| 释义 |
anhypostasia Theol.|ˌænhaɪpəʊˈsteɪsɪə|
Also anhyˈpostasis.
[mod.L., f. Gr. ἀνυποστασία, ἀνυπόστασις unsubstantiality, f. ἀν- priv. + ὑπόστασις substance, substantial existence (see hypostasis 5).]
Lack of a substantial or personal existence. So anhypoˈstatic, -ˈstatical adjs., having no independent or personal existence; describing the human nature of Christ which had no existence apart from the hypostatic union.
1862D. W. Simon tr. Dorner's Person of Christ (Div. ii.) II. 92 Maintaining that Luther regarded the humanity of Jesus as the mere means of the manifestation of the person of the Logos, and taught most clearly that humanity was selfless or anhypostatical. 1863Ibid. (Div. ii.) III. 300 He describes the Logos..as the primal personality.., he holds the significance of the doctrine of the anhypostasis of humanity to be, that God is the essence of humanity. 1877Schaff in Smith & Wace Dict. Chr. Biogr. I. 495/1 The anhypostasia, impersonality, or, to speak more accurately, the enhypostasia, of the human nature of Christ; for anhypostasia is a purely negative term, and presupposes a fictitious abstraction, since the human nature of Christ did not exist at all before the act of the incarnation, and could therefore be neither personal nor impersonal. 1941Jrnl. Theol. Stud. XLII. 123 He sees no absurdity in Cyrilline anhypostatic manhood, with its corollary, the ‘passionless suffering’ of the Word. 1946E. L. Mascall Christ, Christian & Church 8 According to [the doctrine of enhypostasia], the humanity of Christ is neither hypostatic (that is, possessing a human person) nor is it anhypostatic (that is, without a person altogether), but it is enhypostatic (that is, it is constituted in the person of the divine Word). 1954Sc. Jrnl. Theol. VII. 249 By anhypostasia classical Christology asserted that in the assumptio carnis the human nature of Christ had no independent per se subsistence apart from the event of the Incarnation, apart from the hypostatic union. |