Tag Archives: philosophy

Blogging Thru The Incarnation Four Views: Divine Preconscious Model (Part 2)

Posted on by
Reply

This is part of a series of posts exploring each of the views presented in The Incarnation Four Views edited by Andrew Hollingsworth and R.T. Mullins. In part one we explored the Narrow Scope Negation model. 

View 2: Divine Preconscious Model
Andrew Loke is an Associate Professor in the Department of Religion and Philosophy at Hong Kong Baptist University. Among his published works is A Kryptic Model of the Incarnation.

In building a model of the Incarnation, Andrew Loke has a different set of starting premises than Timothy Pawl. He isn’t trying to fit classical theism into his model nor does he accept the authority of the councils. One of the major concerns that Pawl raises against this model is its novelty and theological cost.1

Loke makes a valuable observation about any model that is proposed for the Incarnation.

in order to make meaningful statements about Jesus in accordance with the Scriptures and to rebut the charge of incoherence, it would be helpful if the Christian can suggest a possible model to show how concepts like omniscience and apparent limitation in knowledge can be affirmed of Jesus in such a way that no contradiction results. It is not required that the Christian come up with the actual model of the incarnation. Rather, all that is required is that he or she suggests a possible model to show how contradictions do not result. (emphasis in original) 2

C. Stephen Evans, in his critique, agrees with this idea suggesting he would “be happy if it turns out to be the case that there are other models which accomplish the same goal: providing an account of how God might become incarnate that is logically coherent and possible.” 3

There was a consistent observation highlighted in the responses of each contributor about the Divine Preconscious Model (DPM) model. It is very complex and difficult to understand.4 A notion that Loke does not back away from, noting that “On the other hand, “a great level of complexity of the model of the incarnation is only to be expected given the sheer difficulty of the idea that a person could at the same time be a human as well as the Maker of the universe.” 5

What follows is an overview of DPM.

Continue reading →

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

Posted on by
Reply

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 →

To Be or Not to Be Part 3: Can God kill the Soul?

Posted on by
Reply

In part one we explored the concepts of existence and identity. That was followed, in part 2, by a look at the major influences that lead to the idea that the soul is immortal. This entry will explore alternative understandings of the soul for consideration.

In the last post we saw that, despite different underlying philosophical foundations, Augustine and Aquinas affirm that the person is a composite of body and soul. They also both affirm that the soul, an incorporeal intellect and the principle of life, is naturally immortal (or incorruptible). In a moment we will see that both theologians will be careful to ground the existence of the soul in God and His will rather then in itself. In doing so, we might, with a degree of irony, call both Augustine and Aquinas advocates of a conditional immortality.

The punishment of the damned will never come to an end
Before one scoffs at that and considers it a foolish claim, let me make it abundantly clear that both of these theologians affirm that the wicked will suffer eternal conscious torment (ECT).

pain can exist only
in a living subject 1
– Augustine

Augustine notes that in his day there is debate about the fate of the wicked. He spends the greater part of Book XXI of The City of God making the case that “the soul [of the wicked] will neither be able to enjoy God and live, nor to die and escape the pains of the body.” 2

… to say in one and the same sense, life eternal shall be endless, punishment eternal shall come to an end, is the height of absurdity. Wherefore, as the eternal life of the saints shall be endless, so too the eternal punishment of those who are doomed to it shall have no end.3

Last Judgment by Lieven van den Clite

In the supplement to the Summa Aquinas argues “the damned can prefer ‘not to be’ according to their deliberate reason” which would be to have “relief from a painful life”.4 However “it is inadmissible that the punishment of the damned will ever come to an end.” 5

The disposition of hell will be such as to be adapted to the utmost unhappiness of the damned. Wherefore accordingly both light and darkness are there, in so far as they are most conducive to the unhappiness of the damned. 6

Having established that Augustine and Aquinas were deeply committed to ECT, why might we consider them advocates of conditional immortality?

Continue reading →