دانلود کتاب In Defense of Extended Conciliar Christology: A Philosophical Essay

فهرست مطالب :

Cover In Defense of Extended Conciliar Christology: A Philosophical Essay Copyright Dedication Acknowledgments Table of Contents Introduction I. THE EXTENSIONS AND SOME INITIAL JUSTIFICATION FOR CHOOSING THEM II. SOME POINTS ON METHOD II.a. Concerning the Assumption of Conciliar Christology II.b. On Mystery II.c. On Privileging the Councils II.d. Extensions Cumulatively Assumed II.e. The Division of Labor II.f. The Types of Philosophical Objections Considered II.g. My Reliance on Thomas Aquinas III. THE PLAN OF THE BOOK 1: Preliminaries I. INTRODUCTION II. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS III. THE TEACHING OF THE ECUMENICAL COUNCILS IV. THE METAPHYSICAL TERMS AND CONCEPTS IV.a. “Supposit” and “Person” IV.b. Nature: Abstract or Concrete IV.c. What Concrete Natures Can Do V. CONCLUSION Part 1: Natural Extensions 2: Multiple Interpretations of “Multiple Incarnations” I. INTRODUCTION II. FOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF MULTIPLE INCARNATIONS II.a. The Natural Question II.b. The Personal Question II.c. The Temporal Question II.d. The Sharing Question III . THE THOMISTIC UNDERSTANDING OF MULTIPLE INCARNATIONS III.a. The Thomistic Answer to the Natural Question III.b. The Thomistic Answer to the Personal Question III.c. The Thomistic Answer to the Temporal Question III.d. The Thomistic Answer to the Sharing Question IV. THE FULL THOMISTIC PICTURE IV.a. The Full Thomistic Picture Presented IV.b. The Full Thomistic Picture Ontologically Sketched V. CONCLUSION 3: Objections to the Possibility of Multiple Incarnations I. INTRODUCTION II. THE OBJECTION FROM INCOMPATIBLE PREDICATIONS II.a. A Statement of the Objection II.b. Responses to the Objection II.b.1. The Reply from Denying the Predications II.b.2. The Reply from Qua-Modifying the Predications II.b.3. Denying the Incompatibility of the Predicates III. THE OBJECTION FROM TOO MANY THINKERS III.a. A Statement of the Objection III.b. A Response to the Objection IV. BRIAN HEBBLETHWAITE’S OBJECTION FROM COEXISTENT COMMUNITIES IV.a. A Statement of the Objection IV.b. A Response to the Objection V. BRIAN HEBBLETHWAITE’S OBJECTION FROM DIVINE SUBJECTHOOD V.a. A Statement of the Objection V.b. A Response to the Objection VI. ERIC MASCALL’S OBJECTION FROM CONFERRED PERSONALITY VI.a. A Statement of the Objection VI.b. A Response to the Objection VII. MICHAEL SCHMAUS ON THE INCARNATION OF THE FATHER OR HOLY SPIRIT VII.a. A Statement of the Objection VII.b. A Response to the Objection VIII. KENNETH BAKER’S PRESENTATION OF THE OBJECTION TO MULTIPLE INCARNATIONS VIII.a. A Statement of the Objection VIII.b. A Response to the Objection IX. CONCLUSION 4: Christ and the Interim State I. INTRODUCTION II. CHRIST’S INTERIM STATE III. THE ARGUMENT PRESENTED IV. THE PREMISES IV.a. The Word Permanently Assumed Whatever He Assumed in the Incarnation IV.b. The Word Assumed CHN in the Incarnation IV.c. During the Interim State, Christ’s Human Nature Did Not Exist IV.d. No Real Relations without Relata IV.e. Assumption is a Real Relation V. POTENTIAL RESPONSES TO THE ARGUMENT V.a. Denying Premise 3 V.a.1. The Abstract Nature View V.a.2. The One Part View V.a.3. The Mere Parts View V.a.4. The Survivalist View V.a.5. Summary of the Problems for these Responses V.b. Denying Premise 2 V.c. Denying Premise 1 VI. CONCLUSION Part 2: Volitional Extensions 5: The Freedom of Christ I. INTRODUCTION II. THE CREATED WILL OF CHRIST AND ITS FREEDOM III. FREE WILL IV. THIRD CONSTANTINOPLE AND THE FREEDOM OF CHRIST IV.a. The Text IV.b. A Presentation of Argument IV.c. A Reply to the Argument V. CONCLUSION 6: Impeccability and Temptation I. INTRODUCTION II. THE WITNESS OF TRADITION III. THE PROBLEM III.a. The View as Presented in the Literature III.b. The Argument Formalized IV. RESPONSES THAT DENY THE TRUTH OF PREMISE 1 IV.a. The Epistemic Response IV.b. A Psychological Response V. CAN SOMETHING BE PECCABLE AND IMPECCABLE? V.a. Christ’s Powers and the Ability to Sin V.b. The Aptness Conditions for the Predicates, “Peccable” and “Impeccable” V.c. Objections and Questions V.c.1. What is the Scope of “s” in the Truth Conditions? V.c.2. Must Natures have Natures, then? V.c.3. What of Leftow’s Bloody Hand? VI. A SUMMARY APPLICATION OF THE APPARATUS OF THE CHAPTER VII. CONCLUSION Part 3: Intellectual Extensions 7: Christ’s Knowledge in Relation to our Wills I. INTRODUCTION II. THE KNOWLEDGE OF CHRIST II.a. Aquinas on the Knowledge of Christ II.a.1. Acquired Knowledge II.a.2. Beatific Knowledge II.a.3. Infused Knowledge II.b. Others on Christ’s Human Knowledge II.c. Scriptural Worries about the Foreknowledge Thesis III. THE ARGUMENT FORMALIZED IV. THE RELATION BETWEEN TRUTH AND BEING V. OBJECTIONS V.a. Lady Philosophy’s Objection V.b. A Disanalogy between Mere Human Intellectual States and Christ’s Intellectual States V.c. A Disanalogy between Future and Non-Future Truths V.d. Why Aquinas’s Silence Concerning This Reply? V.e. What if We Focus on Belief, Rather than Knowledge? VI. CONCLUSION 8: Christ’s Knowledge in Relation to his Will I. INTRODUCTION II. THE PROBLEM OF DELIBERATION III. THE AUXILIARY THESES III.a. Certainty Precludes Deliberation III.b. Deliberation Requires Options III.c. Freedom Requires Deliberation IV. THE ARGUMENT FROM DELIBERATION PRESENTED V. RESPONSES TO THE ARGUMENT FROM DELIBERATION V.a. Deny 6 and 7 V.b. Challenge Certainty Precludes Deliberation, Part 1 V.c. Challenge Certainty Precludes Deliberation, Part 2 V.d. Distinguish Certainty Precludes Deliberation V.e. Deny Freedom Requires Deliberation VI. THE PROBLEM OF EXPLANATORY PRIORITY VII. THE ARGUMENT PRESENTED VIII. RESPONSES TO THE PROBLEM OF EXPLANATORY PRIORITY VIII.a. The Pruss/Rota Response VIII.b. Occurrent vs Dispositional Knowledge VIII.c. Deny Premise 13 VIII.d. Distinguish Senses of Priority IX. CONCLUSION Conclusion Bibliography Index