Reply to Panelists

Andrew Loke*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)


I explain why my model of the Incarnation avoids the problems with alternative models and reply to objections concerning my model’s coherence with scripture (for example, Heb. 4:15), the understanding of personhood and natures (using resources from Islamic tradition concerning Jesus’s human nature), the concrete–abstract distinction, the human soul of Christ, the lack of the unconscious in Christ, and the incompatibility with a strong sense of immutability and simplicity. I conclude that my model stays faithful to scripture and can help to secure unity in the body of Christ concerning the doctrine of the Incarnation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)49-56
Number of pages8
JournalPhilosophia Christi
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2019

Scopus Subject Areas

  • Religious studies
  • Philosophy


Dive into the research topics of 'Reply to Panelists'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this