Plurality of Self: Buddhist Anthropology and the Two Natures of Christ
The union of divine and human in Jesus Christ was codified at the Council of Chalcedon. However, while this position makes good theological sense, in terms of soteriology, it remains a conceptual problem. How do two distinct entities combine into a single entity without the loss of their respective...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Wiley-Blackwell
[2017]
|
| Dans: |
Dialog
Année: 2017, Volume: 56, Numéro: 1, Pages: 73-83 |
| RelBib Classification: | BL Bouddhisme CA Christianisme NBF Christologie NBK Sotériologie |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Buddhism
B Christology B Anthropology B Self B Chalcedon B Interreligious |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Résumé: | The union of divine and human in Jesus Christ was codified at the Council of Chalcedon. However, while this position makes good theological sense, in terms of soteriology, it remains a conceptual problem. How do two distinct entities combine into a single entity without the loss of their respective distinctiveness? This article recommends a move from a Greek metaphysic of substance to a Buddhist understanding of selfhood as emptiness. By understanding the self as an interweaving of multiple energies, rather than a fixed substance, Chalcedonian Christology can retain its soteriological integrity with a more helpful conceptual understanding of how two may become one. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1540-6385 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Dialog
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/dial.12298 |