RT Article
T1 How Should one Speak of Christ?: Dyophysitism and Socinianism Compared
JF Toronto journal of theology
VO 39
IS 2
SP 122
OP 130
A1 Nemes, Steven ca. 20./21. Jh.
LA English
YR 2023
UL https://ixtheo.de/Record/1871228131
AB Can it be theologically acceptable to say that Christ was not born of a woman, did not grow, did not increase in wisdom, did not eat or drink, did not hunger or thirst, did not suffer pain or exhaustion, did not die, and was not raised from the dead? This essay explores three possible answers to this question, two from a dyophysite point of view and the other from a Socinian viewpoint. It argues that either such speech is theologically acceptable because it is true of him in his divine nature, or else it is unacceptable because it is false in his one-and-only human nature. However, one cannot say it is true but objectionable because misleading without also calling into question the New Testament's way of speaking about Christ.
K1 Chalcedon
K1 Christology
K1 Socinianism
K1 dyophysitism
K1 theological language