Chytraeus on Sacrifice

John Warwick Montgomery points out that most heresies come about because both/and is turned into either/or. He says that an invidious comparison is made between two things, both of which are correct. "Did Christ die in order to conquer the evil powers OR was it a vicarious sacrifice?" That question is similar to "When did you stop beating your wife?" No matter how you answer it you will be in the wrong. Christ did both: he died to conquer the evil powers against man and to die on our behalf. Montgomery points out quite correctly that there are several atonement motifs presented in the New Testament, but the substitutionary motif is the strongest and deserves to be stressed the most amongst all the motifs. In fact, the substitutionary or vicarious motif is laid out in the book of Hebrews. Montgomery's short essay in the appendix of this book compares Anselm's approach with dealing with the atonement motifs in a theologically proper way with a few other approaches.

John Warwick Montgomery points out that most heresies come about because both/and is turned into either/or. He says that an invidious comparison is made between two things, both of which are correct. "Did Christ die in order to conquer the evil powers OR was it a vicarious sacrifice?" That question is similar to "When did you stop beating your wife?" No matter how you answer it you will be in the wrong. Christ did both: he died to conquer the evil powers against man and to die on our behalf. Montgomery points out quite correctly that there are several atonement motifs presented in the New Testament, but the substitutionary motif is the strongest and deserves to be stressed the most amongst all the motifs. In fact, the substitutionary or vicarious motif is laid out in the book of Hebrews. Montgomery's short essay in the appendix of this book compares Anselm's approach with dealing with the atonement motifs in a theologically proper way with a few other approaches.