The Two Natures of the Incarnate Christ and the Bearer Question

Q2 Arts and Humanities TheoLogica Pub Date : 2019-01-19 DOI:10.14428/THL.V2I3.17663
Mihretu P. Guta
{"title":"The Two Natures of the Incarnate Christ and the Bearer Question","authors":"Mihretu P. Guta","doi":"10.14428/THL.V2I3.17663","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Chalcedonian Definition states that the incarnate Christ is both fully human and fully divine. But spelling out what the Chalcedonian Definition entails continues to be a subject of intense controversy among philosophers and theologians alike. One of these controversies concerns what I call the problem of the bearer question. At the heart of this question lies whether or not the two natures of Christ require two distinct bearers. In section I, I will explain the problem of the bearer question and how it arises directly due to the Chalcedonian Definition. In section II, I will propose a solution to the problem of the bearer question within the framework of what I call, a ‘Multi–Track Disposition Model of the Incarnation’. At the heart of this model lies the notion that the manifestation of properties is multi–directional in the sense that there is a reciprocal partnership among property manifestations. In section III, I will contrast the solution proposed to the bearer question by the Multi–Track Model to that of a ‘Kenotic Model of the Incarnation’. I will argue that the Multi–Track Model provides us with better conceptual resources to make sense of the bearer question. Finally, in section IV, I will briefly point out why ultimately a conclusive answer to the bearer question may still prove to be elusive because the bearer question gives rise to a host of other unresolved questions.","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TheoLogica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14428/THL.V2I3.17663","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The Chalcedonian Definition states that the incarnate Christ is both fully human and fully divine. But spelling out what the Chalcedonian Definition entails continues to be a subject of intense controversy among philosophers and theologians alike. One of these controversies concerns what I call the problem of the bearer question. At the heart of this question lies whether or not the two natures of Christ require two distinct bearers. In section I, I will explain the problem of the bearer question and how it arises directly due to the Chalcedonian Definition. In section II, I will propose a solution to the problem of the bearer question within the framework of what I call, a ‘Multi–Track Disposition Model of the Incarnation’. At the heart of this model lies the notion that the manifestation of properties is multi–directional in the sense that there is a reciprocal partnership among property manifestations. In section III, I will contrast the solution proposed to the bearer question by the Multi–Track Model to that of a ‘Kenotic Model of the Incarnation’. I will argue that the Multi–Track Model provides us with better conceptual resources to make sense of the bearer question. Finally, in section IV, I will briefly point out why ultimately a conclusive answer to the bearer question may still prove to be elusive because the bearer question gives rise to a host of other unresolved questions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
道成肉身的基督的二性与承载者的问题
迦克墩定义指出,道成肉身的基督是完全的人,也是完全的神。但是,阐明迦克顿定义所包含的内容仍然是哲学家和神学家之间激烈争论的主题。其中一个争论涉及我所说的持票人问题。这个问题的核心在于基督的两个本性是否需要两个不同的承担者。在第一节,我将解释持票人问题的问题,以及它是如何直接由于迦克墩定义而产生的。在第二节中,我将在我所谓的“化身的多轨道处置模型”的框架内提出一个解决持票人问题的方法。该模型的核心在于属性的表现是多向的概念,即属性表现之间存在相互的伙伴关系。在第三节中,我将对比多轨道模型和“化身的Kenotic模型”对承载者问题提出的解决方案。我认为,多轨模型为我们提供了更好的概念资源来理解持票人问题。最后,在第四节中,我将简要指出为什么对持票人问题的最终结论性答案可能仍然是难以捉摸的,因为持票人问题引起了许多其他未解决的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
TheoLogica
TheoLogica Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Scholastic Hylomorphism and Dean Zimmerman O felix culpa! Presentism, Timelessness, and Evil A Divine Alternative to Zimmerman’s Emergent Dualism What the Experience of Transience Tells Us About the Afterlife
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1