Cur Deus Homo, or “Why the God-Man” was written by St. Anselm of Canterbury at the end of the 11th century.<\/p>\n
St. Anselm develops his “satisfaction theory”of the atonement. The disobedience in the Garden of Eden was man’s doing; it became man’s obligation to make it right. But, because of man’s nature, he was unable to do so. The Son of God became man so that as<\/em> man<\/em> he could restore what had been lost; i.e., he could offer to God full and complete obedience, the full and complete obedience that was due God in the Garden. In addition, Christ voluntarily laid down his life, “tasting death for every man”, a gift so great as to merit the salvation of all who would put their faith in His atoning sacrifice.<\/p>\n St. Anselm’s work is the basis for the Catholic “substitutionary atonement” view.<\/p>\n St. Anselm’s dialectical style made for interesting reading.<\/p>\n I am still not fully persuaded that a “penal substitutionary” view is more Biblical. Was He punished<\/em> by the Father, i.e., did the Father turn away in disgust, in His wrath? Jesus was fully man, but He was fully God. Did God turn away from God?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Cur Deus Homo, or “Why the God-Man” was written by St. Anselm of Canterbury at the end of the 11th century. St. Anselm develops his “satisfaction theory”of the atonement. The disobedience in the Garden of Eden was man’s doing; it became man’s obligation to make it right. But, because of man’s nature, he was unable … <\/p>\n