非裸权限

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION
Sean Luke
{"title":"非裸权限","authors":"Sean Luke","doi":"10.1163/15697312-bja10040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n How does God ordain creaturely evil while preserving their freedom? In this article, I compare Calvin’s views on God’s relationship to evil with those of the English Reformed. I survey Calvin’s views from his commentaries and the Institutes, arguing that they share several salient features with the views of the English Reformed. However, I also note that the English Reformed more readily use the language of “contingency” and “divine permission” with respect to creaturely evil; this difference is reflected in the language of Westminster, which more closely reflects the language of the English Reformed instead of Calvin.","PeriodicalId":53817,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Reformed Theology","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Not a Bare Permission\",\"authors\":\"Sean Luke\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15697312-bja10040\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n How does God ordain creaturely evil while preserving their freedom? In this article, I compare Calvin’s views on God’s relationship to evil with those of the English Reformed. I survey Calvin’s views from his commentaries and the Institutes, arguing that they share several salient features with the views of the English Reformed. However, I also note that the English Reformed more readily use the language of “contingency” and “divine permission” with respect to creaturely evil; this difference is reflected in the language of Westminster, which more closely reflects the language of the English Reformed instead of Calvin.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53817,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Reformed Theology\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Reformed Theology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15697312-bja10040\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Reformed Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15697312-bja10040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

上帝是如何在保护人类自由的同时,命定邪恶的?在这篇文章中,我将加尔文关于上帝与邪恶关系的观点与英国改革宗的观点进行比较。我从加尔文的注释和《要旨》中考察他的观点,认为他们与英国改革宗的观点有几个显著的共同点。然而,我也注意到,英国改革宗更倾向于使用“偶然性”和“神的许可”这样的语言来描述受造之恶;这种差异反映在威斯敏斯特的语言上,它更接近地反映了英国改革宗的语言,而不是加尔文的语言。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Not a Bare Permission
How does God ordain creaturely evil while preserving their freedom? In this article, I compare Calvin’s views on God’s relationship to evil with those of the English Reformed. I survey Calvin’s views from his commentaries and the Institutes, arguing that they share several salient features with the views of the English Reformed. However, I also note that the English Reformed more readily use the language of “contingency” and “divine permission” with respect to creaturely evil; this difference is reflected in the language of Westminster, which more closely reflects the language of the English Reformed instead of Calvin.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
50.00%
发文量
36
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信