Atonement without satisfaction

Religious Studies 37 (4):397-416 (2001)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to Swinburne, one way of dealing with the guilt that attaches to a morally bad action is satisfaction, consisting of repentance, apology, reparation, and penance. Thus, Christ's life and death make atonement for human sin by providing a reparation which human beings would otherwise be unable to pay. I argue that the nature of God's creative activity entails that human beings can by themselves make reparation for their sins, merely by apology. So there is no need for additional reparation, and the satisfaction theory of the atonement is otiose. Following an insight of Swinburne's, I argue that satisfaction is not sufficient for forgiveness, since satisfaction does not place the wronged party under any obligation to forgive the wrongdoer. Christ's death merits the forgiveness of those sins for which human beings have made satisfaction. It does this in virtue of a divine promise to reward Christ's meritorious life with the forgiveness of such human sin.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,830

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
160 (#144,117)

6 months
12 (#282,714)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Richard Cross
University of Notre Dame

Citations of this work

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.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references