Theology and An-Archy: Deep Incarnation Christology following Emmanuel Lévinas and the New Materialism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, I explore deep incarnation Christology. I posit that many of these christological models offered today, while a welcome development in theology, are grounded in metaphysical anthropocentrism. Insofar as such theologies normalize the human and ground theology within a humanist, conceptualist horizon, the idea of divine infinity is circumscribed, and the human becomes divinized and self-positioned as a transcendent species. Likewise, such a framework, identifying God within strict, dogmatic boundaries, posits divinity as the alter ego of the human. To the contrary, I suggest that theology cannot be grounded within human intentionality. Although theology unfolds in representational thought, it is grounded instead in passivity, revealed outside of the subject's time, in an an-archic past and a pure future, wherein divinity is encountered within but ultimately beyond human corporeity in affective encounters with cosmos and Earth. As such, the idea of infinity is grounded in a time and space beyond the beginning of human consciousness. Such a model invites us to consider a God who comes to mind from beyond an impassable chasm, and thus irreducible to the human imagination. Thus, while this article embraces the idea of deep incarnation, it reimagines the doctrine along lines that are different from what is prominent today.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".