Chapters 59 60

Geisler, Norman

Systematic Theology II

PPt by Mark E. Hargrove, PhD, DMin

Geisler, Norman


Chapter 59

“The Origin of Salvation”

Biblical Basis for Salvation

The Origin of God’s Decrees

That the origin of salvation is

God’s will is revealed through

God’s decrees:

Salvation is of the Lord (Jonah

2:9)

Salvation originated in God’s

decision to save us (Eph. 1:5).


Election according to God’s

Foreknowledge

Peter spoke of the “elect according

to the foreknowledge of God the

Father” (1 Peter 1:2).

If God chooses to create moral

creatures, then He must act

consistently with His unchanging

nature of love and justice and with

the freedom He chose to give His

creatures.


The Condition for Giving vs.

Receiving

The conditions God gave to save

free moral agents must be in

accordance with the freedom He

gave them. Therefore there is no

condition for God’s giving salvation,

but there is one (and only one)

condition for receiving the gift of

eternal life: faith (Acts 16:31; Rom.

4:5; Eph. 2:8-9).


The Nature of God’s Decrees

• The Nature of Grace: Unmerited Favour

(Rom. 6:23)

• The Object of Grace: Repentant Sinner

(Eph. 2:8)

• The Revelation of Grace and Wrath (the

rejection of grace incurs wrath, and the

acceptance of grace brings salvation).

The Order of God’s Decrees: Various

Views

Supralapsarianism

1. Elect some and reprobate others

2. Create both the elect and the non-

elect

3. Permit the Fall

4. Provide salvation only for the elect

5. Apply salvation only to the elect


Views

Infralapsarianism

1. Create all

2. Permit the Fall

3. Elect some and pass others by

4. Provide salvation only for the elect

5. Apply salvation only to the elect


Views

Sublapsarianism

1. Create all

2. Permit the Fall

3. Provide salvation for all

4. Elect those who believe and pass

those who don’t

5. Apply salvation only to believers

(who cannot lose it.)


Views

Wesleyanism

1. Create all

2. Permit the Fall

3. Provide salvation for all

4. Elect based on the foreseen faith of

believers

5. Apply salvation only to believers

(who can lose it.)

Geisler, Norman


Chapter 60

“Theories of Salvation”

Theories of the Atonement

The Recapitulation Theory of the

AtonementAs proposed by Irenaeus (c. 125-c. 202) is summed in

this statement:

The fully divine Christ become fully man in order to sum

up all humanity in himself. What was lost through the

disobedience of the fires dam was restored through the

obedience of the second Adam. Christ when through all

the stages of human life, resisted all temptations, died

and arose a victor over death and the devil. [Hence,] all

the benefits of Christ’s victory are available through

participation in him.

Irenaeus used Romans 5:18-21 to support this view.


The Ransom Theory of the AtonementA view held by various church fathers, best articulated

by Origen (c. 185-c. 254).

This view proposes that Christ’s death was paid to Satan

to purchase human beings, who were captive to sin. Mark

10:45 is used in support of this view.

Origin wrote: “Now it was the devil that held us, to whose

side we had been drawn away by our sins. He asked,

therefore, as our price the blood of Christ” (CR, 2.3)


The Moral-Example Theory of AtonementPelagius (c. 354-c. 420) offered this view of atonement.

According to this position, Christ’s death provided an

example of faith and obedience that inspires others to

be obedient to God. The exhortation of 1 Peter 2:21 is

often used to support this view:

To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving

you an example, that you should follow in his steps.


The Necessary-Satisfaction Theory of

Atonement

Anselm (1033-1109) offered this view of atonement. It affirms

that it was necessary for God’s offended justice and honor be

satisfied be a penalty only Christ could pay. Unlike Origen’s

ransom theory, however, Anselm said that since God was

offended, it was God who must be compensated.

1. Sin puts us in debt to God

2. God is just and cannot overlook sin

3. We cannot pay our own debt of sin.

4. God cannot forgive sins without the debt being paid.

5. Only the God-Man could pay the debt of sin.


The Moral-Influence Theory of Atonement

Peter Abelard (1079-1142) is credited with this theory. It

holds that the primary effect of Christ’s death was as a

demonstration of God’s great love for us.

Abelard developed this theory in reaction to the

necessary-satisfaction theory that some sort of payment

to God was required.


The Optimal-Satisfaction Theory of Atonement

Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) offered is theory which allowed for but did not require satisfaction of God for the sinner. His argument is:

(1) Christ’s passion caused God to be satisfied on behalf of our sins.

(2) God could have forgiven us without Christ’s death.

(3) However, there was no better or more fitting way to satisfy God than with the death of Christ.

Aquinas argues that God is not an accountant, adding up our sins that must be paid for, but instead is a parent wanting to forgive us while also desiring to change us so that we will not choose evil again.


The Substitution Theory of AtonementThe roots of this theory are found in the ransom and the optimal-satisfaction theories. The substitution theory insists that satisfaction of God must be accomplished, but not just because God’s honor has been offended but also because His absolute justice has been violated, and therefore, a substitution for our sins had to be made by the sinless Son of God.

John Calvin (1509-1564) is credited with giving expression to this view. He states: “God was the enemy of men until they were restored in favour by the death of Christ (Rom. 5:10); they were cursed until their iniquity was expiated by the sacrifice of Christ (Gal. 3:10).


The Governmental Theory of AtonementHugo Grotius (1583-1645) reacting to the moral-example view—which he felt lacked an emphasis upon God’s justice and holiness—formulated this theory. His argument is that in His holiness, God has established laws to which sin is in opposition. Grotius argued that any violation of these laws was a serious matter. The model follows this progression:

God, as a sovereign ruler, has the right to punish sin, which is inherently deserving of punishment, but it is not mandatory that He do so. Love is God’s dominant attribute. He desires to forgive sins, but He wishes to do it in such a way as to maintain His moral government.

Just as a creditor may cancel a debt is he chooses, God taking into account the best interest of humanity, sent Christ do die for our sins. The death of Christ was not a payment, but a substitute for the penalty. Christ’s sacrifice demonstrated that God’s justice will require us to suffer if we continue in sin.


The Mystical Theory of Atonement

Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834) proposed that

salvation is attained by a mystical union with Christ—in

Him, the idea of humanity is fully realized.

According to this theory, since Christ was the absolute

unity of divinity an humanity, God became man that man

bay become God. As “God-men,” the redeemed partake

of the divine nature, or the life of Christ.

Adherents to this theory believe that salvation is a

mystical union with God in Christ (cf. Eph. 4:3-4). This

theory alleges that there is no objective basis in any

redemptive act of Christ on the cross that makes salvation

possible.

Various Views of the Atonement

Theories God’s

Attribute

Basic Goal Object Key

Verses

Propone

nt

Recapitu-

lation

Omni-

potence

Reverse the

Fall

Satan Romans

5:15-21

Irenaeus

Ransom Wisdom Defeat Satan Satan Mark 10:45 Origen

Moral-

Example

Love Show God’s

love

Humanit

y

Romans

5:8; 5:17-

19

Pelagius,

Abelard

Necessary-

Satisfaction

Majesty Pay the debt

of sin

God 1 John 2:1 Anselm

Optimal-

Satisfaction

Mercy Restore the

sinner

Humanit

y

Luke 19:10 Aquinas

Substitutio

n

Justice Appease

wrath, release

mercy

God Isaiah

42:21

Calvin

Govern-

mental

Sovereignt

y

Keep moral

order

God and

humanity

Isaiah

42:21

Grotius

Mystical Oneness Unite us with

God

Humanit

y

Eph. 4:3-4;

5:30-32

Schleier-

macher

Education

Chapters 59 60