Satisfaction theory

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The doctrine of satisfaction is part of the Christian doctrine of redemption . In contrast to the theology of the Atonement , the doctrine of satisfaction takes a systematic-theological look at the interpretation of the death of Jesus. The doctrine of satisfaction is therefore a specifically Christian dogma and not the exegetical discussion of sacred texts with sacrificial theologies (Atonement theology).

According to this conception, the death of Jesus as an Atonement is necessary in order to make adequate reparation for the violation of God's glory caused by the fall of man. For God there was only the alternative “either punishment” (aut poena), d. H. the annihilation of the whole of mankind "or reparation" (aut satisfactio) through a compensation that outweighs the sin. In order for the compensation to be more serious than the sin of mankind, it was necessary for God to become man himself in order to now - as a sinless person - give his life in the human form of Jesus Christ as a satisfactio for the sins of men.

Historical development

The first approaches can be found in Tertullian et al. a. Anselm von Canterbury (1033–1109 AD) developed the most important formulation in terms of history in his work Cur deus homo .

Many theologians consider the doctrine of satisfaction to be the central core of Christianity, since it shows how man attains salvation . Other theologians, however, consider the doctrine of satisfaction to be a misinterpretation of the Bible , the statements of which were misunderstood by the medieval understanding of law.

In Being Christ, Hans Küng praises the “formal clarity, legal consistency and systematic cohesion” of the anselmish doctrine of satisfaction, but ultimately criticizes it as “alienating the biblical message”. He says: “Man must be reconciled, not God. [...] not by a personal resentment of God, but by eliminating that real enmity between man and God, which does not arise from an inherited sin, but from current personal guilt and the general guilty fate. "

In today's preaching activity there is both approval and rejection of the anselmisch satisfaction doctrine.

literature

  • Gerhard Gäde : Another mercy. To Understand the Doctrine of Redemption Anselm of Canterbury. Echter, Würzburg 1989.
  • Josef Imbach : Coping with shock using atonement and sacrifice theories. In: Josef Imbach: Can God be bought? The talk of the sacrificial death of Jesus to the test. Gütersloher Verlagshaus, Gütersloh 2011, pp. 142–156.
  • Hans Küng : being a Christian. Piper, Munich 1974, pp. 409-417
  • Otto Hermann Pesch : Anselm von Canterbury and the doctrine of the vicarious satisfaction of Christ. A small critical salvation of honor. In: B. Acklin Zimmermann, F. Annen (Hrsg.): Reconciled through the sacrificial death of Christ? Christian atonement theology in the dock. Zurich 2009, pp. 57–73.
  • Harald Wagner: Satisfaction Theories . In: LThK 9 (3rd edition), p. 82 f.

Web links

Wiktionary: Satisfaction theory  - explanations of meanings, word origins, synonyms, translations

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Why did Jesus Christ die on the cross? Welt online, March 23, 2009
  2. ↑ Why theologians doubt Jesus' atoning death. Welt online, March 28, 2009
  3. ↑ Did the cross die for us? Questions to the sacrificial death theology. (PDF; 137 kB) WDR, April 2, 2010
  4. ^ Sermon Pastor Jörg Arndt
  5. ↑ Sermon Pastor Peter Spörri (PDF; 108 kB)