View Item 
  •   Boyce Digital Repository Home
  • Dissertations, Theses, and Projects
  • Open Access Dissertations and Theses
  • View Item
  •   Boyce Digital Repository Home
  • Dissertations, Theses, and Projects
  • Open Access Dissertations and Theses
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Browse

All Digital CollectionsCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

"Thy Will Be Done": A Dogmatic Defense of Dyothelitism in Light of Recent Monothelite Proposals

Thumbnail
View/Open
Stamps_sbts_0207D_10195.pdf (1.324Mb)
Date
2014-05-16
Author
Stamps, Robert Lucas
Advisor
Wellum, Stephen J.
Metadata
Show full item record
Subject
Jesus Christ--Natures
Incarnation
Monothelitism
Abstract
In the seventh century, the Third Council of Constantinople (680-81) denounced monothelitism, the belief that the incarnate Christ has only one will. Consequently, the dyothelite (two-wills) position would become accepted orthodoxy in all three branches of Christian theology: Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, and Protestantism. But in recent decades, several Christian philosophers and theologians have called into question the church’s conciliar position on the volitional life of Christ. For various reasons, these scholars believe that the one-will view better accounts for the unity of Christ's person and the coherency of his Incarnation. This dissertation analyzes three overlapping categories of contemporary monothelitism: abstractist Christologies, kenotic Christologies, and Spirit Christologies (chapter 2). It then seeks to retrieve the biblical and theological rationale for the dyothelite position. After surveying the emergence of the dyothelite consensus in the Patristic and medieval eras (chapter 3), special consideration is given to four Reformed theologians, who each defended the dyothelite position as a part of his broader Christological program: John Calvin, John Gill, William G. T. Shedd, and Thomas F. Torrance (chapter 4). It is concluded that the case for dyothelitism is cumulative and systematic in nature, taking into consideration not only the witnesses of Scripture and tradition, but also the implications of the debate for various loci of systematic theology (chapter 5).
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/10392/4610
Collections
  • Open Access Dissertations and Theses

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2025  DuraSpace
Contact Us | Send Feedback
DSpace Express is a service operated by 
Atmire NV