{"title":"黑格尔的《骆驼》。从和解史到赎罪论","authors":"R. Saarinen","doi":"10.1515/nzsth-2022-0018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The paper discusses the relationship between “atonement” and “reconciliation” in systematic theology, claiming that Hegel’s concept of reconciliation (Versöhnung) continues to influence contemporary English-speaking theology. It is argued that the so-called theories of atonement often tacitly assume “Hegel’s camel”, an idea consisting of three propositions as follows: (i) atonement is a consistent umbrella concept that pertains to the systematic explanation of the entire work of Christ, (ii) atonement contains both an overarching rational insight and a moral code of conduct that provide an apology for the truth of Christian faith, (iii) Anselm of Canterbury has seminal importance when this rational atonement is explained. The paper complements the author’s historical-critical discussion of “reconciliation” undertaken in St. Andrews Encyclopedia of Theology.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hegel’s Camel. From the History of Reconciliation to the Theory of Atonement\",\"authors\":\"R. Saarinen\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/nzsth-2022-0018\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The paper discusses the relationship between “atonement” and “reconciliation” in systematic theology, claiming that Hegel’s concept of reconciliation (Versöhnung) continues to influence contemporary English-speaking theology. It is argued that the so-called theories of atonement often tacitly assume “Hegel’s camel”, an idea consisting of three propositions as follows: (i) atonement is a consistent umbrella concept that pertains to the systematic explanation of the entire work of Christ, (ii) atonement contains both an overarching rational insight and a moral code of conduct that provide an apology for the truth of Christian faith, (iii) Anselm of Canterbury has seminal importance when this rational atonement is explained. The paper complements the author’s historical-critical discussion of “reconciliation” undertaken in St. Andrews Encyclopedia of Theology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/nzsth-2022-0018\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/nzsth-2022-0018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Hegel’s Camel. From the History of Reconciliation to the Theory of Atonement
Abstract The paper discusses the relationship between “atonement” and “reconciliation” in systematic theology, claiming that Hegel’s concept of reconciliation (Versöhnung) continues to influence contemporary English-speaking theology. It is argued that the so-called theories of atonement often tacitly assume “Hegel’s camel”, an idea consisting of three propositions as follows: (i) atonement is a consistent umbrella concept that pertains to the systematic explanation of the entire work of Christ, (ii) atonement contains both an overarching rational insight and a moral code of conduct that provide an apology for the truth of Christian faith, (iii) Anselm of Canterbury has seminal importance when this rational atonement is explained. The paper complements the author’s historical-critical discussion of “reconciliation” undertaken in St. Andrews Encyclopedia of Theology.