| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
25 of 26 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Why does Jesus Die?,
By matt (the reading room) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of Atonement (Paperback)
I was going through my shelf the other day and came across a 1969 edition and recalled a conversation I had with the folks at Wipf and Stock a few years ago about reprinting it and lo, there it was on amazon.com! Very cool guys. Why I haven't reviewed this book earlier surprises me, since it was seminal in modifying my views on the atonement from an American Lutheran to a more Eastern Orthodox position.
So why does this book matter? Aulén challenges the status quo answer to the question: Why did Jesus have to die and what effect does the resurrection have? Raised Lutheran (Missouri Synod), I was taught a very Anselmian version of God's rationale for the events of our salvation which the author of this book takes to task (or at least demonstrates to be a modern development). We sinned in Adam, are guilty for his sin, and the offense to God's justice demands His wrath be taken out against us. Jesus takes the wrath of God upon himself, so when the Father sees me He really sees Jesus and doesn't take His anger out on me. Of course there is a biblical basis to some of this, but not to the exclusive extent that this theory holds over most of Protestant theology (although, as the author points out, Luther himself had a more nuanced version in his theology with the "blessed exchange" of the natures in Christ and, by that virtue, our own in Christ). Such a model focuses heavily upon the death of Christ, and personally I can remark that often the incarnation and resurrection were taught as an afterthought. Aulén begins his work by stating the problem of the atonement and its possible answers, tracing the history and role that the Anselmian, Latin version has played, commonly known as the substitutionary theory: Jesus takes my place under the wrath of God. Then Irenaeus is used as the example of the earlier and more universal theory of the early church and New Testament: Christ tramples down sin, death and the power of the devil by his incarnation, death and resurrection. This is the classic model of recapitulation in Christ. Then the Middle Ages are examined with the roles of Tertullian, Cyprian, Gregory the Big One and Anslem, among other notables. Here the classic idea is beginning to wane and almost disappear under the weight of the Latin model. Although Luther moves markedly to the classical model, he still employs terms and sometimes the meaning of the Latin model, which has further solidified it in his tradition. He concludes with some analysis of post-Luther developments and posits that a return to the original model is a needed corrective. A very comprehensive and packed slim volume indeed! Other books of interest may include How Are We Saved?: The Understanding of Salvation in the Orthodox Traditionby Kallistos Ware, Common Ground: An Introduction to Eastern Christianity for the American Christian by Jordan Bajis, and for a Lutheran reappropriation of the classical idea, Union With Christ: The New Finnish Interpretation of Lutheredited by Braaten and Jenson. Lastly, perhaps the best book on the topic, although dated to 1927, is Grensted's A Short History Of The Doctrine Of The Atonement (1920). In fact, I would probably buy Grensted's work before Christus Victor for a more complex adn in-depth study. They compliment one another perfectly. I would find it most interesting to look at this whole question through liturgical theology, since how we understand the sacrifice of Christ, along with his taking on and renewing our nature, is intimately bound (think of the Mass as Sacrifice, Recapitulation, partakers of divinity etc); For Christianity is primarily a doxological religion. This would refocus our attention upon the necessity, nature and role of the sacraments/mysteries. PhD/ThD thesis anyone?
31 of 35 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
An extremely useful contribution to theological study,
By Andrew (New Zealand) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of Atonement (Paperback)
Aulen's aim in this work is to explain the doctrine of the atonement as it was held for the first 1000 years of Christianity, and to explain how and why the church has deviated from it.
I am a lay theologian and I have read a lot of theological works, but this book stands out from the rest. I now feel that I didn't properly understand Christianity prior to reading this work. Aulen doesn't interact much with scripture, and confines himself to a historical account of what various people in the church believed at different times. However his fundamental thesis is clear: that the Bible and the early church have a view of Christ's work that is majorly different to what is commonly received today in the Western Church. Though Aulen was a Western theologian, Eastern Orthodox believers will also benefit from Aulen's clear and insightful exploration of the doctrine of the Greek Fathers. Aulen's account of the atonement is Orthodox, and far clearer than what I have seen expressed elsewhere in Orthodox writings.
13 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Triumphing over the powers,
By Baroque Norseman (Louisiana) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of Atonement (Paperback)
This book provides an historically-faithful alternative to the substitutionary and exemplary models of the atonement. Its strength lies in its presentation of a vivid and robust picture of the work of Christ. Its (the book, not the model) weakness is its simplistic reductions of other theologians' thoughts.
Overview: The Christus Victor model presents the work of Christ as a triumph over the devil, powers (demons), bondage of sin, and the "law." Accordingly, given its Eastern overtones, the atonement and the Incarnation are inseperable. Christ united humanity to his nature to redeem it. He redeemed it (still united to his nature) on the cross. This is to be contrasted with the Latin views of the atonement, which are narrowly penal. The Latin views incorporate merit and penance in the atonment model. For Aulen, this move removes the work of God from the work of Christ in redemption. Criticisms of the work: This is why I give it 4 stars. I do not think he dealt as fairly with St Anselm as he could have. David Bentley Hart (*Beauty of the Infinite*) has shown how St Anselm and St Athanasius do not fundamentally disagree. Another problem I had is that biblical students need to see that the Bible incorporates all 3 models of the atonement (Mark 10 = substitutionary; Colossians 2:15 = Christus Victor; Peter 2:21 = exemplary). Aulen also used language that begged the question in favor of his position. Aside from the above criticisms, this is a paradigm-shifting book.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|