Inclusion and incarnation: A reply to Sturch

Timothy Bayne

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/opinion

3 Citations (Scopus)
24 Downloads (Pure)


I make three points in response to Richard Sturch's comments on my paper: I defend my interpretation of the Morris-Swinburne (M-S) account of the Incarnation; I argue that the M-S model appears to undercut the view that the unity of consciousness can be explained in terms of the self; and third, I argue that M-S model seems to entail that god has false beliefs.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)107-109
Number of pages3
JournalReligious Studies
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2003

Bibliographical note

Copyright 2003 Cambridge University Press. Reprinted from Religious studies.


Dive into the research topics of 'Inclusion and incarnation: A reply to Sturch'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this