Blogging Thru The Incarnation Four Views: Narrow Scope Negation (Part 1)

This summer I have been reading more about the Trinity and Christology. I was excited to see the newly published book that explores four different views on the Incarnation. It was edited by Andrew Hollingsworth and R.T. Mullins. I was unfamiliar with the four main contributors and was interested in seeing the different approaches each would take. This short blog series will cover each view with some of my thoughts.

Having read through the first entry and the responses I have a few observations regarding the book. Understanding that the authors were given a limited amount of space to make their points, they need to be judicious in describing their view. However, that should not have resulted in skipping defining key terms in detail. In addition, readers should know that when they crack the cover they are dropped into the middle of a rather deep philosophical discussion between the contributors. It can take some effort to get oriented. Finally, prior familiarity with the concepts that are part of the Trinitarian and Christological discussion is highly recommended.

View 1: Conciliar Narrow Scope Negation
Dr. Timothy Pawl is the first to present his view. He is a Professor in the Department of Philosophy at the University of St. Thomas and is noted for publishing two books on Conciliar Christology. Pawl argues that a Conciliar Christology is the foundation upon which any model of Christology should be built.

Continue reading →

The Third Peacock and the Incarnation

This post is the third part of a series looking at The Third Peacock. If you have not already read it, I recommend starting with part 1.

The introduction of the Incarnation to theodicy in The Third Peacock is a great answer to the question how will God deal with the evil and badness found in creation as well as telling us how God will “make a good show of creation.” It is a rather odd answer to questions like why does God permit so much evil in the first place. But at this point in the book Capon and his readers have “hit the bottom” as there is no way to get “God off the hook for evil”. Nor, for Capon, was the risk God took with freedom worth all the evil and badness.

In light of the reality of evil, Capon pivots and attempts to pull all of the threads he has been exploring – a theology of delight, freedom, badness and a personal yet hands off God – together.

Throughout the book Capon’s style seems designed to shock the reader and he continues this trend with the Incarnation.

In the Christian scheme of things, the ultimate act by which God runs and rescues creation is the Incarnation. Sent by the Father and conceived by the Spirit, the eternal Word is born of the Virgin Mary and, in the mystery of that indwelling, lives, dies, rises and reigns. Unfortunately, however, we tend to look on the mystery mechanically. We view it as a fairly straight piece of repair work which became necessary because of sin.

Capon isn’t dismissing the fact that Jesus came in the flesh to deal with sin, but he is asking us to consider it as much more. In doing so Capon is drawing on a historical view of the Incarnation that is not widely held or discussed. Prior to reading this book I was not familiar with it. The view has been described as Unconditional Incarnation as well as Supralapsarian Christology.

Continue reading →

The Third Peacock and Providence

This post is the second part of a series looking at The Third Peacock. If you have not already read it, I recommend starting with part 1.

The next step in the exploration of theodicy takes us to the concept of Providence. Millard Erickson (in Christian Theology) defines that as follows:

While creation is God’s originating work with respect to the universe, providence is his continuing relationship to it. By providence we mean the continuing action of God by which he preserves in existence the creation he has brought into being, and guides it to his intended purposes for it.

Most readers, if not all, could accept this definition. Capon does.

[This] takes us back to the act of creation and to ask the question of the precise relationship between God the Creator and all the comings and goings of the universe itself. It has already been said that God is not simply the initiator or beginning cause of creation; he is the present, intimate and immediate cause of the being of everything that is.

Where things start to get interesting is trying to understand how God preserves and guides creation. This involves complex and differing ideas about sovereignty, decrees, freedom and foreknowledge. Capon does not dive into the theological deep-end regarding these various topics but does raise an important question.

Continue reading →