Asymmetrical assumption: why Lutheran christology does not lead to kenoticism or divine passibility

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

It has been commonplace for over a century to argue that the distinctively Lutheran form of the communicatio idiomatum leads naturally to kenotic christology, divine passibility, or both. Although this argument has been generally accepted as a historical claim, has also been advanced repeatedly as a criticism of ‘classical theism’ and has featured significantly in almost all recent defences of divine passibility, I argue that it does not work: the Lutheran scholastics had ample resources drawn from nothing more than ecumenical trinitarian and christological dogma to defend their denial of the genus tapeinoticum. I argue further that this defence, if right, undermines a remarkably wide series of proposals in contemporary systematic theology.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)357-374
JournalScottish Journal of Theology
Volume72
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 12 Nov 2019

Keywords

  • Christology
  • Divine passibility
  • Kenosis
  • Lutheran theology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Asymmetrical assumption: why Lutheran christology does not lead to kenoticism or divine passibility'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this