Help


from Wikipedia
« »  
Some theologians say that ' various biblical understandings of the atonement need not conflict '.
Reformed theologian J. I. Packer, for example, although he maintains that ' penal substitution is the mainstream, historic view of the church and the essential meaning of the Atonement ...
Yet with penal substitution at the center ', he also maintains that Christus Victor and other Scriptural views of atonement can work together to present a fully orbed picture of Christ's work '.
J. Kenneth Grider, speaking from a governmental theory perspective, says that the governmental theory can incorporate within itself ' numerous understandings promoted in the other major Atonement theories ', including ransom theory, elements of the ' Abelardian " moral influence " theory ', vicarious aspects of the atonement, etc.

1.827 seconds.