The Kryptic Model of the Incarnation: Understanding Andrew Ter Ern Loke’s Divine Preconscious Model

Introduction: The Central Mystery of Christianity

Every Christmas, millions of Christians around the world celebrate one of the most amazing claims ever made about God – that He became human. This claim, known as the Incarnation, says that Jesus Christ was both fully God and fully human at the same time. But how is this possible? How can someone be all-powerful and limited, all-knowing and learning, everywhere at once and in one place, all at the same time? These questions have puzzled Christians for two thousand years.

Dr. Andrew Ter Ern Loke, a philosopher and theologian from Hong Kong, has developed a new way to understand this mystery. He calls it the “Kryptic Model” or the “Divine Preconscious Model” (DPM). The word “kryptic” comes from the Greek word “krypsis,” which means “hiding.” This model suggests that when God became human in Jesus, His divine powers were somehow hidden or concealed, though not lost.

In his book A Kryptic Model of the Incarnation, Loke writes: “The Incarnation, traditionally understood as the metaphysical union between true divinity and true humanity in the one person of Jesus Christ, is one of the central doctrines for Christians over the centuries” (Chapter 1, “Veiled in Flesh the Godhead See,” p. 1). This report will explain Loke’s model in detail, compare it with other views, and explore what it means for our understanding of Jesus Christ.

Part I: The Problem of the Incarnation

Why the Incarnation Seems Impossible

Before we can understand Loke’s solution, we need to understand the problem. The Bible teaches that Jesus was both God and human. But these two natures seem to have opposite qualities that cannot exist in the same person at the same time.

As Loke explains in Chapter 1 of his book, being divine means having certain properties: “being omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent” – that is, knowing everything, being all-powerful, and being everywhere at once. But the New Testament shows Jesus as “having human properties such as being apparently limited in knowledge, power, and presence” (Preface, p. xiii). For example, the Bible says Jesus grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52), didn’t know the day or hour of his return (Mark 13:32), and got tired (John 4:6).

“It seems logically impossible that any single individual could possess such mutually exclusive sets of properties” (Loke, Preface, p. xiii)

This creates what philosophers call a logical contradiction – like saying something is both completely black and completely white at the same time. Many skeptics throughout history have pointed to this as proof that Christianity doesn’t make sense.

The Historical Development of the Problem

Loke traces the history of this problem through the centuries. In Chapter 1, section 1.1 (“Problems Concerning the Incarnation”), he shows how different groups have tried to solve this puzzle:

Some early Christians, called Docetists, said Jesus only appeared to be human but wasn’t really human. Others, called Ebionites, said Jesus was only human and not really God. The Nestorians suggested Jesus was actually two separate persons – one divine and one human – living in the same body. The Monophysites claimed the human and divine natures mixed together to create something that was neither fully human nor fully divine.

But the early church rejected all these solutions at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD. This council declared that Jesus was one person with two complete natures – fully God and fully human – without mixing, changing, dividing, or separating these natures. As Loke notes, this left Christians with the challenge of explaining how this could be possible (Chapter 1, section 1.2).

Part II: Understanding Loke’s Kryptic Model

The Basic Idea: The Divine Preconscious

Loke’s solution centers on what he calls the “Divine Preconscious Model” (DPM), which he develops fully in Chapter 4 (“A New Kryptic Christology: The Divine Preconscious Model”). The key insight comes from modern psychology’s understanding of consciousness.

Think about your own mind for a moment. You have thoughts you’re aware of right now (your conscious mind) and a vast amount of knowledge and memories you’re not thinking about but could recall if needed (your preconscious or subconscious). For example, you know your phone number, but you’re not always consciously thinking about it. It’s stored in your preconscious, ready to be accessed when needed.

Loke applies this to Jesus. He proposes that during the Incarnation, the divine Son (also called the Logos or Word) had:

As Loke states in Chapter 4, section 4.2 (“The Model Stated”): “According to this model, the Logos (the Second Person of the Trinity) had a mind without a body prior to the Incarnation” (p. 68). At the Incarnation, this divine mind didn’t disappear or change. Instead, it took on a human aspect while keeping its divine aspect in what we might call a “background” or preconscious state.

How the Model Works: Restraining Divine Properties

The crucial mechanism in Loke’s model is what he calls “functional limitation” or “restraint.” In Chapter 4, section 4.4, he explains that the divine properties weren’t lost or given up (which would be impossible for God), but were restrained from entering Jesus’s conscious experience during his earthly life.

Think of it like a professional pianist choosing to play a simple tune with one finger. The pianist hasn’t lost the ability to play complex pieces – that ability is still there, just not being used at the moment. Similarly, Jesus retained all divine powers but chose not to consciously access them during his earthly ministry.

Loke writes: “DPM affirms that during the Incarnation the divine nature did not lose any essential divine properties ontologically… Rather, the Logos chose to restrain the manifestation of his divine preconscious” (Chapter 4, section 4.4.1).

Solving the Knowledge Problem

One of the biggest challenges for any theory of the Incarnation is explaining how Jesus could be omniscient (all-knowing) as God yet have limited knowledge as a human. Chapter 5 (“Addressing the Problems Concerning Omniscience, Omnipotence and Omnipresence”) tackles this directly.

Loke’s solution is elegant: Jesus had all knowledge in his divine preconscious but limited access to it in his human conscious experience. When the Bible says Jesus “grew in wisdom” or didn’t know certain things, it’s referring to his conscious human experience. The divine knowledge was still there, just not consciously accessed.

He uses the analogy of a person under hypnosis who can’t consciously recall certain memories even though those memories are still present in their mind. The memories aren’t destroyed; they’re just temporarily inaccessible to conscious recall (Chapter 5, section 5.2).

Solving the Power Problem

What about Jesus’s divine power? How could he be omnipotent (all-powerful) yet experience weakness, hunger, and fatigue? Loke addresses this in Chapter 5, section 5.3 (“Addressing Omnipotence”).

The answer follows the same pattern: Jesus retained all divine power in his divine nature but chose to experience human limitations in his conscious state. When Jesus performed miracles, Loke suggests these were done through his reliance on the Father and the Holy Spirit, modeling how humans should depend on God rather than their own strength.

This explains why Jesus said things like “I can do nothing on my own” (John 5:30) while also saying “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). In his human conscious experience, he genuinely depended on the Father. Yet in his divine nature, he remained fully God with all divine power.

Solving the Presence Problem

How could Jesus be omnipresent (everywhere at once) as God while being limited to one location as a human? Loke discusses this in Chapter 5, section 5.4 (“Addressing Omnipresence”).

His answer: the divine nature of the Logos remained omnipresent even while the human nature was localized. The divine preconscious wasn’t confined to Jesus’s human body – it continued to be everywhere, sustaining the universe. But Jesus’s conscious human experience was limited to wherever his body was located.

Loke points to historical support for this view in what Reformed theologians call the “extra calvinisticum” – the idea that the divine Son exists beyond (“extra”) the human nature of Christ even during the Incarnation (Chapter 6, section 6.2).

Part III: Key Components and Distinctions in the Model

Understanding Persons and Natures

To fully grasp Loke’s model, we need to understand some technical terms. In Chapter 4, section 4.1 (“Key Terms Explicated”), Loke carefully defines what he means by “person” and “nature.”

A person is “a subject with various traits such as (moral) agency, reason or rationality, language or the cognitive skills language may support (such as intentionality and self-consciousness), and ability to enter into suitable relationship with other persons” (Chapter 4, section 4.1, p. 67).

A nature refers to the essential properties that make something what it is. Divine nature includes properties like omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence. Human nature includes properties like having a body, being able to learn, and experiencing emotions.

Jesus is one person (the divine Son) who possesses two complete natures. This is different from being two persons or having a mixed nature that’s neither fully divine nor fully human.

The Three-Part Structure

Loke advocates for what he calls a “three-part concrete nature Christology” (Chapter 4, section 4.3). This means Jesus consists of:

1. The divine nature (the preexistent Logos)
2. A human soul (distinct from the divine nature)
3. A human body

This structure is important because it avoids several historical heresies. If Jesus didn’t have a human soul (just the divine nature and a human body), that would be Apollinarianism – a view the church rejected because it means Jesus wasn’t fully human. But Loke’s model maintains that Jesus had a complete human nature (soul and body) united with the divine nature.

One Consciousness, Two Aspects

A crucial feature of Loke’s model is that Jesus had only one consciousness, not two separate consciousnesses fighting for control. In Chapter 4, section 4.3.1, Loke emphasizes: “On DPM it is not the case that an entity with a human consciousness was taken up by the Logos at the Incarnation. Rather, at the Incarnation the one consciousness of the Logos acquired a human aspect in addition to the divine aspect” (p. 74).

This is like how you can be consciously focused on reading while your subconscious continues to regulate your heartbeat and breathing. There’s one “you” with different levels or aspects of awareness, not multiple persons inside you.

The Importance of the Preconscious

The concept of the preconscious is central to Loke’s model. In Chapter 4, section 4.4.3, he explains that the preconscious is not the same as the unconscious. The preconscious contains information that can potentially become conscious, like memories you can recall. The unconscious contains things you can’t normally access, like the automatic processes that control your digestion.

For Jesus, the divine knowledge and power were in the preconscious – potentially accessible but not always consciously accessed. This explains how Jesus could have moments of supernatural knowledge (like knowing people’s thoughts) while also having genuine human experiences of learning and growing.

Part IV: Comparing with Other Models

The Two Consciousnesses Model

Many theologians have proposed that Jesus had two distinct consciousnesses – one divine and one human. Loke critiques this view extensively in Chapter 3 (“The Need for a New Solution”).

The main problem with two consciousnesses, according to Loke, is that it seems to create two persons, not one. If there’s a divine “I” and a human “I” in Jesus, each with its own self-awareness, how is that different from two persons sharing a body? This would lead to Nestorianism – the heresy that Jesus was two persons.

Loke quotes theologian Andrew Loke (himself) from an earlier work: “What follows from the ‘two-consciousness’ model is that Jesus would be two persons as asserted by the heretical Nestorianism” (Chapter 3, section 3.1, discussing the Two Consciousnesses Model).

Kenotic Christology

Another major approach is Kenotic Christology, which comes from the Greek word “kenosis” meaning “emptying.” This view, discussed in Chapter 3, section 3.2, suggests that the Son of God “emptied” himself of certain divine attributes when becoming human.

There are two main versions:

1. Ontological Kenoticism: This says the Logos actually gave up divine properties like omniscience and omnipotence. The problem, as Loke points out, is that this seems impossible – how can God stop being God? If God is by definition omniscient, giving up omniscience means ceasing to be God.

2. Functional Kenoticism: This says the Logos kept all divine properties but chose not to use them. This is closer to Loke’s view, but Loke argues his model provides a better explanation of how this works through the preconscious/conscious distinction.

Loke’s critique is thorough: “The problem with Ontological Kenoticism is that it seems to imply that divinity is lost” (Chapter 3, section 3.2). If Jesus wasn’t fully God during the Incarnation, then he couldn’t be our divine savior.

Divine Subconscious Model

William Sanday proposed a model similar to Loke’s in the early 20th century, suggesting that divine elements were in Jesus’s subconscious. Loke discusses this in Chapter 3, section 3.3, but argues his own model improves on Sanday’s in several ways:

1. Loke uses “preconscious” instead of “subconscious” to avoid Freudian psychological associations
2. Loke provides more detailed philosophical argumentation
3. Loke addresses specific biblical passages more thoroughly
4. Loke engages with contemporary philosophical discussions about consciousness

Comparison with Contemporary Scholars

Looking at other books in the contemporary discussion, we can see how Loke’s model fits into current debates:

Part V: Biblical and Theological Support

Scriptural Evidence for the Model

Loke doesn’t just offer philosophical arguments; he shows how his model makes sense of biblical passages that have puzzled theologians. In Chapter 5, he addresses numerous scriptural texts.

Jesus’s Limited Knowledge: When Jesus says he doesn’t know the day or hour of his return (Mark 13:32), Loke explains this refers to his conscious human knowledge. The divine preconscious retained omniscience, but this wasn’t consciously accessed at that moment.

Jesus’s Growth: Luke 2:52 says Jesus “grew in wisdom and stature.” How can God grow in wisdom? Loke’s answer: the human conscious aspect genuinely grew and learned, while the divine preconscious remained unchanged.

Jesus’s Miracles: When Jesus performs miracles, Loke suggests he’s drawing on divine power through prayer and dependence on the Father, modeling how humans should relate to God. This explains why Jesus often prayed before miracles and gave credit to the Father.

Jesus’s Suffering: The Garden of Gethsemane scene, where Jesus experiences anguish and asks if the cup might pass from him, shows genuine human experience. The divine nature remained impassible (unable to suffer), but the human conscious experience involved real suffering.

Historical Theological Support

Loke shows his model has historical precedent. In Chapter 6 (“Addressing the Difficulties Facing the New Kryptic Christology”), he discusses how his view relates to historical theology:

The Lutheran Tradition: The term “Kryptic Christology” comes from 17th-century Lutheran debates. The Giessen and Tübingen schools debated whether Christ’s divine attributes were hidden (krypsis) during his earthly life. Loke’s model develops this idea with modern philosophical precision.

The Reformed Tradition: The Reformed concept of the “extra calvinisticum” – that the divine Son exists beyond the human nature even during Incarnation – supports Loke’s view that the divine nature wasn’t confined to Jesus’s human body.

The Patristic Period: Early church fathers like Cyril of Alexandria spoke of the Logos “making his own” the experiences of the human nature. This fits with Loke’s model of one person experiencing through two natures.

Addressing Traditional Concerns

Throughout Chapter 6, Loke addresses worries that his model might compromise traditional Christian doctrine:

Does it preserve divine immutability? Yes – the divine nature doesn’t change. Only the mode of the Logos’s conscious experience changes through taking on human nature.

Does it maintain the unity of Christ? Yes – there’s only one person (the Logos) with one consciousness that has two aspects, not two separate persons.

Does it affirm real humanity? Yes – Jesus had a complete human nature with genuine human experiences, not just the appearance of humanity.

Does it preserve divine sovereignty? Yes – the divine attributes are retained in the preconscious, continuing to sustain the universe even during the Incarnation.

Part VI: The Two Natures in Detail

The Divine Nature: What It Means to Be Fully God

To understand how Jesus can be fully God, we need to understand what divine nature entails. Loke, drawing on classical Christian theology, identifies several essential divine attributes:

Aseity: God exists independently, not dependent on anything else for existence. The divine nature of Christ retained this property – the Logos didn’t become dependent on the human nature for existence.

Eternality: God exists outside of time or through all time. Even during the Incarnation, the divine nature transcended temporal limitations, though the human nature experienced time normally.

Immutability: God doesn’t change in his essential nature. Loke emphasizes in Chapter 4, section 4.4.4, that the Incarnation didn’t change the divine nature itself, only the mode in which the Logos consciously experienced reality.

Impassibility: Classical theology says God cannot suffer or be affected by external forces. This created a major problem – how could Christ suffer on the cross? Loke’s answer is profound: the divine nature remained impassible while the human nature truly suffered. The one person of Christ experienced suffering through his human nature while his divine nature remained unaffected in its essence.

“DPM affirms that qua divine nature the Logos remained impassible, immutable, omnipresent etc. during the Incarnation” (Chapter 4, section 4.4.4)

Omniscience: God knows all truths. As discussed earlier, this knowledge resided in the divine preconscious during the Incarnation.

Omnipotence: God has unlimited power. This power remained in the divine nature but was functionally limited in conscious exercise.

Omnipresence: God is present everywhere. The divine nature continued to be omnipresent even while the human nature was localized.

The Human Nature: What It Means to Be Fully Human

Loke insists that Jesus had a complete human nature. This means:

A Physical Body: Jesus had a real human body that could hunger, thirst, tire, and die. This wasn’t an illusion or a special divine body – it was genuinely human.

A Rational Soul: In addition to a body, Jesus had a human soul with its own will and mental capacities. This is crucial for avoiding Apollinarianism (the heresy that Jesus only had a human body with the divine nature replacing the human soul).

Human Psychology: Jesus experienced human emotions, temptations, and mental processes. He could be surprised, experience joy and sorrow, and face genuine temptation (though without sin).

Human Development: Jesus went through normal human development – being conceived, born as a baby, growing through childhood, learning language and skills, reaching physical and mental maturity.

Human Limitations: The human nature experienced genuine limitations – spatial location, finite strength, need for food and sleep, ability to suffer and die.

Loke emphasizes in Chapter 5, section 5.3.3, that these limitations were real, not pretended. When baby Jesus cried, it was genuine human need. When adult Jesus grew tired, it was real fatigue. This makes Christ’s life truly relevant to human experience.

The Hypostatic Union: How Two Natures Unite

The technical term for the union of divine and human natures in Christ is the “hypostatic union” (from the Greek word hypostasis, meaning “person”). Loke discusses this throughout his work, particularly in Chapter 4.

Key points about this union:

1. Without Mixture: The two natures don’t blend into a hybrid nature. Divine attributes don’t become human, and human attributes don’t become divine. They remain distinct while united in one person.

2. Without Change: Neither nature changes into the other. The divine doesn’t become human, and the human doesn’t become divine. Each retains its essential properties.

3. Without Division: The two natures aren’t separated into two persons. There’s one unified person, not a divine person and human person in the same body.

4. Without Separation: The two natures are permanently united. Even after the resurrection and ascension, Jesus remains the God-man forever.

Loke’s preconscious model provides a mechanism for understanding this union. The one person (the Logos) operates through two natures via different aspects of consciousness – divine properties through the preconscious, human properties through the conscious experience.

Part VII: Philosophical and Theological Implications

Implications for Salvation

Loke’s model has important implications for understanding salvation. Traditional Christian theology says Jesus had to be fully God to have the power to save and fully human to represent humanity. The Kryptic Model shows how both are possible.

As fully God, Jesus had the infinite value necessary for his sacrifice to atone for all human sin. The divine nature, retained in the preconscious, gave infinite worth to his human actions.

As fully human, Jesus could genuinely represent humanity, experience temptation without sin, and provide a perfect example of human obedience to God. His genuine human experience means he can truly sympathize with human weakness.

The model also explains how Jesus could be the perfect mediator between God and humanity – he genuinely belonged to both categories without compromising either.

Implications for Christian Life

Loke’s model has practical implications for Christian living:

Prayer and Dependence: Jesus’s reliance on prayer, even though he was divine, models human dependence on God. If Jesus, with divine nature in his preconscious, still prayed and depended on the Father, how much more should humans do so?

Suffering and Sympathy: Because Jesus genuinely experienced human limitation and suffering (not just pretended to), Christians can be confident that God understands human struggles personally, not just theoretically.

Example and Imitation: Jesus’s human life provides a genuine example that humans can follow. His obedience wasn’t automatic because of divine nature but was real human choice and effort.

Implications for Understanding God

The Incarnation, as explained by Loke’s model, reveals important truths about God:

Divine Love: God’s willingness to experience genuine human limitation and suffering demonstrates profound love for humanity.

Divine Power: The ability to remain fully God while taking on human limitations shows divine power isn’t compromised by voluntary restraint.

Divine Wisdom: The mechanism of the Incarnation – maintaining divinity while experiencing humanity – displays divine wisdom in accomplishing salvation.

Philosophical Contributions

Loke’s model makes several important philosophical contributions:

1. Consciousness Studies: It applies insights from modern psychology and philosophy of mind to ancient theological questions, showing how different fields can illuminate each other.

2. Personal Identity: It provides a sophisticated account of how one person can have multiple natures without becoming multiple persons.

3. Modal Logic: It carefully distinguishes between what’s necessarily true of natures and what’s contingently true of persons, avoiding logical contradictions.

4. Metaphysics: It offers a detailed metaphysical account of the Incarnation that goes beyond simply asserting mystery, while still respecting the ultimate mystery of the event.

Part VIII: Answering Objections

Common Objections to the Kryptic Model

In Chapter 6, Loke addresses numerous objections to his model. Let’s examine the main challenges and his responses:

Objection 1: “Isn’t this just Nestorianism in disguise?”

Some critics worry that having divine properties in the preconscious and human properties in the conscious creates two persons. Loke responds that there’s only one consciousness with two aspects, not two separate consciousnesses. It’s like how you’re one person whether you’re awake or dreaming, conscious or unconscious.

Objection 2: “Does this compromise divine omniscience?”

If Jesus didn’t consciously know everything, was he really omniscient? Loke argues yes – omniscience means possessing all knowledge, not necessarily being consciously aware of all knowledge at every moment. The knowledge was present in the divine preconscious.

Objection 3: “Can God really limit himself?”

Some argue that God can’t limit his own attributes because they’re essential to his nature. Loke distinguishes between possessing attributes (which can’t change) and exercising them (which can be voluntarily restrained). God remained omnipotent even while choosing not to exercise omnipotence.

Objection 4: “Is the preconscious just an ad hoc solution?”

Critics might say Loke invented the preconscious concept just to solve this problem. But Loke shows the preconscious is a well-established psychological concept, recognized since before Freud and confirmed by modern cognitive science.

Biblical Challenges

Some biblical passages seem to challenge Loke’s model:

“The Word became flesh” (John 1:14): Doesn’t this suggest the divine nature changed into human nature? Loke argues (following traditional interpretation) that “became” means “took on” or “assumed” flesh, not “turned into” flesh. The divine nature added human nature without losing divinity.

“He emptied himself” (Philippians 2:7): Doesn’t this support kenotic theories that Jesus gave up divine attributes? Loke interprets this as emptying himself of the glory and privileges of divinity, not the essence of divinity. Jesus chose not to use divine prerogatives, but retained divine nature.

Jesus’s prayers and dependence on the Father: If Jesus was fully divine, why did he need to pray? Loke sees this as Jesus modeling human dependence on God and choosing to operate through his human nature rather than independently exercising divine power.

Philosophical Challenges

Philosophers have raised additional concerns:

The Problem of Temporary Properties: If the Incarnation involved taking on human properties temporarily (Jesus is no longer physically on earth), doesn’t this mean God changes? Loke responds that the divine nature itself doesn’t change – the Logos eternally has the property of “becoming incarnate at time T” without the divine essence changing.

The Problem of Contradictory Properties: How can one person have contradictory properties like being impassible (unable to suffer) and suffering? Loke uses the doctrine of reduplication – Christ is impassible qua (with respect to) his divine nature and passible qua his human nature. One person, two sets of properties in different respects.

The Problem of Divine Deception: If Jesus’s divine nature was hidden, wasn’t this deceptive? Loke argues there’s a difference between restraining the use of abilities and deceiving others. Jesus never claimed not to be divine; he simply chose to experience genuine human limitations.

Part IX: Comparing with Modern Christological Debates

The Conciliar Christology Tradition

The book “In Defense of Conciliar Christology” represents scholars who defend the traditional Chalcedonian definition without necessarily explaining the mechanism. These scholars often say the “how” of the Incarnation is an impenetrable mystery.

Loke respects this tradition but goes further. He agrees the Incarnation involves mystery but argues we can understand more than traditionally thought. His preconscious model doesn’t eliminate mystery but provides a framework for understanding how divine and human natures could coexist.

The Extended Conciliar Christology Movement

The book “In Defense of Extended Conciliar Christology” represents scholars who accept traditional Christology but explore its implications further, asking questions like: Could there be multiple incarnations? Could Christ have assumed fallen human nature?

Loke’s model contributes to these discussions. If the mechanism is divine preconscious with human conscious, theoretically the Son could have multiple human consciousnesses (multiple incarnations). However, Loke doesn’t pursue these speculative questions, focusing on explaining the one historical Incarnation.

Contemporary Philosophical Approaches

“The Incarnation (Elements in the Philosophy of Religion)” surveys various philosophical models of the Incarnation. Comparing these with Loke’s approach:

Compositional Models: Some philosophers see Christ as composed of parts (divine nature + human nature = Christ). Loke’s model is compositional but adds the crucial element of consciousness to explain how the parts relate.

Kenotic Models: As discussed, these involve divine self-emptying. Loke’s model is partially kenotic (functional limitation) but not ontologically kenotic (no loss of divine attributes).

Abstract vs. Concrete Nature Views: Some see natures as abstract properties, others as concrete particulars. Loke firmly advocates the concrete view – Christ assumed an actual human body and soul, not just human properties.

The Humanity of Christ Debate

“Divinity and Humanity: The Incarnation Reconsidered” explores different understandings of Christ’s humanity. Key questions include:

Did Christ assume fallen or unfallen human nature? Loke implies unfallen (sinless) nature, though affected by the conditions of fallen world (hunger, suffering, death).

Is Christ’s humanity particular or universal? Loke argues for particular – Jesus assumed a specific human body and soul, not humanity in general.

What happened to Christ’s humanity after resurrection? Loke suggests the glorified but still human nature continues eternally, though the conscious/preconscious dynamic may have changed.

Part X: The Physicalism Challenge

Understanding Physicalism and Its Implications

One of the most important challenges to the Incarnation comes from physicalism – the view that everything, including the mind and consciousness, is purely physical. This view, sometimes called materialism, claims humans are nothing more than complex physical bodies without immaterial souls or spirits.

Some modern theologians have tried to reconcile physicalism with Christianity, arguing that humans don’t need souls to be made in God’s image or to have a relationship with God. This connects to the doctrine of “conditional immortality” – the idea that humans aren’t naturally immortal but only live forever if God grants it.

However, Loke’s model shows why physicalism creates serious problems for the Incarnation. In Chapter 4, section 4.6.1 (“Linkage between Concrete Parts: Immaterialist, Materialist and Substance Dualist Accounts of Incarnation”), Loke addresses attempts to understand the Incarnation from a physicalist perspective.

Why Physicalism Undermines the Incarnation

Problem 1: Divine Nature Cannot Be Physical

God, by definition, is spirit (John 4:24) – immaterial, not composed of matter. If physicalism is true and only physical things exist, then either God doesn’t exist or God must be physical. But a physical God faces insurmountable problems:

“If the Logos becomes a purely physical entity at the Incarnation, then it would seem to be metaphysically impossible for him to possess divine properties such as having the knowledge of all truths, having the power of omnipotence, etc. as there seems to be a metaphysical limit as to how much information and power a physical body can hold” (Chapter 4, section 4.6.1)

Think about it: How could a physical brain, no matter how complex, contain knowledge of every fact in the universe? How could physical muscles, no matter how strong, have literally infinite power? Physical things have physical limitations.

Problem 2: The Death of Christ Would End the Incarnation

If humans are purely physical and cease to exist when their bodies die, then Jesus would have ceased to exist when he died on the cross. This creates a theological catastrophe:

• The second person of the Trinity would have ceased to exist (impossible for an eternal God)
• Jesus couldn’t have preached to spirits in prison between death and resurrection (1 Peter 3:19)
• The resurrection would be God creating a new person who looks like Jesus, not raising the same Jesus
• Our hope of conscious existence after death would be false

As Loke points out, the traditional Christian view requires that something of Jesus persisted between death and resurrection – his human soul united to his divine nature. Physicalism cannot account for this.

Problem 3: No Mechanism for Divine-Human Unity

Physicalism cannot explain how divine and human natures unite in one person. Trenton Merricks, a Christian physicalist, proposes that “at the Incarnation the Logos becomes a purely physical body” (cited in Chapter 4, section 4.6.1). But this faces several problems:

1. It implies the divine nature changes into something physical (impossible for an immutable God)
2. It cannot explain how divine properties persist if the Logos becomes purely physical
3. It suggests God’s existence depends on physical matter

The Substance Dualist Solution

Loke argues that substance dualism – the view that humans have both physical bodies and immaterial souls – is necessary for a coherent account of the Incarnation:

“By affirming that the preconscious had divine properties, DPM would require substance dualism, as it would require that the divine preconscious is immaterial” (Chapter 4, section 4.6.1)

With substance dualism, the Incarnation makes sense:

• The divine nature (immaterial) can unite with human nature (body and soul)
• Jesus’s human soul can survive bodily death, maintaining personal continuity
• Divine properties can be possessed without physical limitations
• The resurrection involves reuniting the same soul with a glorified body

Responding to Physicalist Objections

Physicalists often object that substance dualism is unscientific or philosophically problematic. Loke addresses these concerns:

“How can an immaterial soul interact with a physical body?”

Loke notes that if God (who is immaterial) can create and interact with the physical universe, then immaterial souls interacting with bodies is hardly more problematic. As he states: “Given theism (with its non-physical, miracle-working creator God), the objection to dualism that a non-physical entity cannot causally influence the physical ought to be judged uncompelling” (Chapter 4, section 4.6.1).

“Doesn’t neuroscience show the mind is just the brain?”

Loke’s model actually accommodates neuroscience findings. He proposes that in the incarnate state, aspects of consciousness depend on the brain: “if certain parts of the brain were sick or injured, then certain aspects of Jesus’ conscious would not be able to function efficiently” (Chapter 4, section 4.6.1). This explains mind-brain correlation without reducing mind to brain.

“Isn’t physicalism simpler?”

While physicalism might seem simpler, it cannot account for central Christian doctrines. Sometimes the simpler explanation is inadequate. The Incarnation requires a robust metaphysics that includes both material and immaterial realities.

Implications for Human Nature and Salvation

The physicalism debate has profound implications beyond Christology:

Human Dignity: If humans are just physical bodies, our value is reduced to material components. But if we have immaterial souls, we possess inherent dignity as spiritual beings made in God’s image.

Life After Death: Physicalism typically denies conscious existence between death and resurrection. But Jesus promised the thief on the cross “today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43), implying immediate conscious existence after death.

Moral Responsibility: If we’re purely physical, determined by physical laws, genuine moral responsibility becomes questionable. An immaterial soul provides room for free will and moral agency.

Religious Experience: How can purely physical beings have spiritual experiences or relationship with an immaterial God? Substance dualism makes sense of religious experience and divine-human communication.

Part XI: The Incarnation and the Problem of Evil

How the Kryptic Model Addresses Suffering

One of the most powerful aspects of Christianity is its claim that God understands human suffering personally, not just theoretically. The Incarnation means God experienced pain, rejection, and death. But this raises a question: How could an impassible God suffer?

Loke’s model provides a sophisticated answer. In Chapter 4, section 4.4.4, he addresses divine impassibility – the doctrine that God cannot suffer or be affected by external forces:

“DPM affirms that qua divine nature the Logos remained impassible, immutable, omnipresent etc. during the Incarnation… In that self-restricted state, states of mind such as the lack of conscious awareness of some future events, the sensations of fatigue, etc. truly occurred in the mind of Jesus and were truly experienced by him” (Chapter 7, Conclusion)

This means:

• The divine nature itself didn’t suffer (preserving divine transcendence)
• The human nature genuinely suffered (making the suffering real, not pretended)
• The one person of Christ experienced real suffering through his human nature
• God can truly say “I understand your pain” because he experienced it personally in Christ

The Example of Self-Limiting Love

Loke points out that the Incarnation demonstrates a principle relevant to the problem of evil: the value of voluntary self-limitation. He writes:

“The Kryptic Model of the Incarnation also enables us to see how Jesus’ self-sacrifice on the Cross has the potential for teaching people to love their enemies by refraining from striking back even though they might have the power to do so” (Chapter 7, Conclusion)

If God himself chose to limit his power for the sake of love, this suggests that power isn’t the highest value – love is. The existence of evil might be connected to God’s voluntary limitation to allow genuine human freedom and love.

Part XII: Practical Applications for Christian Life

Understanding Jesus’s Prayer Life

One puzzle for many Christians is why Jesus, if he was God, needed to pray. Wasn’t he praying to himself? Loke’s model clarifies this:

Jesus prayed from his human conscious experience, depending on the Father just as humans must. Even though divine power resided in his preconscious, he chose to operate through prayer and dependence. This means:

• Jesus’s prayers were genuine, not theatrical
• His example of prayer is truly relevant for humans
• Prayer isn’t just for the powerless but is the proper posture of all creatures before God

Following Christ’s Example

Some Christians wonder if Jesus’s example is really relevant since he had divine nature to help him resist temptation. But Loke’s model shows Jesus faced temptation through his human conscious experience without accessing divine power to make obedience easy:

“Jesus was able to serve as an example for others to likewise rely on God in their lives” (Chapter 7, Conclusion)

This means:

• Jesus’s victory over temptation was won through human faithfulness, not divine power
• His example is achievable for humans who rely on God’s grace
• We can’t excuse our failures by saying “Well, he was God”

Confidence in Christ’s Understanding

Hebrews 4:15 says we have a high priest who can “sympathize with our weaknesses.” Loke’s model gives theological grounding for this confidence. Christ’s human experiences weren’t superficial or pretended – they were psychologically real:

• When Jesus was tired, he really felt exhaustion
• When he was tempted, he really felt the pull of temptation
• When he suffered, he experienced genuine anguish
• When he felt abandoned on the cross, the feeling was real

This means Christians can approach Christ knowing he truly understands human experience from the inside, not just as an observer.

The Hope of Transformation

Loke’s model also provides hope for human transformation. If the divine Logos could unite with human nature without destroying it, this suggests humans can be united with God (theosis or deification in Eastern Orthodox terminology) without losing their humanity.

The Incarnation becomes a prototype for human destiny – not becoming God by nature, but participating in divine life while remaining genuinely human. As 2 Peter 1:4 says, believers become “partakers of the divine nature.”

Part XIII: The Eternal Significance of the Incarnation

Did the Incarnation End?

An important question Loke addresses in Chapter 6, section 6.3, is whether the limitation of the Logos continues forever. After the resurrection and ascension, does Jesus still have human nature? Is the Incarnation permanent?

Traditional Christianity affirms that the Incarnation is permanent – Jesus remains the God-man forever. But this raises questions for Loke’s model: Does the conscious/preconscious distinction continue? Are divine attributes still functionally limited?

Loke presents two possibilities, both compatible with orthodoxy:

Option 1: The Limitation Ends but Humanity Remains

After glorification, the functional limitation might end while true humanity continues. The risen Christ might have full conscious access to divine attributes while retaining human nature (now glorified and immortal). This would mean:

• The risen Christ consciously exercises omniscience, omnipotence, etc.
• The human nature is so transformed it can bear divine glory
• The purpose of limitation (experiencing human weakness) is fulfilled

Option 2: The Limitation Continues Forever

Alternatively, some form of functional limitation might continue eternally. This wouldn’t diminish Christ’s divinity but would mean:

• Christ eternally identifies with humanity through continued limitation
• The God-man relationship remains the permanent pattern
• Christ’s priesthood includes eternal solidarity with creatures

Loke concludes: “Either of the two possible solutions… are viable, and therefore the issue whether the limitation will last forever poses no insurmountable problem for DPM” (Chapter 7, Conclusion).

Implications for Human Destiny

The permanent Incarnation has profound implications for humanity’s eternal future:

Eternal Mediatorship: Christ remains the mediator between God and humanity forever. There’s always a human in the Trinity, ensuring God eternally understands and represents human concerns.

Glorification Hope: Christ’s glorified humanity shows what awaits believers. If human nature can be united with divine nature without destruction, humans can be transformed while remaining human.

Cosmic Significance: The Incarnation elevates human nature cosmically. Humanity isn’t a temporary experiment but has eternal significance in God’s plan.

Part XIV: Theological and Philosophical Synthesis

Integrating Philosophy and Theology

One of Loke’s major contributions is showing how philosophical analysis can illuminate theological mysteries without explaining them away. His approach demonstrates several important principles:

1. Respecting Mystery While Seeking Understanding: Loke doesn’t claim to eliminate all mystery from the Incarnation. Instead, he shows that acknowledging mystery doesn’t mean abandoning rational investigation. We can understand more than we might think while still recognizing limits.

2. Using Multiple Disciplines: The Kryptic Model draws from psychology (consciousness studies), philosophy (metaphysics and logic), biblical studies (exegesis), and historical theology (patristic and Reformation thought). This interdisciplinary approach enriches understanding.

3. Maintaining Orthodox Boundaries: While innovative in explanation, Loke stays within orthodox Chalcedonian boundaries. His model affirms one person, two complete natures, without mixture, change, division, or separation.

Addressing Contemporary Challenges

Loke’s model speaks to several contemporary challenges:

Scientific Materialism: By showing why the Incarnation requires substance dualism, Loke challenges purely materialistic worldviews while remaining open to scientific findings about mind-brain interaction.

Religious Pluralism: The Incarnation as explained by Loke maintains Christianity’s unique claim – God personally entered human experience – while showing this claim is philosophically coherent, not irrational.

Postmodern Skepticism: Against claims that religious language is meaningless or contradictory, Loke demonstrates that central Christian doctrines can be articulated coherently using precise philosophical language.

The Explanatory Power of the Model

A good theological model should explain a wide range of data. Loke’s model successfully accounts for:

• Biblical passages about Jesus’s divinity and humanity
• Creedal affirmations from early councils
• Jesus’s prayers and dependence on the Father
• Jesus’s growth and learning
• Jesus’s miracles and divine prerogatives
• Jesus’s genuine temptations
• Jesus’s real suffering and death
• The continuity of personal identity through death and resurrection
• The permanent union of divine and human in Christ

This comprehensive explanatory scope demonstrates the model’s theological fruitfulness.

Part XV: Critical Evaluation and Future Directions

Strengths of Loke’s Model

1. Philosophical Sophistication: Unlike models that simply assert mystery, Loke provides detailed philosophical mechanisms while respecting ultimate mystery.

2. Biblical Fidelity: The model takes seriously all biblical data about Christ, not explaining away difficult passages but showing how they cohere.

3. Historical Awareness: Loke engages thoroughly with historical theology, showing his model’s connections to tradition while offering fresh insights.

4. Practical Relevance: The model has clear implications for Christian life, worship, and discipleship, not remaining merely theoretical.

5. Apologetic Value: By showing the Incarnation’s logical coherence, the model removes a major intellectual obstacle to Christian faith.

Potential Weaknesses and Questions

While powerful, Loke’s model raises some questions for further exploration:

1. The Preconscious Mechanism: While the conscious/preconscious distinction is psychologically recognized, applying it to divine consciousness involves speculation beyond human experience.

2. Trinitarian Implications: How does the functional limitation of the Son affect Trinitarian relations? Does it create temporary asymmetry in the Trinity?

3. The Experience of Omniscience: Can omniscience really exist in a preconscious state? Doesn’t knowledge require some form of awareness?

4. Cultural Translation: How can this philosophical model be communicated across cultures that don’t share Western philosophical categories?

Areas for Future Research

Loke’s model opens several avenues for further investigation:

1. Neuroscience and Christology: As neuroscience advances, how might brain science illuminate or challenge the conscious/preconscious distinction in Christ?

2. Multiple Incarnations: Could Loke’s model accommodate multiple simultaneous incarnations? This question has relevance for discussions about extraterrestrial life.

3. Evolutionary Christology: How does the model relate to questions about human evolution and the image of God?

4. Comparative Religion: How does this understanding of Incarnation compare with avatar concepts in Hinduism or manifestation ideas in other religions?

5. Pastoral Theology: How can this theological model inform pastoral care, spiritual direction, and preaching?

Conclusion: The Continuing Relevance of the Incarnation

The Heart of Christian Faith

Andrew Ter Ern Loke’s Kryptic Model of the Incarnation represents a significant contribution to Christian theology. By proposing that the divine Logos possessed a preconscious containing divine attributes while experiencing human limitations in consciousness, Loke offers a philosophically sophisticated yet biblically faithful account of how Jesus Christ could be truly God and truly human.

The model addresses age-old puzzles while respecting divine mystery. It shows that the Incarnation, while transcending complete human comprehension, is not irrational or contradictory. This has enormous apologetic value in an age that often dismisses religious claims as incoherent.

The Necessity of Substance Dualism

Particularly significant is Loke’s demonstration that physicalism undermines the Incarnation. If humans are purely physical, then:

• God cannot truly become human while remaining divine
• Christ’s death would mean cessation of existence
• The resurrection would be recreation, not restoration
• Human destiny would be purely material

The Incarnation requires robust metaphysics including both material and immaterial realities. This challenges contemporary materialism and shows that central Christian doctrines have philosophical implications that cannot be avoided.

The Personal Dimension

Perhaps most importantly, Loke’s model preserves the personal significance of the Incarnation. It means:

God genuinely understands human experience. The limitations, struggles, and sufferings of human life have been experienced by God himself in Christ. This isn’t theoretical knowledge but personal experience.

Human nature has infinite dignity. If God could unite with human nature without destroying it, this reveals humanity’s incredible worth and potential.

Salvation is personal, not mechanical. The Incarnation isn’t a legal transaction but God personally entering human existence to restore relationship.

Transformation, not replacement, is our hope. The Incarnation shows God’s plan isn’t to replace humanity but to transform and glorify it.

The Ongoing Mystery

While Loke’s model illuminates much, mystery remains. As he concludes:

“A defensible model can be offered for the coherence of the Incarnation, a model which for all we know could have been actualized in history. Though it would continue to fill us with wonder throughout the ages, this most incredible story of all is not impossible after all” (Chapter 7, Conclusion)

The Incarnation remains Christianity’s central miracle – God becoming human to redeem humanity. Loke shows this miracle, while transcending complete comprehension, can be coherently affirmed and reasonably believed.

Final Reflections

The Incarnation as explained through Loke’s Kryptic Model reveals a God who doesn’t remain distant from human suffering but enters into it. It shows divine love willing to experience limitation for the sake of relationship. It demonstrates that the gap between infinite Creator and finite creature can be bridged without destroying either.

For Christians, this model provides intellectual confidence in their faith’s coherence. For skeptics, it removes the excuse that Christian doctrine is obviously contradictory. For theologians, it offers a framework for further exploration. For pastors, it provides resources for teaching and preaching. For all, it presents the amazing claim that in Jesus Christ, heaven and earth, divine and human, infinite and finite, meet in one person.

The word “Incarnation” means “enfleshment” – God taking on flesh. Through Loke’s careful philosophical and theological work, we see more clearly how this astounding claim might be true. The divine preconscious model shows that when Christians sing “Veiled in flesh the Godhead see,” they’re not just expressing pious sentiment but articulating a profound truth about reality.

In our age of scientific materialism and religious skepticism, Loke’s work demonstrates that orthodox Christian faith remains intellectually viable. The Incarnation isn’t a relic of pre-scientific thinking but a sophisticated doctrine that engages with contemporary philosophy and psychology while remaining faithful to biblical revelation and historical tradition.

Most importantly, the Incarnation as Loke presents it isn’t merely a doctrine to be understood but a reality to be experienced. It means God knows what it’s like to be human, to struggle, to suffer, to be tempted, and to die. It means humans can know God personally, not just know about him. It means the divide between divine and human has been bridged forever in the person of Jesus Christ.

This is why the Incarnation remains central to Christian faith and life. It’s not just a theological puzzle to be solved but the foundation of Christian hope. In Jesus Christ, God has united himself with humanity permanently. Through the Incarnation, humans can be united with God eternally. This is the good news that has sustained Christians for two millennia and continues to offer hope today.

Andrew Ter Ern Loke’s Kryptic Model helps us understand this hope more clearly, defend it more confidently, and proclaim it more effectively. While mystery remains – and should remain, given the infinite nature of God – we can gratefully receive the light that philosophical and theological reflection provides. The Incarnation may transcend complete human understanding, but it doesn’t transcend human appreciation, wonder, and worship.

In the end, the Incarnation is about relationship – God’s desire to be with his people so strongly that he became one of them. Loke’s model helps us see how this is possible. But beyond possibility lies actuality – the Christian claim that this actually happened in history, in a particular person, at a particular time and place. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth (John 1:14).

This is the mystery Loke illuminates – not to remove our wonder but to deepen it with understanding. The Kryptic Model shows that the most amazing story ever told – God becoming human – might just be the truest story as well.

Bibliography

Primary Source:

Loke, Andrew Ter Ern. A Kryptic Model of the Incarnation. Routledge New Critical Thinking in Religion, Theology and Biblical Studies. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing, 2014.

Secondary Sources from Project Files:

Pawl, Timothy. In Defense of Conciliar Christology. Oxford Studies in Analytic Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pawl, Timothy. In Defense of Extended Conciliar Christology. Oxford Studies in Analytic Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

The Incarnation. Elements in the Philosophy of Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Crisp, Oliver. Divinity and Humanity: The Incarnation Reconsidered. Current Issues in Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.