recapitulation as a stand alone theory.

I am not convinced that the focus of Recapitulation is correct (the solidarity, yes, but the focus....I don't think so).
 
Top