David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In “The Nature of the Atonement”, Eleonore Stump explores the problem of human sin that the atonement is meant to solve, helpfully uncovering important adequacy conditions for theories of atonement. She then uses those conditions to critically evaluate Anselmian and Thomistic theories of atonement, arguing (among many other interesting things) that the Thomist has a leg up on the Anselmian when it comes to the atonement-motivating problem of human sin (pp.11-12 of ms.). I argue for two claims in what follows. First, Stump’s two seemingly independent “further problems” for theorists of atonement (discussed in the penultimate section of her paper) in fact reduce to a single challenge, which suggests a strategy for future theorizing about the atonement. Second, Stump’s case that the Thomist outperforms the Anselmian on the problem of human sin is weaker than it initially appears. As we’ll see, Stump’s own account of shame implies that the Anselmian’s difficulties on this front are less serious than she thinks
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Evan Fales (1989). Antediluvian Theodicy. Faith and Philosophy 6 (3):320-329.
Steven L. Porter (2004). Swinburnian Atonement and the Doctrine of Penal Substitution. Faith and Philosophy 21 (2):228-241.
Linda Radzik (2009). Making Amends: Atonement in Morality, Law, and Politics. Oxford University Press.
Richard Cross (2001). Atonement Without Satisfaction. Religious Studies 37 (4):397-416.
Bruce R. Reichenbach (1999). Inclusivism and the Atonement. Faith and Philosophy 16 (1):43-54.
Richard Swinburne (1989). Responsibility and Atonement. Oxford University Press.
Eleonore Stump (1994). Responsibility and Atonement. Faith and Philosophy 11 (2):321-328.
Steven S. Aspenson (1996). Swinburne on Atonement. Religious Studies 32 (2):187 - 204.
Tim Bayne & Greg Restall (2009). A Participatory Model of the Atonement. In Yujin Nagasawa & Erik J. Wielenberg (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Religion. Palgrave Macmillan. 150.
Added to index2010-08-19
Total downloads43 ( #56,215 of 1,696,640 )
Recent downloads (6 months)9 ( #64,116 of 1,696,640 )
How can I increase my downloads?