Is Anselm's Argument Of Cur Deus Homo?

Anselm’s work Cur Deus Homo is one of the first attempts to create a systematic account of the atonement. For this Anselm should be praised and his argument understood. More recently, Cur Deus Homo has come under scrutiny from modern perspectives as an antiquated and dissatisfying way to articulate the work of Christ. Even if Anselm states certain ideas that would be common for his readers, Anselm’s work should not be undermined and belittled by modern theologians. In fact, it should be amended and accentuated for theological reflection. So, for this paper, I will briefly sketch the argument of Cur Deus Homo, move to a critical reflection on the work, and finally promote a minor way to bolster and amend his work for contemporary readership. …show more content…
happiness in God (II.1,4). Anselm uses this language because he is explicitly drawing from his conception of God being a perfect being (Monologion), even within his dealing with the atonement of a God-man. Hence, Anselm stays within the confines of his theology, which is not only admirable but exposes a well-understood implication of his own theology proper. However, Anselm does a post hoc on the place of human beings who contemplate God as the ones who repopulate the heavenly city in place of the fallen angels (I.16–18). This appears to be dubious given he never touches on this topic again. Anselm believes that humanity is the ones who take the place of fallen angelic beings, yet without him to develop the idea any further, conclusions can be made about the reason for creating human nature. Also, it makes God’s foreknowledge of the number to repopulate the city haphazard to the number of human beings in general. Hence, it makes God OCD about the fullness of the heavenly city, making the material world a by-product of God’s unwillingness to redeem fallen angels (II.21). Also, it is a deductive fallacy that humans beings were made to repopulate the heavenly