Switch to: References

Citations of:

Justice, Mercy, Supererogation, and Atonement

In Thomas P. Flint (ed.), Christian Philosophy. Univ Notre Dame Pr (1990)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Communal Substitutionary Atonement.Joshua Thurow - 2015 - Journal of Analytic Theology 3:47-69.
    In this paper I develop and defend a new theory of the Atonement - the Communal Substitution Theory. According to the Communal Substitution Theory, by dying on the cross Jesus either takes on the punishment for, or offers satisfaction for, the sins of the human community. Individual humans have sinned, but human communities have sinned as well. Jesus dies for the communal sins. As a result, human communities are forgiven and reconciled to God, and through the event of communal forgiveness, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Is penal substitution unjust?William Lane Craig - 2018 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 83 (3):231-244.
    Penal substitution in a theological context is the doctrine that God inflicted upon Christ the suffering which we deserved as the punishment for our sins, as a result of which we no longer deserve punishment. Ever since the time of Faustus Socinus, the doctrine has faced formidable, and some would say insuperable, philosophical challenges. Critics of penal substitution frequently assert that God’s punishing Christ in our place would be an injustice on God’s part. For it is an axiom of retributive (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (2 other versions)A participatory model of the atonement.Tim Bayne & Greg Restall - 2008 - In Yujin Nagasawa & Erik Wielenberg (eds.), New waves in philosophy of religion. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan. pp. 150.
    In this paper we develop a participatory model of the Christian doctrine of the atonement, according to which the atonement involves participating in the death and resurrection of Christ. In part one we argue that current models of the atonement—exemplary, penal, substitutionary and merit models—are unsatisfactory. The central problem with these models is that they assume a purely deontic conception of sin and, as a result, they fail to address sin as a relational and ontological problem. In part two we (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations