James K. Beilby - The Nature of the Atonement: Four Views

The Christus Victor paradigm, known alternatively as the classic or dramatic model, can be described as Satanward in its focus. In Aulns words, the central theme of this approach is the idea of the Atonement as a Divine conflict and victory; ChristChristus Victorfights against and triumphs over the evil powers of the world, the tyrants under which mankind is in bondage and suffering.

More specifically, the Christus Victor paradigm understands the work of Christ primarily in terms of his conflict with and triumph over those elements of the kingdom of darkness that, according to the New Testament, hold humanity in their clutches, that is, Satan and his demonic hosts (Lk 13:10-16; Acts 10:38; 2 Tim 2:26; Heb 2:14-15), the sin power (Jn 8:34; Acts 8:23; Rom 6; 7:14-25; 8:2), death (Rom 6:23; 1 Cor 15:56; Heb 2:15) and even, particularly in its curse elements, the law (Rom 7:8-13; 1 Cor 15:56; Gal 3:13). In addition, the harrowing of hell motif has fed into the Christus Victor theme from ancient times (i.e., Eph 4:8-10; 1 Pet 3:18-20).

In one form or another, this view seems to have dominated the atonement theology of the early church for the first millennium (thus the label classic view). In certain quarters this general approach crystallized into a more defined modelthe so-called ransom theory of the atonement. In the ransom theory, this conflict-victory theme was conjoined with the redemption-ransom motif to produce an explanatory model in which Jesus became the ransom by which God redeemed humanity from Satans power. Several elements came to characterize the theory: (1) Satan gained mastery over humanity when the first couple chose the path of sin in the garden. Satan retains this hold on humanity through the powers of the kingdom of darkness (sin, fear, death, etc.). (2) Through death, Jesus innocent life became the ransom price that was acceptable to Satan for the liberation/redemption of humanity. The New Testament passage often used to support this idea came from the very lips of Jesus: The Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45; cf. 1 Tim 2:6). (3) Finally, the ransom theory typically emphasizes that Christs victory was achieved by outwitting the devil. The inherent injustice of taking an innocent life as a ransom is the basis on which Christ defeats Satan (a notion tied to the words of Paul in 1 Cor 2:8).

Among the more notable exponents of some version of the ransom theory are Irenaeus (at least in its embryonic form), Origen (the first to explicate the theory in any kind of detail), Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory the Great and Rufinus.

However, with the coming of the eleventh century and Anselms satisfaction theory (including his critique of the more idiosyncratic elements of the ransom theory) came the demise of the predominance of the Christus Victor paradigm. Under Aulns assessment, Martin Luther revitalized the Christus Victor approach.

While aspects of the Christus Victor view and Aulns presentation of it have been subjected to criticismfor example, since Anselms famous critique, many have charged that it fosters a dangerous dualism, one that, among other things, threatens the very sovereignty of Godit nonetheless is widely acknowledged as highlighting an important element of the atonement that went largely neglected for centuries. At the very least it is clear that since the advent of Aulns book in 1931, a number of scholars have picked up on the Christus Victor theme, and have made it an important, if not the central, theme by which to understand the atoning work of Jesus Christ.