Abstract
The Christological disputes of the 6th–7th centuries (the polemics of Leontius of Byzantium with the Nestorians and Eutychians, and Maximus the Confessor with the monoenergistes/monothelites) showed that the Chalcedonian definition gives rise to a number of problems that cannot be solved within the framework of traditional theology: the unclear ontological status of human nature without a human hypostasis; the inconsistency of the ontological models underlying trinitology and Christology; the need to resort to an artificial interpretation of the gospel testimonies about Christ. However, the Chalcedonian definition is only one possible way to describe the unity of the divine and the human in Christ. The Christology of Paul Tillich is considered as an example of an alternative description in which the above problems do not arise. Tillich’s idea is to replace the traditional concept of the Logos incarnated in man with the concept of the Spirit of God transforming man. According to this view, God does not act on human nature without hypostasis, but on the hypostasis of man through its unifying center. During the earthly life of Christ, this effect occurred only in the hypostasis of Christ as man. And after (and thanks to) the death on the cross and the resurrection of Christ, it extends to all people.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.