Korsets gåde – en undersøgelse af offerbegrebets filosofiske og teologiske implikationer

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Standard

Korsets gåde – en undersøgelse af offerbegrebets filosofiske og teologiske implikationer. / Knudsen, Annette Hjort.

I: Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift, Bind årgang 83, Nr. 3-4, 2020, s. 83-101.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Harvard

Knudsen, AH 2020, 'Korsets gåde – en undersøgelse af offerbegrebets filosofiske og teologiske implikationer', Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift, bind årgang 83, nr. 3-4, s. 83-101. <https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/125880/172782>

APA

Knudsen, A. H. (2020). Korsets gåde – en undersøgelse af offerbegrebets filosofiske og teologiske implikationer. Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift, årgang 83(3-4), 83-101. https://tidsskrift.dk/dtt/article/view/125880/172782

Vancouver

Knudsen AH. Korsets gåde – en undersøgelse af offerbegrebets filosofiske og teologiske implikationer. Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift. 2020;årgang 83(3-4):83-101.

Author

Knudsen, Annette Hjort. / Korsets gåde – en undersøgelse af offerbegrebets filosofiske og teologiske implikationer. I: Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift. 2020 ; Bind årgang 83, Nr. 3-4. s. 83-101.

Bibtex

@article{b88b9aac2f2d412580902fa6c81c5a8d,
title = "Korsets g{\aa}de – en unders{\o}gelse af offerbegrebets filosofiske og teologiske implikationer",
abstract = "t: According to Asle Eikrem{\textquoteright}s book “God as Sacrificial love”, the concept of the Christian God as a God of love is not coherent with the claim that Jesus was sacrificed on the cross for the redemption of human sins. Eikrem{\textquoteright}s conclusion builds on a conceptual framework that describes the crucifixion as a self-sacrifice. His argument makes Jesus co-responsible, thus sanctioning the violent action. This way, evil becomes instrumental which is inconsistent with the notion of God as love. It is the intention of this article to show that (at least) one alternative conceptual framework makes it possible to maintain the view that the crucifixion was necessary for Jesus{\textquoteright} redemptive mission. The crucifixion is thus not inconsistent with, but rather a consequence of the conception of God as love. For Jesus to realize God{\textquoteright}s incarnational intention of establishing a living fellowship with humanity is for him to realize a fellowship of experienced damnation followed by a truly redemptive resurrection. ",
keywords = "Det Teologiske Fakultet, Asle Eikrem – coherence – language – sacrifice – redemption – crucifixion – humanity – love – sin – ethics",
author = "Knudsen, {Annette Hjort}",
year = "2020",
language = "Dansk",
volume = "{\aa}rgang 83",
pages = "83--101",
journal = "Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift",
issn = "0105-3191",
publisher = "Eksistensen",
number = "3-4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Korsets gåde – en undersøgelse af offerbegrebets filosofiske og teologiske implikationer

AU - Knudsen, Annette Hjort

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - t: According to Asle Eikrem’s book “God as Sacrificial love”, the concept of the Christian God as a God of love is not coherent with the claim that Jesus was sacrificed on the cross for the redemption of human sins. Eikrem’s conclusion builds on a conceptual framework that describes the crucifixion as a self-sacrifice. His argument makes Jesus co-responsible, thus sanctioning the violent action. This way, evil becomes instrumental which is inconsistent with the notion of God as love. It is the intention of this article to show that (at least) one alternative conceptual framework makes it possible to maintain the view that the crucifixion was necessary for Jesus’ redemptive mission. The crucifixion is thus not inconsistent with, but rather a consequence of the conception of God as love. For Jesus to realize God’s incarnational intention of establishing a living fellowship with humanity is for him to realize a fellowship of experienced damnation followed by a truly redemptive resurrection.

AB - t: According to Asle Eikrem’s book “God as Sacrificial love”, the concept of the Christian God as a God of love is not coherent with the claim that Jesus was sacrificed on the cross for the redemption of human sins. Eikrem’s conclusion builds on a conceptual framework that describes the crucifixion as a self-sacrifice. His argument makes Jesus co-responsible, thus sanctioning the violent action. This way, evil becomes instrumental which is inconsistent with the notion of God as love. It is the intention of this article to show that (at least) one alternative conceptual framework makes it possible to maintain the view that the crucifixion was necessary for Jesus’ redemptive mission. The crucifixion is thus not inconsistent with, but rather a consequence of the conception of God as love. For Jesus to realize God’s incarnational intention of establishing a living fellowship with humanity is for him to realize a fellowship of experienced damnation followed by a truly redemptive resurrection.

KW - Det Teologiske Fakultet

KW - Asle Eikrem – coherence – language – sacrifice – redemption – crucifixion – humanity – love – sin – ethics

M3 - Tidsskriftartikel

VL - årgang 83

SP - 83

EP - 101

JO - Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift

JF - Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift

SN - 0105-3191

IS - 3-4

ER -

ID: 382438977