Introductory notes for readers of this thesis - Theses - Flinders ...

destruction of a sinful human race. Rather, the Incarnation is the reason behind thecreation—God’s eternal plan is the revelation of himself in human form. The Incarnationis not a rescue mission of forensic justification aimed at delivering sinners from the handsof a wrathful God. The Incarnation is the always-intended natural extension of God’slove for others and his desire to reveal himself in relationship. Jesus would still havecome to earth as the real symbol of God’s divinity in humanity whether sin was aproblem or not. In this sense humanity has its anthropological origin in the eternalLogos—God and humanity are forever intrinsically linked through the life, death andresurrection of Jesus of Nazareth 103 .Excursus: real symbolism as an example of creative tension in Rahner’s theologyKaren Kilby’s reflection on Rahner’s construction of Jesus as the real symbol of divinityhighlights the creative tension that is often present in Rahner’s thought. Kilby argues thatthe idea of Jesus as the real symbol of God breaks down when Rahner’s theology ofsymbol is considered against the broader view of Christian theology that God is completein himself and therefore does not need to express himself in real-symbolic form for anyself-actualising purpose. She notes that, in his ‘real symbol’ idea, Rahner argues thatinner thoughts and feelings must be expressed in words and actions so that the individualsexpressing them can experience and fulfil their true reality. Rahner’s ‘real symbol’actually facilitates what it signifies and is completed as a symbol by the reality it bringsto pass. But can this idea really be applied to God who is already fully complete inhimself? ‘Must’ God express himself through the Incarnation to become complete?Would it be truer to say that Jesus is the real symbol of God’s grace? 104Kilby’s questions evoke George Vandervale’s reflection 105 that, in the construction of a‘supernatural existential’, Rahner sets a logical trap for himself by insisting on themystery of God’s universal nearness as an ontological concept. The fact that both Kilbyand Vandervale are sympathetic interpreters highlights that, even amongst his friends,103 Ibid.104 K. Kilby, Karl Rahner (London: Fount, 1997), 43-44.105 See the discussion in our previous chapter on ‘The human experience of mystery’ under the heading‘Critical Reflection on the Mystery of Infinity in Proximity,’ 29.159