본문 바로가기
  • Home

Atonement and Ethics: A Critical Review on Denny Weaver’s Criticism on Satisfaction Atonement and Joanne Brown’s “Divine Child Abuse” Theme

  • The Korean Journal of Chiristian Social Ethics
  • Abbr : 기사윤
  • 2014, (30), pp.161-193
  • Publisher : The Society Of Korean Christian Social Ethics
  • Research Area : Humanities > Christian Theology

Park, Jae-Eun 1

1Calvin Theological Seminary

Accredited

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to seek a proper answer about whether J. DennyWeaver’s criticism on satisfaction atonement and Joanne Carlson Brown’s “DivineChild Abuse” theme in the atonement is an ethically and theologically soundargument. Weaver and Brown think that the doctrine of atonement (specifically,the satisfaction and penal substitution theory) does permit a separation of theologyand ethics. Weaver holds that since the satisfaction theory merely focuses on“ahistorical” or “abstract” aspects of atonement, it does not address believers’ realmoral life. According to Brown, the atonement image in the penal substitutiontheory has a horrible image of “divine child abuse” and therefore, should be regardedas immoral. However, through this study, it will finally be shown thattheir arguments are ethically and theologically problematic, for (1) Weaver andBrown both confuse the scope of the atonement ethics; (2) Brown not only confusesthe object and subject-matter of the atonement ethics, but also tends to neglector misunderstand the notion of divine intentionality in the atonement; and(3) Weaver fails to see both aspects of atonement (i.e., objective and subjective)with a balanced view.

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.