Welcome to the Works of Scholars in Christianity!
In this section of Paper 4B, we dive deep into one of the most important questions in Christian theology: Soteriology. This is just a fancy word for the study of salvation. Specifically, we are looking at how humans are made "at one" with God again after the relationship was broken by sin. This process is called Atonement.
We will be comparing two heavyweight thinkers who have very different ideas about how this works: Karl Barth and John Hick. Don't worry if these names or ideas seem a bit heavy at first—we’ll break them down step-by-step!
1. Understanding the Basics: Atonement and Soteriology
Before we look at our scholars, let’s get our definitions straight:
Soteriology: The study of religious doctrines of salvation. In Christianity, this focuses on how Jesus saves humanity.
Atonement: A term created by breaking down the words into "at-one-ment." It refers to the reconciliation between God and humanity through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Quick Review: The Problem
In traditional Christian thought, the "problem" is Sin. Sin creates a barrier between a perfect, holy God and imperfect humans. Atonement is the "bridge" that crosses that barrier.
2. Karl Barth: The Judge Judged in Our Place
Karl Barth (1886–1968) is often considered the most influential Protestant theologian of the 20th century. He lived through the horrors of World War I and II, which shaped his view that humans are completely incapable of saving themselves.
Barth’s Key Ideas on Atonement
Barth’s ideas are found in his massive work, Church Dogmatics. He focuses on the Doctrine of Reconciliation. Here is how he explains it:
1. God as the Subject: Barth insists that God is the one who does all the work. Humans can't "reach up" to God; God has to "reach down" to us. This is a top-down approach to theology.
2. The Judge Judged in Our Place: This is Barth's most famous phrase regarding atonement. Imagine a courtroom:
- We are the guilty defendants.
- God is the righteous Judge who must punish sin.
- But, in Jesus, the Judge becomes the one who is judged. God takes the punishment onto Himself.
3. Objective Reality: For Barth, atonement isn't just a nice story or a feeling. It is an objective fact that happened in history. When Jesus died, the relationship between God and the entire world was actually changed, whether people realize it or not.
Memory Aid for Barth
Think of Barth and the Bar (as in a courtroom). He sees atonement as a legal/judicial event where God (the Judge) steps down from the bench to take the prisoner's place.
3. John Hick: Atonement as a Metaphor
John Hick (1922–2012) represents a very different, modern perspective. He was a religious pluralist, meaning he believed that many religions could lead to God. This made him very critical of traditional views of atonement.
Hick’s Key Ideas on Atonement
Hick’s views are explored in his work, The Metaphor of God Incarnate. He thinks the old "courtroom" models of atonement (like Barth’s) are problematic for the modern world.
1. Atonement as Metaphor: Hick argues that we shouldn't take the "blood sacrifice" of Jesus literally. Instead, it is a metaphor. It’s a powerful story that helps us change our lives and turn toward God, but it isn't a literal legal transaction.
2. Rejection of "Substitution": Hick found the idea that a loving God would demand the death of His son to be "morally revolting." He argues that a truly loving father wouldn't need a blood payment to forgive his children.
3. Subjective Transformation: Unlike Barth (who says the world changed objectively), Hick says atonement happens subjectively. It’s about soul-making. Jesus' life and death inspire us to move from "self-centredness" to "Reality-centredness" (God-centredness).
Did you know?
John Hick started as a very traditional evangelical Christian! It was only after he moved to multicultural Birmingham and met people of other faiths that he began to question if Christianity was the only way to salvation.
4. Comparing Barth and Hick
When you are writing your essays, you need to be able to compare and contrast these two thinkers. Here is a handy breakdown:
Karl Barth (Traditional/Exclusive)
- Method: Literal and objective. Atonement really happened in history.
- God’s Role: The Judge who takes our place.
- Human Role: Passive. We just receive the gift God has already won.
- Focus: The uniqueness of Jesus. Only through Christ is there reconciliation.
John Hick (Modern/Pluralist)
- Method: Metaphorical and symbolic. Atonement is a way of talking about change.
- God’s Role: A loving father who doesn't need "payment" to forgive.
- Human Role: Active. We must use the metaphor to transform our own lives.
- Focus: Universalism. The Jesus story is one "map" among many to reach the Divine.
5. Common Mistakes to Avoid
1. Mixing up Objective and Subjective: Remember—Barth = Objective (It happened "out there" regardless of what you think). Hick = Subjective (It happens "in here" when you are inspired by the story).
2. Forgetting the "Judge" Analogy: Students often forget the specific phrasing Barth uses. Make sure to use the phrase "The Judge judged in our place" to get those high marks for specialist language!
3. Assuming Hick doesn't value Jesus: Hick still thinks Jesus is incredibly important! He just doesn't think Jesus is the literal son of God or a literal sacrifice. He sees Jesus as a supreme example of a "God-conscious" person.
6. Summary and Key Takeaways
- Atonement is about making humanity and God "at one" again.
- Karl Barth argues for a literal reconciliation where God, as Jesus, takes our legal punishment upon Himself (The Judge judged in our place).
- John Hick argues that atonement is a metaphor for moral transformation. He rejects the idea that God requires a "sacrifice" to forgive us.
- The big debate: Is salvation something God did once and for all in history (Barth), or is it a personal journey of transformation inspired by a story (Hick)?
Note: For more on the specific texts these scholars wrote, see the chapter on "Anthology Extracts: Christianity".