Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:54:05.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inclusion and Incarnation: a reply to Sturch

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2003

TIM BAYNE
TIM BAYNE
Affiliation:
Philosophy Department, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I make three points in response to Richard Sturch's comments on my paper: I defend my interpretation of the Morris–Swinburne (M–S) account of the Incarnation; I argue that the M–S model appears to undercut the view that the unity of consciousness can be explained in terms of the self; and third, I argue that M–S model seems to entail that God has false beliefs.

Type
Research Article
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 39 , Issue 1 , March 2003 , pp. 107 - 109
Copyright
© 2003 Cambridge University Press

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.)