Systematic Theology, by Louis Berkhof - New Leaven

V. Divergent Theories of the Atonement
Since the atonement is clearly something objective, something that has a Godward
direction, strictly speaking only those theories can come into consideration here that
represent the work of Christ as intended primarily to ward off the wrath of God and
divine punishment from sinners rather than to change the sinner’s attitude to God from
one of hostility to one of friendship. Theories that are entirely subjective and conceive of
the work of Christ exclusively as bearing on the sinner’s moral condition might, in strict
logic, be left out of consideration altogether. They might conceivably be considered as
theories of reconciliation, but can hardly be regarded as theories of atonement. Miley
argues that there really can be no more than two theories of atonement. He points out
that the atonement, as an objective ground for the forgiveness of sins, must answer to a
necessity which will naturally determine its nature. This necessity must lie, either in the
requirement of an absolute justice which must punish sin, or in the rectoral office of
justice as an obligation to conserve the interests of moral government. In the first case
one arrives at the satisfaction theory; in the second, at the governmental theory, which is
preferred by Miley and finds great favor with the Methodists in general. Alfred Cave
ascribes an objective character also to the theory of the early Arminians, in which the
death of Christ is regarded as a substitute for the penalty imposed on sinners; and to the
theory of McLeod Campbell, which finds the real significance of the work of Christ in
His vicarious repentance. And it is undoubtedly true that both of these do contain an
objective element. But in addition to these there are several purely subjective theories.
Though these are not, strictly speaking, theories of atonement, yet they call for
consideration, since they are considered as such in many circles. The following are the
most important theories:
A. THEORIES OF THE EARLY CHURCH.
There were two theories in the early Church that call for brief mention.
1. THE RANSOM-TO-SATAN THEORY. This is based on the singular notion that the
death of Christ constituted a ransom paid to Satan, in order to cancel the just claims
which the latter had on man. Origen, one of the chief advocates of this theory, held that
Satan was deceived in the bargain, since the outcome proved that he could not stand in
the presence of the holy Christ, and was not able to retain his hold on Him. This theory
found favor with several of the early Church Fathers, though they did not always state
it in exactly the same form. It proved to be rather tenacious, for the echo of it was still
424