Christus Victor

 “The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field” (Matt. 13:44).

 

What if this isn’t a parable about all we must do to possess the kingdom? What if Jesus is the one who finds the treasure? What if we human beings are the treasure? What if the field is this world that belonged to Satan, the former prince of the world? And what if it is Jesus who gives up everything He owns to purchase (redeem) this world and reclaim us as His possession? What if that’s what the kingdom of heaven is like?

 

Did you realize that for the first thousand years of Christendom that picture was likely the more common way of understanding salvation? It is sometimes called Christus Victor. Today the common view is penal substitution: that is, Jesus died in our place to pay for our sins. This view of salvation has its roots in a classic atonement theory Saint Anselm articulated in the eleventh century. After various revisions following the Protestant Reformation, it has become the dominant view of salvation. It’s not that Christus Victor is right and penal substitution is wrong. They simply represent different ways of looking at the gospel. God’s work of salvation is so great (Heb. 2:3), like a huge mountain, that we must view it from many angles to gain an accurate and comprehensive picture. But most Christians don’t realize this and believe there is only one way to describe what Jesus accomplished on the cross.

 

You could summarize the Christus Victor view of salvation this way: the prince of the world, Satan, possessed this world; the Son of God came to earth and defeated him on the cross, then established and commissioned the church to enforce His kingdom’s rule on earth and reclaim lost people to His possession. That used to be a more common way to understand the gospel of salvation.

 

--- Doug Newton, Fresh Eyes on Jesus' Parables: Discovering New Insights in Familiar Passages. 2018.