Denna uppsats syftar till att analysera den klassiska, den objektiva och den subjektivaförsoningsläran och se hur dessa förhåller sig till den pluralistiska och inklusivistiskareligionssynen. Uppsatsens syfte är att undersöka huruvida synen på Jesus som vägen till frälsning ide tre försoningslärorna förändras om samma försoningslära ställs emot pluralismen respektiveinklusivismen. I en koherensanalys undersöks huruvida någon av försoningslärorna inte är koherentmed pluralismen eller inklusivismen. Genom denna undersökning följer resultatet attsanningsbegreppet inte används på samma sätt i de olika religionssynerna och försoningslärornavilket leder till problem främst mellan den klassiska respektive den objektiva försoningsläran ochpluralismen. Det framkommer även att en viss form av pluralism - den restriktiva - är mer koherentmed försoningslärorna än andra former. Alla former av inklusivism och dess sanningsbegrepp ärmer lättförenliga med den klassiska och den objektiva försoningsläran än med den subjektiva. Ifallet med den subjektiva försoningsläran kan motiveringen för ett inklusivistisk synsätt ifrågasättasvilket gör den mer koherent med pluralism än med inklusivism. / In this essay the coherence between three theories of atonement are analysed with religiouspluralism and religious inclusivism. The atonement theories analysed are the classical, theobjective, and the subjective theory. The result shows if the role of Jesus as saviour in the Passionchanges if the specific theory of atonement is combined with religious pluralism or religiousinclusivism. Through an analysis of the coherence between the three theories of atonement andpluralism and inclusivism, it is made clear that the notion of truth is not viewed in the same waywithin the theories of atonement and religious pluralism and inclusivism. The classical and theobjective theory meets problems when combined with religious pluralism because of this. Only oneform of religious pluralism, the restrictive pluralism, is compatible with theese two theories ofatonement. All forms of religious inclusivism are coherent with the classical and the objectivetheory but not with the subjective theory wich is much more compatible with religious pluralism.

This study examines the nature of, the relationship between salvation, knowledge and faith in the specific context of Christian theology. It seeks to establish an epistemological basis for the Christian message of salvation in a culture which since the time of the Enlightenment has been highly sceptical of religious claims. This study begins with a critique of the theology of Emil Brunner. It accepts two of his theological premises; that human reason and philosophy cannot prove the truth of salvation, and that the salvation of which Christianity speaks does not address humanity like a bolt from the blue as some groundless revelation but on the basis of a point of contact between man and God, which allows humanity to recognise the salvific event. The distinction Brunner draws between 'personal' knowledge as an encounter between subjects, and 'objective' knowledge which is the construct of human reason enables him to speak of revelation in an unusual and original way. According to this thesis Christian revelation is at the same time rationally and 'personally' comprehensible, and yet not capable of being deduced or verified by human reason. However closer investigation reveals that Brunner's exposition of the incarnation as the 'personal' self-revelation of God within history is not coherent in itself. His understanding of both the 'personal' and the 'historical' is not so much derived from a natural understanding of personality and history, but rather from a use of those terms as defined by, an understanding of revelation which contains implicit within it the groundlessness and the 'alien' nature of revelation which, he sought to avoid. It is the contention of this thesis that in spite of Brunner's failure it is possible to use his basic categories of the 'historical' and the 'personal' to speak of salvation as the, confirmation within history of human 'personal' worth. This worth is ultimately indescribable and inexplicable in the categories of a contingent and finite world, and, as such, is open to a transcendent confirmation and validation. The Christian tradition, itself rooted in the tradition of Judaism, bears witness, like Judaism, to the experience of such a 'personal' validation and vindication. In this sense, therefore, the resurrection of Jesus, while offering no historical 'proof of the truth' on account of its essentially 'personal' nature, can be seen as a legitimate epistemological basis for an understanding of salvation, which still preserves the primacy of faith. However the focus upon the category of salvation, and salvation as an epistemological touchstone, reveals that the resurrection of Jesus confirms not so much the traditional distinctive Christological ontology, but rather a more all-embracing ontology of the gracious transcendence of love itself which resists the narrow and distinctive definitions of orthodoxy. In fact an epistemologically valid ontology of faith's activity in love allows the traditional ontologies of Christology, Soteriology and the Trinity to be seen as peripheral to a contemporary articulation of the Christian message of salvation on account of their dubious epistemological foundations.

The Christian tradition, both East and West, has developed various models and theories of the atonement as explanations of what it means to speak of the reconciling activity of God in Christ. Central to these has been the claim that God has reconciled the world to himself in Christ. One way of testifying to the reconciling love of God has been the adoption of the metaphor theosis (�divinization�, �deification�) as an explanation of salvation. While central to Eastern Orthodoxy, a doctrine of theosis also has a rich tradition within Western, especially Reformed theology. The Reformed theologian, Thomas Forsyth Torrance, represents an attempt to construct a soteriology that incorporates both Eastern and Western models of the atonement around the controlling metaphor of theosis. A close reading of his theology presents a robust and clearly articulated doctrine of theosis as a key way of expressing God�s reconciling activity in Christ. As the true Man and the last Adam, Christ represents the arche and telos of human existence, the one in whose image all humanity has been created and into whose likeness all humanity is destined to be transformed from glory to glory. Through the Incarnation the Son becomes human without ceasing to be divine, to unite humanity and divinity together and effect a �deification� of human nature, mediated to men and women who are said to be �in Christ� by the work of the Holy Spirit. By means of a �wonderful exchange� Christ takes what is ours and gives us what is his. For Torrance, this is the heart of atonement. The goal of humanity is worship, something Torrance defines as the gift of participating through the Spirit in the incarnate Son�s communion with the Father. The locus of worship, and thus of theosis, is the church, the communion of saints created by the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. Throughout Torrance�s doctrines of creation, anthropology, incarnation, reconciliation, and pneumato-ecclesiology, the concept of theosis plays a central and constitutive role in explaining a Christian theology of salvation. Theosis is thus foundational to Torrance�s theology and is one way in which he holds together in systematic fashion his diverse theological oeuvre.

Thesis (M.A.-Miss.)--Nazarene Theological Seminary, 1988. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 96-100).

Thesis (M.T.S.)--International Christian Graduate University, School of Theology, 1987. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 102-106).

Thesis (M.Phil.)--Hong Kong Baptist University, 2005. / Thesis submitted to the Dept. of Religion and Philosophy. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 149-163).

Thesis (M.T.S.)--International Christian Graduate University, School of Theology, 1987. / Bibliography: leaves 102-106.

Thesis (M.A.)--Dallas Theological Seminary, 2003. / Available. Bibliography: leaves 55-60. Issued also in microform.

Thesis (M. Div. Theological Studies)--Multnomah Biblical Seminary, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 112-119).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Bob Jones University, 1994. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 196-205).