We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2008
In his recent work Professor Morris writes: ‘I am suggesting that, armed with a couple of fairly simple metaphysical distinctions we can begin to see how the doctrine of the Incarnation can possibly be true.’
What are these ‘metaphysical distinctions’ and do they stand up to critical examination? My answer to the latter part of this question in regard to the first distinction is a reserved ‘Yes’; in regard to the second distinction a definite ‘No’. If my criticism of the second distinction holds good, then Morris's defence of the orthodox doctrine of the Incarnation fails, for his defence crucially relies on the validity of that distinction.
page 121 note 1 The Logic of God Incarnate, Thomas W. Morris, Cornell University Press, 1986.
page 121 note 2 I should add that should my argument hold good it is even so a matter of regret to me since in my view this book presents a brilliant defence of traditional orthodoxy and the most outstanding contribution to incarnational logic and theology since the introduction of Kenotic Christology in the last century.
page 121 note 3 Pp. 63 ff.
page 123 note 1 Cf. bottom of p. 63.
page 126 note 1 My italics.
page 126 note 2 My italics.
