The Satisfaction theory of atonement, according to Dr. Bounds, is a view that we have personally offended God through our sin. This offense kindles God’s wrath against us and Christ’s death satisfies that wrath. Felker Jones explains that this theory is put forth by Anselm who teaches that God’s salvation is both just and merciful. She explains that the theory focuses on Jesus’s substitutionary sacrifice and has strengths in being rooted in the person of Jesus Christ, taking seriously justification, dealing with the horror and the consequences of sin, emphasizing both the justice and faithfulness of God, putting this sacrifice at the center of biblical narrative. Felker Jones points out some drawbacks being less emphasis on the incarnation and resurrection, individual focused, and justification focused.
I appreciate the way Felker Jones sums up Anselm’s thought process, “God’s salvation is both just and merciful. Justice is seen in the fact that God responds to sin with the punishment it deserves, mercy in God’s willingness to become human in order to pay sin’s just prices.” I am compelled to respond to this theory because it speaks to the wrath of God. It recognizes that our sin offends God and requires a resolution for that offense while also recognizing that God - in His great mercy- becomes the resolution. It recognizes that justice is human offending=human resolving.