scholarly journals The Coherence of Penal Substitution: An Edwardsean Defence

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Woznicki
Keyword(s):  
Penal Substitution

Do We Believe in Consequences? Revisiting the “Incoherence Objection” to Penal Substitution

2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (2) ◽  
pp. 208-228
Author(s):  
Christopher Woznicki
Keyword(s):  
Moral Responsibility ◽  
Special Reference ◽  
Union With Christ ◽  
Corporate Moral Responsibility ◽  
Penal Substitution

Summary Among recent assessments of penal substitutionary accounts of atonement one significant critique is Mark Murphy’s “incoherence objection.” In this essay I express general agreement with Murphy’s critique of penal substitution, yet I suggest that there is a way to reconceive the doctrine of atonement such that it is conceptually coherent, is commensurate with scripture, and is a version of penal substitution. I call this view: The Penal-Consequence View of Atonement. This is a view of atonement that makes use of a distinction between what I call “penal consequences” and “mere consequences.” The view is defended with special reference to the topics of corporate moral responsibility and union with Christ.

scholarly journals Re-Thinking Atonement in Jonathan Edwards and New England Theology

Perichoresis ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-99
Author(s):  
S. Mark Hamilton
Keyword(s):  
New England ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
Jonathan Edwards ◽  
Substitution Model ◽  
Divine Justice ◽  
Penal Substitution

Abstract Jonathan Edwards′ New England theology has a great deal more to say that is of contemporary doctrinal interest than it is often credited with, particularly as it relates to the doctrine of atonement. This article explores several anomalous claims made be this 18th and 19th century tradition, and in this way, challenges the recent and growing consensus that Edwards espoused the penal substitution model and his successors a moral government model. I argue that of all that is yet to be considered about their doctrine of atonement, we ought to begin with those claims made about the nature and demands of divine justice.

scholarly journals Teologi Kebangkitan: Mengkaji Kembali Pemikiran Wolfhart Panenberg Tentang Kebangkitan

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 110-117
Author(s):  
Tolop Oloan Marbun
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Method ◽  
Historical Approach ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Death Of Jesus ◽  
Penal Substitution ◽  
Wolfhart Pannenberg

This article examines the theology of resurrection: rethinking the thought of Wolfhart Pannenberg about resurrection. Resurrection is the centre of Pannenberg theology. In his views, the bible should be approached in a historical approach and the resurrection is the climax of incarnation since the incarnation was progressive. The method is a qualitative method with a literature approach. The author will describe Pannenberg’s thought, after that the author will evaluate his thought, and last the author will give argumentations.  As the result, histories were written in the bible because of revelation, the resurrection was not the climax of the incarnation. Bible did not agree with the progressive incarnation, and the death of Jesus was not a catastrophe.  The conclusion, Bible should be approached in a revelation approach, Jesus as fully God from eternity to eternity. Bible does not have internal testimony that incarnation was progressive. The death of Jesus is penal substitution. Artikel ini membahas tentang Teologi Kebangkitan: Mengkaji ulang pemikiran Wolfhart Pannenberg tentang kebangkitan. Kebangkitan merupakan sentral dari teologi Pannenberg. Dalam pandangan Pannenberg, Alkitab harus dipelajari dengan pendekatan historis dan kebangkitan merupakan klimaks dari inkarnasi. Metode yang digunakan metode kualiatas dengan pendekatan studi Pustaka. Pertama penulis akan deskripsikan pemikiran Pannenberg, selanjutanya penulis akan mengkaji ulang pemikirannya dan terakhir penulis akan memberikan argumentasi. Hasilnya, sejarah ditulis dalam Alkitab karena pewahyuan, kebangkitan bukan klimaks inkarnasi, Alkitab tidak menyetujui inkaranis progresif dan kematian Yesus Kristus bukan sebuah catastrophe. Kesimpulannya, mempelajari Alkitab harus menggunakan pendekatan wahyu, Yesus Kristus adalah Allah dari kekekalan sampai kekekalan, Alkitab tidak memiliki kesaksian internal mengenai inkarnasi progresif, dan kematian Yesus adalah penal substitusi.

Is penal substitution unjust?

2018 ◽  
Vol 83 (3) ◽  
pp. 231-244
Author(s):  
William Lane Craig
Keyword(s):  
Penal Substitution

Quid Pro Quo Satisfaction? An Analysis and Response to Garry Williams on Penal Substitutionary Atonement and Definite Atonement

2018 ◽  
Vol 89 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-70
Author(s):  
Michael Lynch
Keyword(s):  
Logical Consistency ◽  
Main Thesis ◽  
Penal Substitution

Advocates of definite atonement have often argued that penal substitutionary atonement entails the doctrine that Christ satisfied for the sins of the elect alone. Recently, Garry Williams published two essays in a book entitled From Heaven He Came and Sought Her defending the thesis that logical consistency demands that if one affirms penal substitution, classically understood, then one must affirm definite atonement. This paper responds to Williams’s two essays and his main thesis by noting several historical considerations that significantly undermine Williams’s exposition of what he deems to be the ‘classic’ doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement. Further it is shown that the various theological problems proffered by Reformed theologians against Williams’s pecuniary version of penal substitution—such as R. L. Dabney’s response to John Owen’s double-payment argument—are inadequately addressed.

Divine Love, Divine Holiness, and the Atonement

2021 ◽  
pp. 188-211
Author(s):  
Mark C. Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Divine Action ◽  
Divine Love ◽  
Penal Substitution ◽  
Union With God ◽  
The Way

The chapter contrasts what we should expect and require from a theory of Atonement if we take divine action to be governed by the holiness framework and if we do not. The primary foil is Eleonore Stump’s unqualifiedly and exclusively love framework account of the Atonement. Stump’s way of categorizing theories of the Atonement based on whether the obstacle to union with God is in us or in God is inadequate; rather, the appropriate distinction is between views that take the obstacle to be psychological (as Stump’s own view does) or normative (as satisfaction and penal substitution views do). By Stump’s own lights, the way in which past sin is an obstacle to union with God requires a normative treatment, and the holiness framework provides a plausible explanation of this: so long as such past sin is not dealt with, it normatively precludes the fuller unity with God that is constitutive of our good.

scholarly journals Reparative Substitution and the ‘Efficacy Objection’: Toward a Modified Satisfaction Theory of Atonement

Perichoresis ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 97-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua R. Farris ◽  
S. Mark Hamilton
Keyword(s):  
Recent Interest ◽  
Penal Substitution ◽  
Evangelical Protestants ◽  
Satisfaction Theory

Abstract 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 (mostly evangelical) 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 for those whom it appears he undertakes his atoning work, but merely makes provision for salvation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document