The Free Will of a Sinless Incarnate God and the Dispositional Incarnation Model: A Response to Swinburne

This article offers a critical response to Richard Swinburne's “The Free Will of a Sinless Incarnate God”. Swinburne addresses an apparent contradiction in traditional Christology: how Christ can possess a human nature, including genuine free will, while being necessarily sinless. After reviewing Swinburne's proposed solution - that Christ was predetermined not to sin but still experienced genuine temptation - I develop an objection based on Kane's libertarian theory of free will. I argue that genuine human freedom necessarily involves Self-Forming Actions where alternative possibilities, including the possibility to sin, are genuinely available. Since Christ, on Swinburne's account, lacks this capacity, he cannot possess genuine human freedom and thus lacks an essential component of human nature. I propose the Dispositional Incarnation Model as the most robust solution to this dilemma, as it allows Christ to possess genuine libertarian freedom at the occurrent level of his human experience while securing his sinlessness through his divine nature dispositionally exemplified. This, rather than the solution proposed by Swinburne, provides the conceptual basis for one affirming the traditional Chalcedonian claim that Christ is “perfect in humanity” and “like us in all respects except for sin”.

Publication Details

Journal
PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation)
Published
2025-01-01
Primary Topic
Theology and Philosophy of Evil
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Free Will of a Sinless Incarnate God and the Dispositional Incarnation Model: A Response to Swinburne

PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation)
Theology and Philosophy of Evil
article

The Free Will of a Sinless Incarnate God and the Dispositional Incarnation Model: A Response to Swinburne

article en

Abstract

This article offers a critical response to Richard Swinburne's “The Free Will of a Sinless Incarnate God”. Swinburne addresses an apparent contradiction in traditional Christology: how Christ can possess a human nature, including genuine free will, while being necessarily sinless. After reviewing Swinburne's proposed solution - that Christ was predetermined not to sin but still experienced genuine temptation - I develop an objection based on Kane's libertarian theory of free will. I argue that genuine human freedom necessarily involves Self-Forming Actions where alternative possibilities, including the possibility to sin, are genuinely available. Since Christ, on Swinburne's account, lacks this capacity, he cannot possess genuine human freedom and thus lacks an essential component of human nature. I propose the Dispositional Incarnation Model as the most robust solution to this dilemma, as it allows Christ to possess genuine libertarian freedom at the occurrent level of his human experience while securing his sinlessness through his divine nature dispositionally exemplified. This, rather than the solution proposed by Swinburne, provides the conceptual basis for one affirming the traditional Chalcedonian claim that Christ is “perfect in humanity” and “like us in all respects except for sin”.

PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 48%
Theology and Philosophy of Evil
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.