Affiliation:
1. Houston Baptist University & Free University of Amsterdam
Abstract
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.
Reference15 articles.
1. Anselm (1998) Why God became Man. In Davies B, Evans GR (eds) The Major Works. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Bavinck H (2006) Sin and Salvation in Christ, volume 3. In Bolt J (ed), Vriend J (trans) Reformed Dogmatics. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker.
3. Crisp OD (2014) Deviant Calvinism. Broadening the Reformed Tradition. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.
4. Franks RS (2001) A History of the Doctrine of the Work of Christ. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock.
5. Farris JR, Hamilton SM (2017) Contemporary Restitution Models of Atonement, Divine Justice, and Somatic Death. Irish Theological Quarterly (forthcoming).
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献