<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Krisis &#38; Praxis &#187; Christology (Systematic)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/category/christology-systematic/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com</link>
	<description>To Understand Truth and to Attain the True</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Dec 2011 04:56:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Christology and Sociality in Bonhoeffer (Part 2/2)</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/02/christology-and-sociality-in-bonhoeffer-part-22/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/02/christology-and-sociality-in-bonhoeffer-part-22/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Feb 2007 10:15:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Christology (Systematic)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theological Issues]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2007/02/christology-and-sociality-in-bonhoeffer-part-22/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bonhoeffer never conducted theology merely as an academic exercise. He insisted that acquired knowledge cannot be divorced from the existence in which it is acquired. Theology is an expression of belief since â€œonly he who believes is obedient, and only he who is obedient believesâ€? (CD 69). For Bonhoeffer, there can be no abstract Christology.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/02/christology-and-sociality-in-bonhoeffer-part-22/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Christology and Sociality in Bonhoeffer (Part 1/2)</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/01/christology-and-sociality-in-bonhoeffer-part-12/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/01/christology-and-sociality-in-bonhoeffer-part-12/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 05:28:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Christology (Systematic)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theological Issues]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2007/01/christology-and-sociality-in-bonhoeffer-part-12/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In their protests against established religion, many youths today cry aloud the slogan, â€œHostile to the church, but friendly to Jesus.â€? The question, however, is, which Jesus are they friendly with? Is it the Jesus of the liberal theologian, the liberationist, the Gnostic or even perhaps the Jesus of Hollywood? Bonhoeffer would certainly approve of their insistence on the centrality of Christ, unclouded by traditional religious trappings. We must, however, be fully aware of the great temptation to substitute the Christ of tradition with a Christ who is constructed out of some current concerns or personal fancies.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/01/christology-and-sociality-in-bonhoeffer-part-12/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>JESUS CHRIST â€“ ESCHATOLOGICAL PROPHET AND INCARNATE SAVIOR (Part 4/4)</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/01/jesus-christ-%e2%80%93-eschatological-prophet-and-incarnate-savior-3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/01/jesus-christ-%e2%80%93-eschatological-prophet-and-incarnate-savior-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 07:20:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Christology (Systematic)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dialog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2007/01/jesus-christ-%e2%80%93-eschatological-prophet-and-incarnate-savior-3/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Gospels make clear that Jesus was not only bringing a special message. He personified what God reveals. He was not only an â€˜emissaryâ€™ but the personality in and through whom God is known. Whereas in Islam the Quran is the very â€˜textâ€™ of divine truth, the New Testament is the access to the Christ-expression of God. The Scripture has its being by derivation from the prior and primarily reality of â€˜the Word made fleshâ€™]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/01/jesus-christ-%e2%80%93-eschatological-prophet-and-incarnate-savior-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Thomas V Morris: The Two-Minds Model of the Incarnation</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/05/thomas-v-morris-the-two-minds-model-of-the-incarnation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/05/thomas-v-morris-the-two-minds-model-of-the-incarnation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 May 2006 11:12:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Christology (Systematic)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trinity and Incarnation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2006/05/thomas-v-morris-the-two-minds-model-of-the-incarnation/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It must be pointed out that the charge of incoherence of the Incarnation assumes we know the exact nature of human and divine properties to be able to assert that there can be no joining together of human and divine properties in an individual.

John Macquarieâ€™s response to such a presupposition is pertinent, â€œPart of the trouble with the doctrine of incarnation is that we discuss the divinity and even the humanity of Christ in terms of ready-made ideas of God and man that we bring with us, without allowing these ideas to be corrected and even drastically changed by what we learn about God and man in and through the incarnation.â€?

Thomas V. Morrisâ€™ landmark book, The Logic of God Incarnate suggests the two-minds model as one possible demonstration of the coherence of the incarnation.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/05/thomas-v-morris-the-two-minds-model-of-the-incarnation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Possibility of Incarnation (Part 1)</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/the-possibility-of-incarnation-part-1/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/the-possibility-of-incarnation-part-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Apr 2006 16:17:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Christology (Systematic)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theological Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trinity and Incarnation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2006/04/the-possibility-of-incarnation-part-1/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Assuming that we accept the coherence of the concept of the Incarnation (set out in my earlier article dated 15 April 2006), I now proceed to consider the possibility of the Incarnation and explore how God can become genuinely human and yet remain God.

To begin with, God becoming human (a divine individual) means acquiring a human soul that interacts with the world through its bodily senses and functions as the centre that organizes rational thought processes and exercises will power of choice and action. That such functions are limited is of course a normal but not essential (relating to essence) quality of human existence.
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/the-possibility-of-incarnation-part-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Logical Coherence of the Incarnation of Christ</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/the-logical-coherence-of-the-incarnation-ofchrist/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/the-logical-coherence-of-the-incarnation-ofchrist/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:39:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Christology (Systematic)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theological Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trinity and Incarnation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2006/04/the-logical-coherence-of-the-incarnation-ofchrist/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We begin with the Chalcedonian Creed â€“ â€œWe should confess that our Lord Jesus Christ is the one and the same Son, the same perfect in Godhead and the same perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, the same of a rational soul and body, consubstantial [of one substance] with the Father in Godhead, and the same consubstantial with us in manhood, like us in all things except sin;. . . (Kelly, ECD 339-340)]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/the-logical-coherence-of-the-incarnation-ofchrist/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Meaning of Incarnation in the Chalcedonian Creed</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/meaning-of-incarnation-in-the-chalcedonian-creed/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/meaning-of-incarnation-in-the-chalcedonian-creed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:35:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Christology (Systematic)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theological Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trinity and Incarnation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2006/04/meaning-of-incarnation-in-the-chalcedonian-creed/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Chalcedon Creed includes the following affirmation:
â€œWe should confess that our Lord Jesus Christ is the one and the same Son, the same perfect in Godhead and the same perfect in manhood, truly God and truly man, the same of a rational soul and body, consubstantial [of one substance] with the Father in Godhead, and the same consubstantial with us in manhood, like us in all things except sin;. . . one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, made known in two natures without confusion, without change, without division, without separation, the difference [distinction] of the natures being by no means removed [annulled] because of the union, but the property of each nature being preserved and coalescing in one person [prosopon] and one hypostasis [subsistence] â€“ not parted or divided into two persons [prosopa], but the one and the same Son, only-begotten, divine Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, . . . (J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrine, pp. 339-340)]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/meaning-of-incarnation-in-the-chalcedonian-creed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pluralism and the Particularity of Salvation in Christ</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/pluralism-and-the-particularity-of-salvation-in-christ/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/pluralism-and-the-particularity-of-salvation-in-christ/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2006 02:56:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Christology (Systematic)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theological Issues]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2006/04/pluralism-and-the-particularity-of-salvation-in-christ/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Many ruling authorities in past Asian societies have exploited religion to legitimize their authority. Rulers then ensured religious homogeneity in their societies to reinforce conformity through religious and cultural loyalty. Today, however, religious allegiance is seen as an expression of oneâ€™s intellectual and spiritual integrity. Intellectual and spiritual integrity presupposes unhindered access to different religious options that allow choices to be made after careful thought in contrast to a blind submission and conformity to social or legal coercion. After all, religious allegiance is genuine possible only if authorities acknowledge the reality, if not the desirability, of religious plurality and respect the freedom of all believers to proclaim, practice and propagate their faiths in the context of mutual tolerance. In this regard, religious plurality presents new opportunities for the proclamation of the Gospel in Asia.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2006/04/pluralism-and-the-particularity-of-salvation-in-christ/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

