Is penal substitution incoherent?: An examination of Mark Murphy's criticisms
Some critics of the doctrine of penal substitution have alleged that the doctrine is incoherent because punishment entails an attitude of condemnation or censure towards the person punished, which is impossible in the case of Christ. It is shown that this objection is multiply flawed and that a numb...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
[2018]
|
| In: |
Religious studies
Year: 2018, Volume: 54, Issue: 4, Pages: 509-526 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Murphy, Mark C. 1968-
/ Criminal law
/ Punishment
/ Substitution
|
| IxTheo Classification: | AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism XA Law |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | Some critics of the doctrine of penal substitution have alleged that the doctrine is incoherent because punishment entails an attitude of condemnation or censure towards the person punished, which is impossible in the case of Christ. It is shown that this objection is multiply flawed and that a number of viable ways of avoiding the alleged incoherence are available to the penal substitution theorist. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1469-901X |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Religious studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S003441251700018X |