Recapitulation theory of atonement

Part of a series on
Atonement in
Christianity
Theories
Classic paradigm
Ransom
(Patristic)
Christus Victor
(20th century)

Recapitulation
(Patristic)

Objective paradigm
Satisfaction
(Scholastic / Anselmian)
Penal substitution
(Scholastic / Reformed / Arminian)

Governmental
(Arminian)

Subjective paradigm
Moral influence
(Mixed)
Moral example
(Socinian)
Types
Limited
(Scholastic / Reformed)
Unlimited
(Amyraldism / Arminianism / Protestantism)
See also
Christian universalism

The recapitulation theory of the atonement is a doctrine in Christian theology related to the meaning and effect of the death of Jesus Christ.

While it is sometimes absent from summaries of atonement theories,[1] more comprehensive overviews of the history of the atonement doctrine typically include a section about the “recapitulation” view of the atonement, which was first clearly formulated by Irenaeus of Lyons.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]

One of the main New Testament scriptures upon which this view is based states: "[God's purpose is, in] the fulness of the times, to sum up all things in Christ, the things in the heavens, and the things upon the earth..." (Ephesians 1:10, RV). The Greek word for 'sum up' (ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι, anakephalaiosasthai) was literally rendered 'to recapitulate' in Latin.[10]

In the recapitulation view of the atonement, Christ is seen as the new Adam who succeeds where Adam failed.[11] Christ undoes the wrong that Adam did and, because of his union with humanity, leads humankind on to eternal life (including moral perfection).[12]

Through man’s disobedience the process of the evolution of the human race went wrong, and the course of its wrongness could neither be halted nor reversed by any human means. But in Jesus Christ the whole course of human evolution was perfectly carried out and realised in obedience to the purpose of God.

– William Barclay[13]
  1. ^ E.g. Leon Morris, 'Theories of the Atonement' in Elwell Evangelical Dictionary.
  2. ^ H. N. Oxenham, ‘‘The Catholic doctrine of the atonement’’ (London: Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts, and Green, 1865), p. 114-118
  3. ^ James Bethune-Baker, An introduction to the early history of Christian doctrine to the time of the Council of Chalcedon (London: Methuen & Co, 1903), p. 333-337
  4. ^ J. K. Mozley, The doctrine of the atonement (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1916), p. 100-101
  5. ^ R. Mackintosh, Historic theories of the atonement (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1920), p. 89-90
  6. ^ L. W. Grensted, A Short History of the Doctrine of the Atonement (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1920), p. 57-60
  7. ^ Robert S. Franks, A history of the doctrine of the work of Christ in its ecclesiastical development vol. 1 (London: Hodder and Stoughton), p. 37ff.
  8. ^ Gustaf Aulen, Christus Victor (1931) (London: SPCK), p. 16ff., esp. p. 20-22,29
  9. ^ Michael Green, The Empty Cross of Jesus (Eastbourne: Kingsway, 2004; first published 1984), p. 66-68
  10. ^ "What's the Fuss About Recapitulation Theology?". October 2007.
  11. ^ E.g., James Bethune-Baker, An introduction to the early history of Christian doctrine to the time of the Council of Chalcedon (London: Methuen & Co, 1903), p. 334: 'Just as mankind in Adam lost its birthright, so in Christ mankind recovers its original condition'.
  12. ^ Robert S. Franks, A history of the doctrine of the work of Christ in its ecclesiastical development vol. 1 (London: Hodder and Stoughton), p. 37-38
  13. ^ William Barclay, Crucified and Crowned (S.C.M, first published 1961), p. 100