Pub Date : 2021-03-15DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2021.1923558
Torbjörn Gustafsson Chorell
ABSTRACT The debate about secularization in recent decades has challenged long-held assumptions about Western modernity and the purported decline of religion in modern societies. However, the impact of this criticism on the idea of history has so far not received as much attention as it deserves. Jayne Svenungsson’s analysis of the influence of biblical motives on contemporary political theology illustrates one way in which the concept of history might be rethought in the wake of the crisis of the secularization thesis. In dialogue with Karl Löwith’s classical argument that modern philosophy of history and the idea of historical progress are secularized versions of Christian eschatology, she argues that the prophetic vision of history as a struggle for a justice that supersedes every current law or moral system is a viable and promising alternative that ought to be considered in contemporary discussions of politics and history. Svenungsson’s analysis thus amounts to what one might call a postsecular challenge to a secular historical discourse.
{"title":"Unsecularizing history and politics: Jayne Svenungsson and Karl Löwith on meaning in history","authors":"Torbjörn Gustafsson Chorell","doi":"10.1080/21692327.2021.1923558","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2021.1923558","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The debate about secularization in recent decades has challenged long-held assumptions about Western modernity and the purported decline of religion in modern societies. However, the impact of this criticism on the idea of history has so far not received as much attention as it deserves. Jayne Svenungsson’s analysis of the influence of biblical motives on contemporary political theology illustrates one way in which the concept of history might be rethought in the wake of the crisis of the secularization thesis. In dialogue with Karl Löwith’s classical argument that modern philosophy of history and the idea of historical progress are secularized versions of Christian eschatology, she argues that the prophetic vision of history as a struggle for a justice that supersedes every current law or moral system is a viable and promising alternative that ought to be considered in contemporary discussions of politics and history. Svenungsson’s analysis thus amounts to what one might call a postsecular challenge to a secular historical discourse.","PeriodicalId":42052,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Philosophy and Theology","volume":"82 1","pages":"176 - 192"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21692327.2021.1923558","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48582749","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-15DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2021.1911674
E. Watson
ABSTRACT In order to explore what it means to pursue philosophical investigations for theological reasons, this paper argues that Ludwig Wittgenstein continues and corrects Pseudo-Denys’ project in The Divine Names. I first argue that The Divine Names should be interpreted as attempting to render human thought transparent to the divine by relativizing our concepts. The success of this project is compromised because the concept of ‘unity’ is not relativized. I then develop the claim that Wittgenstein does relativize unity in a similar way and for similar religious reasons to Pseudo-Denys. As such, he can be read as continuing and correcting the Pseudo-Dionysian project. I conclude by reflecting on several of this argument’s implications for the relationship between philosophy and Christian systematic theology.
{"title":"The sacred fire: Wittgenstein, Pseudo-Denys, and transparency to the divine","authors":"E. Watson","doi":"10.1080/21692327.2021.1911674","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2021.1911674","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In order to explore what it means to pursue philosophical investigations for theological reasons, this paper argues that Ludwig Wittgenstein continues and corrects Pseudo-Denys’ project in The Divine Names. I first argue that The Divine Names should be interpreted as attempting to render human thought transparent to the divine by relativizing our concepts. The success of this project is compromised because the concept of ‘unity’ is not relativized. I then develop the claim that Wittgenstein does relativize unity in a similar way and for similar religious reasons to Pseudo-Denys. As such, he can be read as continuing and correcting the Pseudo-Dionysian project. I conclude by reflecting on several of this argument’s implications for the relationship between philosophy and Christian systematic theology.","PeriodicalId":42052,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Philosophy and Theology","volume":"82 1","pages":"136 - 154"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21692327.2021.1911674","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49244078","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2021.1880962
C. Anbeek
ABSTRACT The central thesis of this essay is that, in addressing the many disruptive experiences people have in current times, Tillich’s notion of ‘the courage to be’ should be complemented by the notion of the ‘courage to be vulnerable’. In adding this idea, it is argued that courage should focus less on the anxieties of emptiness, guilt and death of the individual, but rather to being carried, becoming and appearing to each other. Philosophical support for this proposed modification has been found in the notion of ‘natality’, coined by Hannah Arendt, by which she expresses the wonder of being born, and the meanings three feminist scholars, Stone, Brison and Cavarero ascribed to it. First, people are both fundamentally and situationally vulnerable due to their ‘being carried and being born’ physically. Secondly, human beings could experience a ‘second birth’ by starting something new. And thirdly, people could have another ‘birth’ by fostering the courage to disclose themselves and their vulnerability to the other. However, this courage to be vulnerable must be facilitated by communities-with-a-heart, which embrace reciprocity, interdependency and a plurality of experiences, leading to people becoming each other’s witness in times of disruption and pursuing activities of faith, hope and love.
{"title":"The courage to be vulnerable: philosophical considerations","authors":"C. Anbeek","doi":"10.1080/21692327.2021.1880962","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2021.1880962","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The central thesis of this essay is that, in addressing the many disruptive experiences people have in current times, Tillich’s notion of ‘the courage to be’ should be complemented by the notion of the ‘courage to be vulnerable’. In adding this idea, it is argued that courage should focus less on the anxieties of emptiness, guilt and death of the individual, but rather to being carried, becoming and appearing to each other. Philosophical support for this proposed modification has been found in the notion of ‘natality’, coined by Hannah Arendt, by which she expresses the wonder of being born, and the meanings three feminist scholars, Stone, Brison and Cavarero ascribed to it. First, people are both fundamentally and situationally vulnerable due to their ‘being carried and being born’ physically. Secondly, human beings could experience a ‘second birth’ by starting something new. And thirdly, people could have another ‘birth’ by fostering the courage to disclose themselves and their vulnerability to the other. However, this courage to be vulnerable must be facilitated by communities-with-a-heart, which embrace reciprocity, interdependency and a plurality of experiences, leading to people becoming each other’s witness in times of disruption and pursuing activities of faith, hope and love.","PeriodicalId":42052,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Philosophy and Theology","volume":"82 1","pages":"64 - 76"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21692327.2021.1880962","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47463135","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2020.1869061
Rory Misiewicz
ABSTRACT This essay’s aim is to demonstrate how recent defenses of divine simplicity have failed to address the prevailing challenge of analogical language, and thereby render much of their argumentation for simplicity’s appropriateness in Christian theology null-and-void. For this task, three book-length works published within the last few years are examined: Steven Duby’s Divine Simplicity: A Dogmatic Account (2016), D. Stephen Long’s The Perfectly Simple Triune God: Aquinas and His Legacy (2016), and Jordan Barrett’s Divine Simplicity: A Biblical and Trinitarian Account (2017). The first section briefly details what each author understands divine simplicity to characterize, and how that characterization involves the pivotal denial of God belonging to any genus. The second section addresses the extent to which each author provides an answer as to how one can analogically speak of a simple God. Finally, the third section critiques the kinds of analogical positions found in Thomas Cajetan’s influential De Nominum Analogia, showing that they do not provide a sufficient analogical framework to ground intelligible propositions or inferences about a simple God, which thereby places the original three authors’ defenses in danger of serious incoherence.
{"title":"Divine simplicity: some recent defenses and the prevailing challenge of analogical language","authors":"Rory Misiewicz","doi":"10.1080/21692327.2020.1869061","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2020.1869061","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay’s aim is to demonstrate how recent defenses of divine simplicity have failed to address the prevailing challenge of analogical language, and thereby render much of their argumentation for simplicity’s appropriateness in Christian theology null-and-void. For this task, three book-length works published within the last few years are examined: Steven Duby’s Divine Simplicity: A Dogmatic Account (2016), D. Stephen Long’s The Perfectly Simple Triune God: Aquinas and His Legacy (2016), and Jordan Barrett’s Divine Simplicity: A Biblical and Trinitarian Account (2017). The first section briefly details what each author understands divine simplicity to characterize, and how that characterization involves the pivotal denial of God belonging to any genus. The second section addresses the extent to which each author provides an answer as to how one can analogically speak of a simple God. Finally, the third section critiques the kinds of analogical positions found in Thomas Cajetan’s influential De Nominum Analogia, showing that they do not provide a sufficient analogical framework to ground intelligible propositions or inferences about a simple God, which thereby places the original three authors’ defenses in danger of serious incoherence.","PeriodicalId":42052,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Philosophy and Theology","volume":"82 1","pages":"51 - 63"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21692327.2020.1869061","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42144839","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2021.1896374
King‐Ho Leung
ABSTRACT This article offers a comparative reading of the ontologies of David Bentley Hart and Jean-Paul Sartre as well as their respective appeals to phenomenology as a philosophical method. While it may seem odd to compare one of the twentieth century’s most celebrated atheists with one of contemporary Christianity’s most highly-acclaimed critics of atheism, this article shows that there are many surprising parallels between the ontological outlooks of Hart and Sartre, namely their conceptions of God as the unity of being and consciousness and their accounts of human consciousness as a desire to ‘become God’. By examining the similarities and differences between Sartre’s and Hart’s philosophical and theological works, this article seeks to highlight the phenomenological aspects of Hart’s theological outlook and consider how Hart’s appeal to the phenomenological analysis of intentional consciousness in his theological work can illuminate our understanding of the ongoing engagements between theology and phenomenology.
{"title":"Hart and Sartre on God and Consciousness","authors":"King‐Ho Leung","doi":"10.1080/21692327.2021.1896374","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2021.1896374","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article offers a comparative reading of the ontologies of David Bentley Hart and Jean-Paul Sartre as well as their respective appeals to phenomenology as a philosophical method. While it may seem odd to compare one of the twentieth century’s most celebrated atheists with one of contemporary Christianity’s most highly-acclaimed critics of atheism, this article shows that there are many surprising parallels between the ontological outlooks of Hart and Sartre, namely their conceptions of God as the unity of being and consciousness and their accounts of human consciousness as a desire to ‘become God’. By examining the similarities and differences between Sartre’s and Hart’s philosophical and theological works, this article seeks to highlight the phenomenological aspects of Hart’s theological outlook and consider how Hart’s appeal to the phenomenological analysis of intentional consciousness in his theological work can illuminate our understanding of the ongoing engagements between theology and phenomenology.","PeriodicalId":42052,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Philosophy and Theology","volume":"82 1","pages":"34 - 50"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21692327.2021.1896374","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41562599","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2021.1881915
P. Irizar, A. Dupont
ABSTRACT Johannes van Oort claims that Augustine has an irreconcilable ‘two-fold ecclesiology,’ which separates the inwardness of unseen individual grace from the external empirical community. Efforts to unify Augustine’s ‘two-fold ecclesiology’ have hitherto focused on emphasizing the continuity between the invisible and the visible, the locus for which is often the manifestation of individual (invisible) grace in the context of the (visible) community. The present article brackets the debate about grace and the power of signs and focuses instead on the relationship between the individual and the community, broadly and loosely construed. Accordingly, the question arises, what is the relationship between individual and community? It is our conviction that drawing dichotomies between the individual and community, between the invisible and the visible, is unwarranted and in fact proves detrimental to understanding Augustine’s comprehensive approach to ecclesiology. By proposing a holistic approach to Augustine’s ecclesiology instead, we seek to accord community its central place in the Church as the culmination of individuality and vice-versa. In this way, we opt for an approach that reconciles Augustine’s ‘two-fold ecclesiology’.
摘要Johannes van Oort声称奥古斯丁有一种不可调和的“双重教会学”，它将看不见的个人恩典的内在与外部经验共同体分离开来。迄今为止，统一奥古斯丁“双重教会学”的努力一直集中在强调看不见和可见之间的连续性，其中心往往是个人（看不见）恩典在（可见）社区背景下的表现。本文将关于恩典和符号力量的辩论放在一边，而将重点放在个人和社区之间的关系上，广义和松散地解释。因此，问题来了，个人和社区之间的关系是什么？我们坚信，在个人和社区之间，在看不见的和可见的之间划分二分法是没有根据的，事实上，这对理解奥古斯丁对教会学的全面方法是有害的。相反，通过对奥古斯丁的教会学提出一种整体的方法，我们寻求将社区作为个性的顶点，在教会中占据中心地位，反之亦然。通过这种方式，我们选择了一种调和奥古斯丁“双重教会学”的方法。
{"title":"Many as one: Augustine’s onefold ecclesiology","authors":"P. Irizar, A. Dupont","doi":"10.1080/21692327.2021.1881915","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2021.1881915","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Johannes van Oort claims that Augustine has an irreconcilable ‘two-fold ecclesiology,’ which separates the inwardness of unseen individual grace from the external empirical community. Efforts to unify Augustine’s ‘two-fold ecclesiology’ have hitherto focused on emphasizing the continuity between the invisible and the visible, the locus for which is often the manifestation of individual (invisible) grace in the context of the (visible) community. The present article brackets the debate about grace and the power of signs and focuses instead on the relationship between the individual and the community, broadly and loosely construed. Accordingly, the question arises, what is the relationship between individual and community? It is our conviction that drawing dichotomies between the individual and community, between the invisible and the visible, is unwarranted and in fact proves detrimental to understanding Augustine’s comprehensive approach to ecclesiology. By proposing a holistic approach to Augustine’s ecclesiology instead, we seek to accord community its central place in the Church as the culmination of individuality and vice-versa. In this way, we opt for an approach that reconciles Augustine’s ‘two-fold ecclesiology’.","PeriodicalId":42052,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Philosophy and Theology","volume":"82 1","pages":"1 - 16"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21692327.2021.1881915","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48615296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2021.1882330
Evan F. Kuehn
ABSTRACT Kant’s late essay ‘The End of All Things’ (1794) establishes a distinctly modern field of inquiry that has fittingly been called ‘philosophical eschatology’ by asking, ‘why do human beings expect an end of the world at all?’ (AA 8:330) Interpretation of the essay’s purpose and argument have usually taken one of two routes: Kant is either understood as writing an esoteric political critique under the guise of the philosophy of religion, or as being focused largely on problems related to the immortality of the soul as a postulate of pure practical reason. In contrast, I argue that the essay presents the end of all things as a cosmological idea of reason. In this essay I trace Kant’s idea of an end as its preconditions are established through the three Critiques, and finally made explicit in his late work.
{"title":"The idea of the end: Kant’s philosophical eschatology","authors":"Evan F. Kuehn","doi":"10.1080/21692327.2021.1882330","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2021.1882330","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Kant’s late essay ‘The End of All Things’ (1794) establishes a distinctly modern field of inquiry that has fittingly been called ‘philosophical eschatology’ by asking, ‘why do human beings expect an end of the world at all?’ (AA 8:330) Interpretation of the essay’s purpose and argument have usually taken one of two routes: Kant is either understood as writing an esoteric political critique under the guise of the philosophy of religion, or as being focused largely on problems related to the immortality of the soul as a postulate of pure practical reason. In contrast, I argue that the essay presents the end of all things as a cosmological idea of reason. In this essay I trace Kant’s idea of an end as its preconditions are established through the three Critiques, and finally made explicit in his late work.","PeriodicalId":42052,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Philosophy and Theology","volume":"82 1","pages":"17 - 33"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21692327.2021.1882330","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60495728","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2021.1881916
Ashok Collins
ABSTRACT When read alongside the great command of Deuteronomy, ‘love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, and strength,’ the Judeo-Christian directive to ‘love your neighbour as yourself’ is perhaps one of the most theologically and ethically charged phrases in the Bible. In these two mutually reliant commandments lies a meeting point between the divine and the human that has important implications for our understanding of the nexus between theological conceptions of love and philosophical engagement with worldly existence. This point of intersection is explored in a particularly unique way in the thinking of Michel Henry and Jean-Luc Nancy. In this article, I conduct the first sustained comparative analysis of their respective philosophies, using an exploration of the role of love and affectivity in their work to better understand the philosophical opportunity represented by the commandment to love God and neighbour.
{"title":"For the love of this world: Michel Henry and Jean-Luc Nancy on theology and affectivity","authors":"Ashok Collins","doi":"10.1080/21692327.2021.1881916","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2021.1881916","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT When read alongside the great command of Deuteronomy, ‘love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, and strength,’ the Judeo-Christian directive to ‘love your neighbour as yourself’ is perhaps one of the most theologically and ethically charged phrases in the Bible. In these two mutually reliant commandments lies a meeting point between the divine and the human that has important implications for our understanding of the nexus between theological conceptions of love and philosophical engagement with worldly existence. This point of intersection is explored in a particularly unique way in the thinking of Michel Henry and Jean-Luc Nancy. In this article, I conduct the first sustained comparative analysis of their respective philosophies, using an exploration of the role of love and affectivity in their work to better understand the philosophical opportunity represented by the commandment to love God and neighbour.","PeriodicalId":42052,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Philosophy and Theology","volume":"82 1","pages":"77 - 94"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21692327.2021.1881916","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44555572","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2021.1891958
Barnabas Aspray
{"title":"A Companion to Ricœur’s The Symbolism of Evil","authors":"Barnabas Aspray","doi":"10.1080/21692327.2021.1891958","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2021.1891958","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42052,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Philosophy and Theology","volume":"82 1","pages":"95 - 96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21692327.2021.1891958","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44946612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-19DOI: 10.1080/21692327.2020.1841671
Rolfe King
ABSTRACT I illustrate the subject of conditional theology through discussing John Webster’s theology. This is a form of philosophical theology, with interesting links to natural theology, but not subject to Barthian strictures about natural theology. Webster started out with a Barthian emphasis, but later increasingly drew on Aquinas, emphasising God’s aseity. Webster, though, continued to emphasise the priority of the revelation of God as triune, and to resist what he saw as abstract notions of God deriving from natural theology and philosophy of religion. I argue, however, that his work illustrates an underlying reliance on philosophical theology, related to conditional theology, and that dogmatic theology cannot be formed without such reliance. I comment on divine self-naming and conclude my reflections on Webster by discussing dogmatic science and grace, drawing links between conditional theology, special revelation and natural theology.
{"title":"On conditional theology: John Webster and theological reason","authors":"Rolfe King","doi":"10.1080/21692327.2020.1841671","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21692327.2020.1841671","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT I illustrate the subject of conditional theology through discussing John Webster’s theology. This is a form of philosophical theology, with interesting links to natural theology, but not subject to Barthian strictures about natural theology. Webster started out with a Barthian emphasis, but later increasingly drew on Aquinas, emphasising God’s aseity. Webster, though, continued to emphasise the priority of the revelation of God as triune, and to resist what he saw as abstract notions of God deriving from natural theology and philosophy of religion. I argue, however, that his work illustrates an underlying reliance on philosophical theology, related to conditional theology, and that dogmatic theology cannot be formed without such reliance. I comment on divine self-naming and conclude my reflections on Webster by discussing dogmatic science and grace, drawing links between conditional theology, special revelation and natural theology.","PeriodicalId":42052,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Philosophy and Theology","volume":"81 1","pages":"485 - 503"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2020-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21692327.2020.1841671","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49432772","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：