Religious Studies 32 (2):187 - 204 (1996)
I criticize Richard Swinburne's account of the need for and means of atonement in his "Responsibility and Atonement." I offer objections to his understanding and use of the notion of 'the gift of life' in his account of the need for atonement; and closely related to that, I show that his conclusions about duties to God as a benefactor do not follow from his reasons. Furthermore, when examined closely, these conclusions seem false. In relation to his account of the means of atonement, I argue that the mechanism he provides to explain how Christ's actions benefit sinners does not work.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
The Mystery of Atonement and Swinburne's Reparation Theory.Alexander Hyun - 2017 - Religious Studies 53 (1):133-141.
Similar books and articles
Christian Atonement and Kantian Justification.Philip L. Quinn - 1986 - Faith and Philosophy 3 (4):440-462.
Abelard on Atonement: Nothing Unintelligible, Arbitrary, Illogical, or Immoral About It'.Philip Quinn - 1993 - In E. Stump (ed.), Reasoned Faith. Cornell Univ Pr.
Swinburnian Atonement and the Doctrine of Penal Substitution.Steven L. Porter - 2004 - Faith and Philosophy 21 (2):228-241.
Swinburne on the Atonement: Reflections on Philosophical Theology and Religious Dialogue.Amir Dastmalchian - 2012 - Journal of Inter-Religious Dialogue (10):49-60.
The Christian Scheme of Salvation.Richard Swinburne - 1988 - In Thomas V. Morris (ed.), Philosophy and the Christian Faith. Univ. Of Notre Dame Press. pp. 13-30.
A Participatory Model of the Atonement.Tim Bayne & Greg Restall - 2009 - In Yujin Nagasawa & Erik J. Wielenberg (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Religion. Palgrave-Macmillan. pp. 150.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads14 ( #329,897 of 2,158,893 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #193,044 of 2,158,893 )
How can I increase my downloads?