How Sin Works: A Review Essay
Reviewing works by James Alison, Alistair McFadyen, Andrew Sung Park, Ted Peters, and Solomon Schimmel, the author suggests that the status and (dys)function of the discourse/doctrine of sin highlight tensions between theology and ethics in ways that suggest the character, limits, and promise of rel...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Wiley-Blackwell
2001
|
| Dans: |
Journal of religious ethics
Année: 2001, Volume: 29, Numéro: 3, Pages: 443-470 |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Agency
B Desire B Victims B self-justification B Sin B Will B Acts |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Résumé: | Reviewing works by James Alison, Alistair McFadyen, Andrew Sung Park, Ted Peters, and Solomon Schimmel, the author suggests that the status and (dys)function of the discourse/doctrine of sin highlight tensions between theology and ethics in ways that suggest the character, limits, and promise of religious ethics. This literature commends attention to sin-talk because it helps religious ethicists to render more adequately the dynamics of human agency, sociality, and culture and because it raises questions about the nature and task of theology, faith, and morality. Yet these volumes also indicate that religious ethics should pay more attention to particular sins. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1467-9795 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Journal of religious ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/0384-9694.00093 |