Today, there’s a lot of controversy among Christians as to how Christ saves us. One of the most common views among Evangelicals is that Jesus was punished in our place so that God wouldn’t need to punish us.
However, many Christians have gone back to early views of the atonement that haven’t been focused on recently. These Christians might believe instead that the main focus of the atonement is Jesus’ victory over Satan, or that Jesus give himself as a ransom to save us from Satan.
This article isn’t intended to argue for one or the other. I think there’s truth to multiple views, although there are forms of Penal Substitutionary Atonement that I can’t conscientiously believe. Mainly, I think it’s a shame that Christians make this such a divisive issue.
Instead, in this article, I’ll discuss how Anabaptists today think about the atonement. In my experience, among Anabaptists, I’d say there are roughly three views on this issue.
1. Some have no dogmatic view.
The most conservative/traditional groups of Anabaptists don’t tend to have a formulated view of the atonement. Instead of having a particular view, they pretty much would say what the Bible says about the atonement, without trying too hard to shape it into a cohesive doctrine. I grew up in a group like this.
These Christians are often comfortable with borrowing concepts from multiple views. Often there’s an attitude of, “Well, we don’t know exactly how it all worked, but we do know that Jesus saves us and we should obey him.”
2. Some believe in Penal Substitutionary Atonement.
Groups that are a bit less conservative often have bought into some Protestant resources to help them in their spiritual renewal. They tend toward holding to a Protestant form of PSA, but are usually not dogmatic on it. Some individuals in these groups, and some groups as a whole, are very dogmatic on it, though.
Many of those who would say they believe in Penal Substitutionary Atonement actually probably fall into the first category. They would be shocked to find out some of the things the contemporary forms of PSA teach—for example, that God actually poured out his wrath on Jesus because his wrath had to be satisfied on someone, whether guilty or innocent. Some Anabaptists do believe that God poured out his wrath on Jesus, but most wouldn’t, even if they accept that Jesus was punished in order that we didn’t need to be punished.
3. Some teach other views.
Many Anabaptists back off from PSA and teach other views that were more common in early church history. This includes multiple Anabaptist groups that have made an effort to ground their theology in history, as well as many individuals who belong to groups that don’t have that focus. I currently belong to a church like this.
In this third category, there’s a range of those who are very anti-PSA and those who simply have concerns about its more radical teachings.
Overview
I’d say that a majority of Anabaptists are in category 1, a minority is in category 2, and a minority that’s about the same size is in category 3. Which view you encounter among Anabaptists really depends on what church you attend.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In