Luther and Zwingli

R. Cross
{"title":"Luther and Zwingli","authors":"R. Cross","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198846970.003.0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter shows that Luther’s Christology follows the basic structure of Ockham’s, both in terms of the metaphysics and the semantics. It demonstrates that Luther accepts the supposital-union theory, and shows how to read complex texts that have sometimes been taken to show the opposite. It is shown that Luther’s most distinctive and original claim is that the divine person is the bearer of his human accidents. The chapter contextualizes Luther’s claims about Christ’s bodily omnipresence in Medieval debates, and shows that Luther did not hold bodily omnipresence to amount to the possession of a divine attribute. It also provides a detailed account of Zwingli’s Christological semantics. It shows how Luther misunderstood Zwingli’s claims about the communicatio, and concludes that Zwingli’s Christology, contrary to Luther’s appraisal, is in no sense Nestorian.","PeriodicalId":360748,"journal":{"name":"Communicatio Idiomatum","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communicatio Idiomatum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198846970.003.0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter shows that Luther’s Christology follows the basic structure of Ockham’s, both in terms of the metaphysics and the semantics. It demonstrates that Luther accepts the supposital-union theory, and shows how to read complex texts that have sometimes been taken to show the opposite. It is shown that Luther’s most distinctive and original claim is that the divine person is the bearer of his human accidents. The chapter contextualizes Luther’s claims about Christ’s bodily omnipresence in Medieval debates, and shows that Luther did not hold bodily omnipresence to amount to the possession of a divine attribute. It also provides a detailed account of Zwingli’s Christological semantics. It shows how Luther misunderstood Zwingli’s claims about the communicatio, and concludes that Zwingli’s Christology, contrary to Luther’s appraisal, is in no sense Nestorian.
路德和慈运理
本章表明,路德的基督论在形而上学和语义学上都遵循了奥卡姆的基本结构。它证明了路德接受假设联合理论,并展示了如何阅读复杂的文本,有时被认为是相反的。这表明,路德最独特和最原始的主张是,神的人是他的人类事故的承担者。这一章将路德在中世纪辩论中关于基督身体无所不在的主张置于背景中,并表明路德并不认为身体无所不在等同于拥有神的属性。它也提供了慈运理基督语义的详细说明。它显示了路德是如何误解了慈运理关于交流的主张,并得出结论,慈运理的基督论,与路德的评价相反,在任何意义上都不是聂斯脱里派的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信