{"title":"再论自然神学、形而上学与类比","authors":"S. Duby","doi":"10.1177/10638512211017251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I respond to each of the three authors who have engaged my book God in Himself. Regarding Gray Sutanto’s response, I offer comments on his effort to integrate Schleiermacher and Calvin on the human “feeling of dependence” and the sensus divinitatis and to draw upon the insights of Bonaventure to frame our natural knowledge of God. Regarding Scott Swain’s response, I seek to build on his thoughts about the necessary use of metaphysical concepts by considering some additional biblical material and by clarifying the way in which metaphysical concepts might be treated as developments of ordinary, common human knowledge of reality. Finally, regarding Dolf te Velde’s response, I seek to clarify further why I think Scotus and Aquinas may not be too far apart on the nature of theological predication and why I think Aquinas’ view of analogy and divine simplicity is still sufficient for confirming the veracity of Christian speech about God.","PeriodicalId":223812,"journal":{"name":"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology","volume":"09 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Further Thoughts on Natural Theology, Metaphysics, and Analogy\",\"authors\":\"S. Duby\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10638512211017251\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article, I respond to each of the three authors who have engaged my book God in Himself. Regarding Gray Sutanto’s response, I offer comments on his effort to integrate Schleiermacher and Calvin on the human “feeling of dependence” and the sensus divinitatis and to draw upon the insights of Bonaventure to frame our natural knowledge of God. Regarding Scott Swain’s response, I seek to build on his thoughts about the necessary use of metaphysical concepts by considering some additional biblical material and by clarifying the way in which metaphysical concepts might be treated as developments of ordinary, common human knowledge of reality. Finally, regarding Dolf te Velde’s response, I seek to clarify further why I think Scotus and Aquinas may not be too far apart on the nature of theological predication and why I think Aquinas’ view of analogy and divine simplicity is still sufficient for confirming the veracity of Christian speech about God.\",\"PeriodicalId\":223812,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology\",\"volume\":\"09 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10638512211017251\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10638512211017251","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
摘要
在这篇文章中,我回应了三位作者,他们都参与了我的书“上帝在他自己”。关于Gray Sutanto的回应,我对他整合Schleiermacher和Calvin关于人类“依赖感”和神性感知的努力以及借鉴Bonaventure的见解来构建我们对上帝的自然知识提出了评论。关于斯科特·斯温的回答,我试图通过考虑一些额外的圣经材料,并通过澄清形而上学概念可能被视为普通的、人类对现实的共同知识的发展的方式,来建立他关于形而上学概念的必要使用的思想。最后,关于Dolf te Velde的回答,我试图进一步澄清为什么我认为斯科特和阿奎那在神学预言的本质上可能没有太大的分歧,以及为什么我认为阿奎那关于类比和神的简单性的观点仍然足以证实基督教关于上帝的言论的真实性。
Further Thoughts on Natural Theology, Metaphysics, and Analogy
In this article, I respond to each of the three authors who have engaged my book God in Himself. Regarding Gray Sutanto’s response, I offer comments on his effort to integrate Schleiermacher and Calvin on the human “feeling of dependence” and the sensus divinitatis and to draw upon the insights of Bonaventure to frame our natural knowledge of God. Regarding Scott Swain’s response, I seek to build on his thoughts about the necessary use of metaphysical concepts by considering some additional biblical material and by clarifying the way in which metaphysical concepts might be treated as developments of ordinary, common human knowledge of reality. Finally, regarding Dolf te Velde’s response, I seek to clarify further why I think Scotus and Aquinas may not be too far apart on the nature of theological predication and why I think Aquinas’ view of analogy and divine simplicity is still sufficient for confirming the veracity of Christian speech about God.