Satisfaction-Penal Theories of Atonement
Drawing on an account of satisfaction theories recently set out by Oliver Crisp, I argue that all theories of atonement which specifically relate Christ’s suffering and death to satisfying divine retributive justice, are forms of penal theory. I introduce the notion of satisfaction-penal theories. I...
| Κύριος συγγραφέας: | |
|---|---|
| Τύπος μέσου: | Ηλεκτρονική πηγή Άρθρο |
| Γλώσσα: | Αγγλικά |
| Έλεγχος διαθεσιμότητας: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Έκδοση: |
2026
|
| Στο/Στη: |
TheoLogica
Έτος: 2026, Τόμος: 10, Τεύχος: 1, Σελίδες: 1-22 |
| Άλλες λέξεις-κλειδιά: | B
Atonement
B Satisfaction B Oliver Crisp B Penal Substitution B Penalty |
| Διαθέσιμο Online: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Σύνοψη: | Drawing on an account of satisfaction theories recently set out by Oliver Crisp, I argue that all theories of atonement which specifically relate Christ’s suffering and death to satisfying divine retributive justice, are forms of penal theory. I introduce the notion of satisfaction-penal theories. I compare their structure to penal substitution accounts. In both, the appeal to the dignity of the Son of God is critical. A key underlying difference is what is offered to God: Christ offering himself, in perfect love and obedience, or the value of the punishment borne by him. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2593-0265 |
| Περιλαμβάνει: | Enthalten in: TheoLogica
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.14428/thl.v10i1.84573 |
