Mike Rea from Notre Dame University has a model of the
incarnation that is very innovative and unique. I asked him this question: If
his model of the incarnation could be adapted to fit a physicalist understanding
of human nature? and he said:
'It depends a bit on what you think physicalism comes to. If Aquinas counts as a
physicalist on your view then yes, the model very easily accommodates that view.
If physicalism implies (e.g.) that there are no souls and no non-physical
powers (whatever those might be), then the view *might* have trouble. I'm not
sure, though. I don't think that there's anything central to the model that
obviously contradicts "physicalism about human nature"; but neither can I
demonstrate that it doesn't.'
The importance of this for resurection has to do with the meaning of the resurrection that is often applied
on the basis of Jesus' teaching and radical divine self-understanding. That
meaning of course has to do with the after the fact inference that Jesus was the
personal emodiment of YHWH, and the resurrection serves as the divine stamp on
Jesus' radical self-concept. But, if it is impossible for Jesus to be god
incarnate given one's physicalist leanings on humna nature, then we would have a
real problem on our hands. Thus, I have included Mike Rea's very helpful article:
incarnation that is very innovative and unique. I asked him this question: If
his model of the incarnation could be adapted to fit a physicalist understanding
of human nature? and he said:
'It depends a bit on what you think physicalism comes to. If Aquinas counts as a
physicalist on your view then yes, the model very easily accommodates that view.
If physicalism implies (e.g.) that there are no souls and no non-physical
powers (whatever those might be), then the view *might* have trouble. I'm not
sure, though. I don't think that there's anything central to the model that
obviously contradicts "physicalism about human nature"; but neither can I
demonstrate that it doesn't.'
The importance of this for resurection has to do with the meaning of the resurrection that is often applied
on the basis of Jesus' teaching and radical divine self-understanding. That
meaning of course has to do with the after the fact inference that Jesus was the
personal emodiment of YHWH, and the resurrection serves as the divine stamp on
Jesus' radical self-concept. But, if it is impossible for Jesus to be god
incarnate given one's physicalist leanings on humna nature, then we would have a
real problem on our hands. Thus, I have included Mike Rea's very helpful article:
| hylomorphism_and_incarnation.pdf |
RSS Feed