Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Approaching Participation in the Divine Gift: Anselm of Canterbury’s Theology of the Holy Spirit.Parker Haratine - 2019 - Heythrop Journal 62 (4):729-742.
    This article seeks to constructively retrieve Anselm’s theology of the Holy Spirit by responding to a recent criticism of his doctrine of atonement. This criticism is called the question of efficacy and focuses particularly on how Anselm holds humanity to participate in and receive the divine gift of atonement. In short, this paper argues that the Spirit’s prevenient and subsequent grace allow for an individual to respond freely and in faith to Christ’s work, resulting in three individually necessary and jointly (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Reparative Substitution and the ‘Efficacy Objection’: Toward a Modified Satisfaction Theory of Atonement.Joshua R. Farris & S. Mark Hamilton - 2017 - Perichoresis 15 (3):97-110.
    The doctrine of the atonement is a subject of perpetual curiosity for a number of contemporary theologians. The penal substitution theory of atonement in particular has precipitated a great deal of recent interest, being held up by many Protestants as ‘the’ doctrine of atonement. In this essay, we make a defense against the objection to the Anselmian theory of atonement that is often leveled against it by exponents of the Penal Substitution theory, namely, that Christ’s work does not accomplish anything (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Trinitarian Inseparable Operations and the Incarnation.Adonis Vidu - 2016 - Journal of Analytic Theology 4:106-127.
    The present article argues that the doctrine of the inseparable external operations of the Trinity is consistent with the doctrine of the incarnation of the Son alone. To demonstrate this, it will be shown, first, that the assumption of human nature can be ascribed to the Son alone when taken as a state, as opposed to an action. Secondly, I will defend John Owen’s claim that the Son is not the “immediate” agent of Christ’s actions. Finally, an appeal is made (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark