The Twofold Assumption: A Response to Cole-Turner,Moritz, Peters and Peterson |
| |
Authors: | Niels Henrik Gregersen |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. nhg@teol.ku.dk |
| |
Abstract: | AbstractThe article discusses points and perspectives offered by the four respondents to the R.J. Russell Fellow Lectures for 2013/14. Joshua M. Moritz and Ron Cole-Turner bring in new material from biblical and patristic traditions relevant for the proposal of deep incarnation. How does the concept of deep incarnation fare in relation to tradition and science? Ted Peters and Daniel J. Peterson raise questions about the compatibility between a compatibilist view of divine action and creaturely freedom on the one hand, and ideas of kenosis on the other. Which models of kenosis models are workable, and which forms of compatibilism? |
| |
Keywords: | Ron Cole-Turner Joshua M. Moritz Ted Peters Daniel J. Peterson Deep incarnation Soteriological universalism Logos-sarx Christology Compatibilism Divine action Models of kenosis |
|
|