'Penal non-Substitution'

OD Crisp

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)


There are two broad historic approaches to the so-called governmental view of the atonement (which is better described, from its defining characteristic, as penal non-substitution): the Grotian or Arminian version, and the New England or Calvinistic version. The important differences of emphasis between these two approaches are re-examined. One version of the doctrine, drawing on the work of the New England theologian Jonathan Edwards Jnr (1745–1801), is defended against several criticisms often made of the theory. It is argued that, although not without problems, penal non-substitution is a robust account of atonement that should be taken much more seriously than it has been in the recent literature.
Translated title of the contribution'Penal non-Substitution'
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)140 - 168
Number of pages28
JournalJournal of Theological Studies
VolumeNS 59 .1
Publication statusPublished - 2008

Bibliographical note

Publisher: Oxford University Press

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of ''Penal non-Substitution''. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this