While varying in method (e.g. Barth’s dialectic vs. Luther’s sola scriptura), they affirm Scripture as God’s authoritative Word.
Human Dependence on Grace
Augustine, Anselm, Luther, Barth, Bonhoeffer
Each teaches that humans are fundamentally dependent on divine grace for salvation or moral action.
Faith as Response to God’s Initiative
Augustine, Luther, Bonhoeffer, Lewis, Barth
All stress faith as a gift or trust, not merely intellectual assent or ethical striving.
2. Thematic Similarities (Similar Focus or Emphasis)
Theme
Theologians
Description
Grace and Salvation
Augustine, Luther, Anselm
Though from different eras, each outlines how divine grace intervenes to save the human person. Luther draws heavily from Augustine; Anselm adds a juridical framework.
Ethics and Christian Action
Bonhoeffer, Lewis, Barth
These modern figures link theological belief with ethical living and public witness. All are critical of moral compromise.
The Holy Spirit
Basil, Barth, Lewis
Basil affirms the Spirit’s divinity; Barth emphasises the Spirit in revelation; Lewis explores the Spirit’s role in personal sanctification and imagination.
Discipleship
Bonhoeffer, Luther, Lewis
These thinkers underscore obedience, cost, and transformation in the Christian life.
3. Theological Differences (Diverging Positions or Methods)
Issue
Contrast
Commentary
Atonement Theory
Anselm (Satisfaction), Luther (Substitution), Barth (Reconciliation), Lewis (Narrative, Multiple)
Different models emerge: Anselm sees legal satisfaction, Luther sees penal substitution, Barth views it as divine self-offering, while Lewis embraces narrative plurality.
Predestination
Augustine (Strong), Luther (Moderate), Barth (Christological Reframing), Lewis (Minimal)
Augustine and Luther affirm unconditional election. Barth reframes election around Christ as Elect and Elected, while Lewis downplays predestinarian language in favour of moral freedom.
Revelation
Barth (Christ alone), Augustine and Anselm (Reason and Scripture), Lewis (Imagination and Reason), Luther (Scripture alone)
Barth denies any natural theology, unlike Anselm. Lewis embraces imaginative argument, while Luther and Augustine maintain biblical priority with reason as servant.
Cyprian upholds visible episcopal authority. Luther critiques it in favour of Scripture and conscience. Barth resists state-church corruption. Lewis avoids the issue institutionally.
4. Tensions and Conflicts (Historical or Doctrinal)
Conflict Area
Figures in Tension
Analysis
Free Will vs. Predestination
Augustine vs. Pelagius (historically); Luther/Augustine vs. Lewis (implicitly)
Augustine and Luther deny salvific free will, whereas Lewis allows space for genuine human choice, showing a more Arminian leaning.
Church Structure and Sacramentalism
Cyprian vs. Luther, Lewis
Cyprian’s episcopal and sacramental exclusivism is rejected by Luther’s priesthood of all believers and Lewis’s non-sacerdotal Anglicanism.
Natural Theology
Anselm vs. Barth
Anselm uses rational argument (ontological proof); Barth insists God can only be known by revelation, strongly criticising natural theology.
Cultural Optimism vs. Cultural Critique
Lewis vs. Barth
Lewis engages culture as a gift to be redeemed, whereas Barth views it as deeply corrupted by human pride, demanding radical divine interruption.
Summary Table
Theologian
Grace
Church
Scripture
Culture
Ethics
Election
Gregory of Nazianzus
Implicit
Pre-Schism
Affirmed
Not focused
Holiness
Not explicit
Athanasius
Christological
Pre-Schism
Christ-centred
Not focused
Incarnational
Not explicit
Luther
Monergistic
Reformed, anti-hierarchical
Sola Scriptura
Critical
Obedience
Strong
Cyprian
Sacramental
Episcopal, hierarchical
Apostolic
Not engaged
Ecclesial
Minimal
Basil the Great
Sacramental, Spirit-filled
Monastic-episcopal
Liturgical
Liturgical
Holiness
Not focused
Barth
Sovereign, Christocentric
Confessing Church
Word of God
Pessimistic
Responsible
Reframed in Christ
Anselm
Merit-based grace
Catholic sacramental
Philosophical-theological
Not engaged
Moral
Strong
Augustine
Predestinarian
Catholic
Faith and reason
Moral realism
Anti-Pelagian
Strong
Bonhoeffer
Costly grace
Confessing Church
Christocentric
Political
Radical obedience
Ambiguous
Lewis
Transformative, mystical
Broad Anglican
Rational-imaginative
Affirmative
Virtue
Minimal
Conclusion
These ten theologians span 1600 years of Church history, representing a rich tapestry of theological traditions, methods, and emphases. While core convictions unite them—such as Trinitarian orthodoxy, Christ-centred salvation, and the authority of divine revelation—they differ in how they articulate these truths, particularly regarding grace, ecclesiology, culture, and human freedom.
Their differences are not simply doctrinal but also contextual—shaped by persecution, reform, political tyranny, or secularism. Rather than flattening these voices into one uniform theology, this comparative framework invites us to appreciate the diversity of faithful expression in the history of Christian thought.
