The destructive power of atonement theology
Various theologians pose the question of whether the biblical message of atonement through the blood of Christ does not legitimate violence. An outspoken representative of them is J. Harold Ellens. According to him, the metaphor of a God who kills his own son not only contradicts the original biblic...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
NTWSA
2006
|
| In: |
Neotestamentica
Year: 2006, Volume: 40, Issue: 2, Pages: 383-401 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
| Summary: | Various theologians pose the question of whether the biblical message of atonement through the blood of Christ does not legitimate violence. An outspoken representative of them is J. Harold Ellens. According to him, the metaphor of a God who kills his own son not only contradicts the original biblical theology of unconditional grace-it also breeds violence. In this paper his arguments are scrutinized from three perspectives: the biblical-exegetical evidence, the evidence from the history of Christianity, and the cultural-anthropological view of René Girard. It is argued that although it is indisputable that Christian atonement theology from time to time has been a destructive power in world history, the question, however, of whether this destructive power is rooted in the gospel itself is much more complicated. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2518-4628 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Neotestamentica
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.10520/EJC83246 |