Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:37:01.150Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A compositional incarnation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 December 2016

WILLIAM HASKER
WILLIAM HASKER*
Affiliation:
Huntington University, 2753 W 450 S (home address), Huntington, IN 46750, USA
*
e-mail: whasker@huntington.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article expounds and defends a compositional view of the incarnation, in which the eternal divine Son assumes a human body and soul as parts of himself. Objections to the view are answered, and it is argued that it is superior to other metaphysical accounts of the incarnation.

Type
Articles
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 53 , Issue 4 , December 2017 , pp. 433 - 447
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Crisp, Oliver (2007) ‘The human nature of Christ’, in Crisp, Oliver, Divinity and Humanity: The Incarnation Reconsidered (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 35–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crisp, Oliver (2011) ‘Compositional christology without Nestorianism’, in Marmodoro, Anna & Hill, Jonathan (eds) The Metaphysics of the Incarnation (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 45–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, Richard (2009) ‘The Incarnation’, in Flint, Thomas P. & Rea, Michael C. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 452–475.Google Scholar
Flint, Thomas (2011) ‘Should concretists part with mereological models of the incarnation?’, in Marmodoro, Anna & Hill, Jonathan (eds) The Metaphysics of the Incarnation (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 67–86.Google Scholar
Flint, Thomas (2015) ‘Is Model T rattle-free? A reply to Hasker,’ Faith and Philosophy, 32, 177–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hasker, William (2013) Metaphysics and the Tri-Personal God (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Kelly, J. N. D. (1938) Early Christian Doctrines (London: Adam & Charles Black).Google Scholar
Le Poidevin, Robin (2009) ‘Identity and the composite Christ: an incarnational dilemma’, Religious Studies, 45, 167–186.Google Scholar
Leftow, Brian (2002) ‘A timeless God incarnate’, in Davis, Stephen T., Daniel Kendall, SJ, & Gerald O'Collins, SJ (eds) The Incarnation (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 273–299.Google Scholar
Leftow, Brian (2011) ‘The humanity of God’, in Marmodoro, Anna & Hill, Jonathan (eds) The Metaphysics of the Incarnation (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 20–44.Google Scholar
Leftow, Brian (2015) ‘Against materialist Christology’, in Ruloff, C. P. (ed.) Christian Philosophy of Religion: Essays in Honor of Stephen T. Davis (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press), 65–94.Google Scholar
Olson, Eric (2006) ‘The paradox of increase’, The Monist, 89, 390–417.Google Scholar
Stump, Eleonore (2003) Aquinas (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
Swinburne, Richard (1994) The Christian God (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar