Template talk:Atonement in Christianity

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Christianity: Theology / Arminianism This template is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles This template is supported by theology work group. This template is supported by WikiProject Arminianism.

List has been alphabetized. Could be organized by prevalence in modern thought, or chronologically (by earliest distinct mention, i.e. Ransom/Recapitulation from Irenaeus, Christus Victor from Chrysostom, Athanasius or the Cappadocians, Satisfaction from Anselm [as Augustine isn't clear in his mention of it, he's mainly Christus Victor still], etc.). Also, divinization/theosis is an understanding of salvation among Eastern Orthodox, but is not a theory of the atonement - it is a theory of salvation or soteriology, held together with the Orthodox theory of the atonement, which is Christus Victor. St John Chrysostom ^Δόξα_{τω ^Θεώ} 09:23, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto this template:

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
v t e

I have a problem with this template, as not all Arminians subscribe to a governmental view of atonement. The Free Will Baptists, for instance, and Arminius himself believed in the penal satisfaction view. See, again: Pinson, J. Matthew (2003). "Will the Real Arminius Please Stand Up? A Study of the Theology of Jacobus Arminius in Light of His Interpreters" (PDF). Integrity: A Journal of Christian Thought. 2: 121–139. TuckerResearch TuckerResearch (talk) 06:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

under limited atonement it lists the reformed and scholastic view but I dont think the scholastic theolgians believed in limited atonementIlikerabbits! (talk) 09:10, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]