DOCSLIB.ORG

Unknown God, Known in His Activities EUROPEAN STUDIES in THEOLOGY, PHILOSOPHY and HISTORY of RELIGIONS Edited by Bartosz Adamczewski

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Unknown God, Known in His Activities EUROPEAN STUDIES in THEOLOGY, PHILOSOPHY and HISTORY of RELIGIONS Edited by Bartosz Adamczewski 18 What can man know about God? This question became one of the main Tomasz Stępień / problems during the 4th-century Trinitarian controversy, which is the focus Karolina Kochańczyk-Bonińska of this book. Especially during the second phase of the conflict, the claims of Anomean Eunomius caused an emphatic response of Orthodox writers, mainly Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa. Eunomius formulated two ways of theology to show that we can know both the substance (ousia) and activities (energeiai) of God. The Orthodox Fathers demonstrated that we can know only the external activities of God, while the essence is entirely incom- prehensible. Therefore the 4th-century discussion on whether the Father and the Son are of the same substance was the turning point in the development Unknown God, of negative theology and shaping the Christian conception of God. Known Unknown God, Known God, Unknown in His Activities in His Activities Incomprehensibility of God during the Trinitarian Controversy of the 4th Century stopibhuarly Jewish Sources Tomasz Stępień is Associate Professor at the Faculty of Theology, Cardi- Karolina Kochańczyk-Bonińska · nal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw. He researches and publishes / on Ancient Philosophy, Early Christian Philosophy, Natural Theology and Philosophy of Religion. European Studies in Theology, Karolina Kochańczyk-Bonińska is Assistant Professor at the Institute of Philosophy and History of Religions the Humanities and Social Sciences, War Studies University in Warsaw. She researches and publishes on Early Christian Philosophy and translates Edited by Bartosz Adamczewski patristic texts. Stępień Tomasz ISBN 978-3-631-75736-9 EST_018 275736-Stepien_TL_A5HC 151x214 globalL.indd 1 04.07.18 17:07 18 What can man know about God? This question became one of the main Tomasz Stępień / problems during the 4th-century Trinitarian controversy, which is the focus Karolina Kochańczyk-Bonińska of this book. Especially during the second phase of the conflict, the claims of Anomean Eunomius caused an emphatic response of Orthodox writers, mainly Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa. Eunomius formulated two ways of theology to show that we can know both the substance (ousia) and activities (energeiai) of God. The Orthodox Fathers demonstrated that we can know only the external activities of God, while the essence is entirely incom- prehensible. Therefore the 4th-century discussion on whether the Father and the Son are of the same substance was the turning point in the development Unknown God, of negative theology and shaping the Christian conception of God. Known Unknown God, Known God, Unknown in His Activities in His Activities Incomprehensibility of God during the Trinitarian Controversy of the 4th Century stopibhuarly Jewish Sources Tomasz Stępień is Associate Professor at the Faculty of Theology, Cardi- nal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw. He researches and publishes on Ancient Philosophy, Early Christian Philosophy, Natural Theology and Philosophy of Religion. European Studies in Theology, Karolina Kochańczyk-Bonińska is Assistant Professor at the Institute of Philosophy and History of Religions the Humanities and Social Sciences, War Studies University in Warsaw. She researches and publishes on Early Christian Philosophy and translates Edited by Bartosz Adamczewski patristic texts. Karolina Kochańczyk-Bonińska · / Stępień Tomasz EST_018 275736-Stepien_TL_A5HC 151x214 globalL.indd 1 04.07.18 17:07 Unknown God, Known in His Activities EUROPEAN STUDIES IN THEOLOGY, PHILOSOPHY AND HISTORY OF RELIGIONS Edited by Bartosz Adamczewski VOL. 18 Tomasz Stępień & Karolina Kochańczyk-Bonińska Unknown God, Known in His Activities Incomprehensibility of God during the Trinitarian Controversy of the 4th Century Bibliographic Information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de. The authors acknowledge financial support from the National Science Centre, Poland, grant number 2013/11/B/HS1/04140. Copyedited by El bieta Puławska and Anna Kazimierczak-Kucharska Tomaszż Stępień: 1, 2, 3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.6, 5.2 Karolina Kochańczyk-Bonińska: 4.5, 5.1, 5.3, 5.4 ISSN 2192-1857 ISBN 978-3-631-75736-9 (Print) ISBN 978-3-631-75737-6 (E-PDF) ISBN 978-3-631-75738-3 (EPUB) ISBN 978-3-631-75739-0 (MOBI) DOI 10.3726/ b14190 Open Access: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 unported license. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ © Tomasz Stępień & Karolina Kochańczyk-Bonińska, 2018 Peter Lang GmbH Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften Berlin 2018 Peter Lang – Berlin ∙ Bern ∙ Bruxelles ∙ New York ∙ Oxford ∙ Warszawa ∙ Wien This publication has been peer reviewed. www.peterlang.com Preface Looking at the philosophical and theological traditions, one can see that man has been constantly trying to describe the Absolute. Those attempts have always been confronted with the problem of how to speak about the reality which is somehow known to man, but also remains beyond the reach of human intellect. That is why negative theology seems indispensable in such attempts to describe the one who remains mysterious despite all efforts to describe him. Negative speaking on God exposes many fundamental problems of epistemological and linguistic nature. It urges one to reconsider the limits of human knowledge, the capability of the human language to express the reality, since man has to use words to express the Unsayable. The tradition of negative theology is so prolific because it is not only a theoretical issue of naming the First Principle, but it is intrinsically linked with the human experience of the Absolute. Negative theology is then almost a fundament of the mystical tradition, and it seems that God that unveils Himself when He is experienced is most often described in negative terms. But negative theology is not an outdated view of the past ideas. It seems that it is still alive and present in the currents of modern thought. When presenting the complicated situation of contemporary philosophy of religion, J.A. Simmons points out that this field of study is in the state of crisis and seeking the new directions.1 Negative theology is recognized as one of the ba- sic problems which must be confronted in the study of philosophy of religion, and therefore the study of traditions of this way of speaking on God is also given as the proposition of a new direction and exploration of new frontiers.2 In this study, we shall examine the negative theology of a period which was of utmost importance for shaping the Christian doctrine – the 4th century. It was the time of looking for new concepts and possibilities of expressing Christian dogmas, and negative theology was certainly one of them. The most important debate of that period, started by Arius, 1 Cf. J.A. Simmons, Old Questions and New Frontiers in Philosophy of Religion, in: Contemporary Debates in Negative Theology and Philosophy, ed. N. Brown, J.A. Simmons, Palgrave Macmillan 2017, pp. 1–4. 2 Cf. ibid., pp. 12–13. 5 concerned the problem of the status of the Son of God: whether He was equal to the Father or rather an inferior and first created being. It seems that negative theology also played an important role at the early stage of the controversy. There were writers who used negative and positive the- ology to support their positions. It will be seen during the course of this study that positive or negative claims of God on the one side of the conflict almost always caused the opposite claims on the other side. However, to understand the role of negative theology in this discussion, it is necessary to show briefly the development of negative theology starting from the most obvious point of reference for Christian writers, namely the Holy Scripture. Although the Bible is ambiguous on this topic, we observe the constant growth of the importance of negative speaking on God in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Nonetheless, the 4th century seems crucial to the understanding how negative theology settled for good in the Christian thought. There is certainly an important role of negative argumentation on in- feriority of the Son of God in Arius himself, which will be investigated together with the Orthodox response. But there was a significant shift of the debate when the Anomeans (Aetius and Eunomius) started to spread their opinion that the essence of God can be known. Especially Eunomius was the one who skilfully argued on this claim and provoked the response of Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa. There is no need here to describe the complete timeline of this phase of the discussion since we have many studies which explain well the sequence of writings,3 but for the purpose of this study, it seems necessary to recall the basic facts. The timeline of the discussion between Eunomius, Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa Most of all, it is worth remembering that Eunomius and his teacher Ae- tius were not Arians in the strict sense. In their own lifetime, they were recognized as a separate group which was most radical since they claimed that the Son has the substance which is different and dissimilar with that of 3 The most important of them is certainly: T. A. Kopecek, A History of Neo- Arianism, Cambridge 1979, pp. 299–543. Cf. also: M. DelCogliano, Basil of Caesarea’s Anti-Eunomian Theory of Names, Leiden, Boston 2010, pp. 3–14. 6 the Father. Therefore, they are rather Neo-Arians, and in their own times, they were also called Anomeans (from ἀνόμοιος - dissimilar). The first Anomean writing wasSyntagmation by Aetius, but that text had a formal structure and was complicated; therefore, it was not popular and did not play any important role during the conflict.4 Eunomius was a disciple and secretary of Aetius since the late 340s.5 There is still a debate among scholars as to when the first work of Eunomius:Liber Apologeti- cus was created.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CRATYLUS by Plato Translated by Benjamin Jowett the Project Gutenberg Ebook of Cratylus, by Plato
    CRATYLUS By Plato Translated by Benjamin Jowett The Project Gutenberg EBook of Cratylus, by Plato INTRODUCTION. The Cratylus has always been a source of perplexity to the student of Plato. While in fancy and humour, and perfection of style and metaphysical originality, this dialogue may be ranked with the best of the Platonic writings, there has been an uncertainty about the motive of the piece, which interpreters have hitherto not succeeded in dispelling. We need not suppose that Plato used words in order to conceal his thoughts, or that he would have been unintelligible to an educated contemporary. In the Phaedrus and Euthydemus we also find a difficulty in determining the precise aim of the author. Plato wrote satires in the form of dialogues, and his meaning, like that of other satirical writers, has often slept in the ear of posterity. Two causes may be assigned for this obscurity: 1st, the subtlety and allusiveness of this species of composition; 2nd, the difficulty of reproducing a state of life and literature which has passed away. A satire is unmeaning unless we can place ourselves back among the persons and thoughts of the age in which it was written. Had the treatise of Antisthenes upon words, or the speculations of Cratylus, or some other Heracleitean of the fourth century B.C., on the nature of language been preserved to us; or if we had lived at the time, and been 'rich enough to attend the fifty-drachma course of Prodicus,' we should have understood Plato better, and many points which are now attributed to the extravagance of Socrates' humour would have been found, like the allusions of Aristophanes in the Clouds, to have gone home to the sophists and grammarians of the day.
    [Show full text]
  • Religious Tolerance and Anti-Trinitarianism: the Influence of Socinianism on English and American Leaders and the Separation of Church and State
    University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Honors Theses Student Research 5-6-2021 Religious Tolerance and Anti-Trinitarianism: The Influence of Socinianism on English and American Leaders and the Separation of Church and State Keeley Harris University of Richmond Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/honors-theses Part of the Political Science Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Harris, Keeley, "Religious Tolerance and Anti-Trinitarianism: The Influence of Socinianism on English and American Leaders and the Separation of Church and State" (2021). Honors Theses. 1577. https://scholarship.richmond.edu/honors-theses/1577 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Religious Tolerance and Anti-Trinitarianism: The Influence of Socinianism on English and American Leaders and the Separation of Church and State By Keeley Harris Honors Thesis Submitted to: Jepson School of Leadership Studies University of Richmond Richmond, VA May 6, 2021 Advisor: Dr. Kristin M. S. Bezio Harris 1 Abstract Religious Tolerance and Anti-Trinitarianism: The Influence of Socinianism on English and American Leaders and the Separation of Church and State Keeley Harris Committee members: Dr. Kristin M. S. Bezio, Dr. George R. Goethals and Dr. Douglas L. Winiarski This research focuses on a sect of Christian thinkers who originated in mid-16th century Poland called Socinians. They had radical Christian views built upon ideas from humanism and the Protestant Reformation, including Anti-Trinitarianism and rejecting the divinity of Christ.
    [Show full text]
  • Kant's Theoretical Conception Of
    KANT’S THEORETICAL CONCEPTION OF GOD Yaron Noam Hoffer Submitted to the faculty of the University Graduate School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Philosophy, September 2017 Accepted by the Graduate Faculty, Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Doctoral Committee _________________________________________ Allen W. Wood, Ph.D. (Chair) _________________________________________ Sandra L. Shapshay, Ph.D. _________________________________________ Timothy O'Connor, Ph.D. _________________________________________ Michel Chaouli, Ph.D 15 September, 2017 ii Copyright © 2017 Yaron Noam Hoffer iii To Mor, who let me make her ends mine and made my ends hers iv Acknowledgments God has never been an important part of my life, growing up in a secular environment. Ironically, only through Kant, the ‘all-destroyer’ of rational theology and champion of enlightenment, I developed an interest in God. I was drawn to Kant’s philosophy since the beginning of my undergraduate studies, thinking that he got something right in many topics, or at least introduced fruitful ways of dealing with them. Early in my Graduate studies I was struck by Kant’s moral argument justifying belief in God’s existence. While I can’t say I was convinced, it somehow resonated with my cautious but inextricable optimism. My appreciation for this argument led me to have a closer look at Kant’s discussion of rational theology and especially his pre-critical writings. From there it was a short step to rediscover early modern metaphysics in general and embark upon the current project. This journey could not have been completed without the intellectual, emotional, and material support I was very fortunate to receive from my teachers, colleagues, friends, and family.
    [Show full text]
  • Repentance As Divine Communion in St. Symeon the New Theologian´S Hymns of Divine Love
    International Journal of Orthodox Theology 11:1 (2020) 7 urn:nbn:de:0276-2020-1025 John Anthony McGuckin Repentance as Divine Communion in St. Symeon the New Theologian´s Hymns of Divine Love Abstract Much English language scholarship on St. Symeon the New Theologian has, perhaps understandably, been intri- gued by and focused on the saint's narrative of his luminous visions of the Lord. But this has often served to Archpriest John Anthony distract readers from the primary McGuckin is the Nielsen thrust of the most rhapsodic and ec- Professor of Byzantine static of all his writings, the Hymns Theology Emeritus at Uni- of Divine Love. This paper argues that on Theological Seminary, New York, Professor of this major teaching is the doctrine of Early Christian Thought in radical repentance that the saint the Theological Faculty of espouses: and he does it in such a way Oxford University, Rector as to redirect the flow of earli- of St. Gregory's Orthodox Mission in St. Anne's on er Christian teaching on the develop- Sea in England, and a ping stages of the spiritual life in a Fellow of the British Royal profoundly innovative manner. Historical Society. 8 John Anthony McGuckin Rather than seeing re-pentance as a 'beginner's stage' in spiri- tuality, to be succeeded by 'unitive' and 'contemplative' stages (as in many manuals of spiritual theology which suppose they thus reproduce Pseudo-Dionysios) Symeon appears to pro- ject radical and heartfelt repentance as the royal road to the deepest level of communion with Christ. For him, repentance is one of the highest spiritual states, not the lowest.
    [Show full text]
  • Aelius Aristides , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 27:3 (1986:Autumn) P.279
    BLOIS, LUKAS DE, The "Eis Basilea" [Greek] of Ps.-Aelius Aristides , Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 27:3 (1986:Autumn) p.279 The Ei~ BauLAea of Ps.-Aelius Aristides Lukas de Blois HE AUTHENTICITY of a speech preserved under the title El~ Ba­ T utAia in most MSS. of Aelius Aristides (Or. 35K.) has long been questioned.1 It will be argued here that the speech is a basilikos logos written by an unknown author of the mid-third century in accordance with precepts that can be found in the extant rhetorical manuals of the later Empire. Although I accept the view that the oration was written in imitation of Xenophon's Agesilaus and Isoc­ rates' Evagoras, and was clearly influenced by the speeches of Dio Chrysostom on kingship and Aristides' panegyric on Rome,2 I offer support for the view that the El~ BautAia is a panegyric addressed to a specific emperor, probably Philip the Arab, and contains a political message relevant to a specific historical situation. After a traditional opening (§ § 1-4), the author gives a compar­ atively full account of his addressee's recent accession to the throne (5-14). He praises the emperor, who attained power unexpectedly while campaigning on the eastern frontier, for doing so without strife and bloodshed, and for leading the army out of a critical situation back to his own territory. The author mentions in passing the em­ peror's education (1lf) and refers to an important post he filled just before his enthronement-a post that gave him power, prepared him for rule, and gave him an opportunity to correct wrongs (5, 13).
    [Show full text]
  • Plotinus, Epicurus, and the Gnostics: on Plotinian Classification of Philosophies
    PLOTINUS, EPICURUS, AND THE GNOSTICS: ON PLOTINIAN CLASSIFICATION OF PHILOSOPHIES Andrei Cornea 1. When we try to figure out what Plotinus might have looked like, it is a Byzantine icon that usually comes up in our mind: a slim, tall, highly- spiritualized figure, floating in out-of-this-world space, intensively gazing upon us, totally detached from the things below. Yet such an image over- simplifies this philosopher’s life. For instance, although one does not expect a Byzantine icon to be involved in heavy polemic, polemic plays an impor- tant role in Plotinus’ life and philosophy. So the icon has got cracks. In fact, because Plotinus, like many in his epoch, denied that his ideas had any basic originality,1 considering them (despite obvious and essential innovations) to be but the unfolding of one master’s ultimate truth, polemic mainly con- cerned the question of whether or not his own interpretation of this master, Plato, was the most faithful of all. Besides, Plotinus believed, Plato had to be defended against all misinterpretation and outright contestation which were never in short supply. So Plotinus had a lot of potential adversaries; but of course he could not afford to take on all of them at once. Therefore, he needed politics. In fact, there is no polemic without some politics, and that prompts me to invoke Carl Schmitt’s famous definition: The political is the art of distinguishing friends from enemies. In other words, politics usually establish a divide between the former and the latter that must be appropriate to the occasion.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nous: a Globe of Faces1
    THE NOUS: A GLOBE OF FACES1 Theodore Sabo, North-West University, South Africa ([email protected]) Abstract: Plotinus inherited the concept of the Nous from the Middle Platonists and ultimately Plato. It was for him both the Demiurge and the abode of the Forms, and his attempts at describing it, often through the use of arresting metaphors, betray substantial eloquence. None of these metaphors is more unusual than that of the globe of faces which is evoked in the sixth Ennead and which is found to possess a notable corollary in the prophet Ezekiel’s vision of the four living creatures. Plotinus’ metaphor reveals that, as in the case of Ezekiel, he was probably granted such a vision, and indeed his encounters with the Nous were not phenomena he considered lightly. Defining the Nous Plotinus’ Nous was a uniquely living entity of which there is a parallel in the Hebrew prophet Ezekiel. The concept of the Nous originated with Anaxagoras. 2 Although Empedocles’ Sphere was similarly a mind,3 Anaxagoras’ idea would win the day, and it would be lavished with much attention by the Middle and Neoplatonists. For Xenocrates the Nous was the supreme God, but for the Middle Platonists it was often the second hypostasis after the One.4 Plotinus, who likewise made the Nous his second hypostasis, equated it with the Demiurge of Plato’s Timaeus.5 He followed Antiochus of Ascalon rather than Plato in regarding it as not only the Demiurge but the Paradigm, the abode of the Forms.6 1 I would like to thank Mark Edwards, Eyjólfur Emilsson, and Svetla Slaveva-Griffin for their help with this article.
    [Show full text]
  • A Contextual Examination of Three Historical Stages of Atheism and the Legality of an American Freedom from Religion
    ABSTRACT Rejecting the Definitive: A Contextual Examination of Three Historical Stages of Atheism and the Legality of an American Freedom from Religion Ethan Gjerset Quillen, B.A., M.A., M.A. Mentor: T. Michael Parrish, Ph.D. The trouble with “definitions” is they leave no room for evolution. When a word is concretely defined, it is done so in a particular time and place. Contextual interpretations permit a better understanding of certain heavy words; Atheism as a prime example. In the post-modern world Atheism has become more accepted and popular, especially as a reaction to global terrorism. However, the current definition of Atheism is terribly inaccurate. It cannot be stated properly that pagan Atheism is the same as New Atheism. By interpreting the Atheisms from four stages in the term‟s history a clearer picture of its meaning will come out, hopefully alleviating the stereotypical biases weighed upon it. In the interpretation of the Atheisms from Pagan Antiquity, the Enlightenment, the New Atheist Movement, and the American Judicial and Civil Religious system, a defense of the theory of elastic contextual interpretations, rather than concrete definitions, shall be made. Rejecting the Definitive: A Contextual Examination of Three Historical Stages of Atheism and the Legality of an American Freedom from Religion by Ethan Gjerset Quillen, B.A., M.A. A Thesis Approved by the J.M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies ___________________________________ Robyn L. Driskell, Ph.D., Interim Chairperson Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Baylor University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Approved by the Thesis Committee ___________________________________ T.
    [Show full text]
  • ABSTRACT the Apostolic Tradition in the Ecclesiastical Histories Of
    ABSTRACT The Apostolic Tradition in the Ecclesiastical Histories of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret Scott A. Rushing, Ph.D. Mentor: Daniel H. Williams, Ph.D. This dissertation analyzes the transposition of the apostolic tradition in the fifth-century ecclesiastical histories of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret. In the early patristic era, the apostolic tradition was defined as the transmission of the apostles’ teachings through the forms of Scripture, the rule of faith, and episcopal succession. Early Christians, e.g., Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen, believed that these channels preserved the original apostolic doctrines, and that the Church had faithfully handed them to successive generations. The Greek historians located the quintessence of the apostolic tradition through these traditional channels. However, the content of the tradition became transposed as a result of three historical movements during the fourth century: (1) Constantine inaugurated an era of Christian emperors, (2) the Council of Nicaea promulgated a creed in 325 A.D., and (3) monasticism emerged as a counter-cultural movement. Due to the confluence of these sweeping historical developments, the historians assumed the Nicene creed, the monastics, and Christian emperors into their taxonomy of the apostolic tradition. For reasons that crystallize long after Nicaea, the historians concluded that pro-Nicene theology epitomized the apostolic message. They accepted the introduction of new vocabulary, e.g. homoousios, as the standard of orthodoxy. In addition, the historians commended the pro- Nicene monastics and emperors as orthodox exemplars responsible for defending the apostolic tradition against the attacks of heretical enemies. The second chapter of this dissertation surveys the development of the apostolic tradition.
    [Show full text]
  • The Christological Function of Divine Impassibility: Cyril of Alexandria and Contemporary Debate
    The Christological Function of Divine Impassibility: Cyril of Alexandria and Contemporary Debate by David Andrew Graham A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Wycliffe College and the Theological Department of the Toronto School of Theology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael's College © Copyright by David Andrew Graham 2013 The Christological Function of Divine Impassibility: Cyril of Alexandria and Contemporary Debate David Andrew Graham Master of Arts in Theology University of St. Michael’s College 2013 Abstract This thesis contributes to the debate over the meaning and function of the doctrine of divine impassibility in theological and especially christological discourse. Seeking to establish the coherence and utility of the paradoxical language characteristic of the received christological tradition (e.g. the impassible Word became passible flesh and suffered impassibly), it argues that the doctrine of divine apatheia illuminates the apocalyptic and soteriological dimension of the incarnate Son’s passible life more effectively than recent reactions against it. The first chapter explores the Christology of Cyril of Alexandria and the meaning and place of apatheia within it. In light of the christological tradition which Cyril epitomized, the second chapter engages contemporary critiques and re-appropriations of impassibility, focusing on the particular contributions of Jürgen Moltmann, Robert W. Jenson, Bruce L. McCormack and David Bentley Hart. ii Acknowledgments If this thesis communicates any truth, beauty and goodness, credit belongs to all those who have shaped my life up to this point. In particular, I would like to thank the Toronto School of Theology and Wycliffe College for providing space to do theology from within the catholic church.
    [Show full text]
  • Iamblichus and Julian''s ''Third Demiurge'': a Proposition
    Iamblichus and Julian”s ”Third Demiurge”: A Proposition Adrien Lecerf To cite this version: Adrien Lecerf. Iamblichus and Julian”s ”Third Demiurge”: A Proposition . Eugene Afonasin; John M. Dillon; John F. Finamore. Iamblichus and the Foundations of Late Platonism, 13, BRILL, p. 177-201, 2012, Ancient Mediterranean and Medieval Texts and Contexts. Studies in Platonism, Neoplatonism, and the Platonic Tradition, 10.1163/9789004230118_012. hal-02931399 HAL Id: hal-02931399 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02931399 Submitted on 6 Sep 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Iamblichus and Julian‟s “Third Demiurge”: A Proposition Adrien Lecerf Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, France [email protected] ABSTRACT. In the Emperor Julian's Oration To the Mother of the Gods, a philosophical interpretation of the myth of Cybele and Attis, reference is made to an enigmatic "third Demiurge". Contrary to a common opinion identifying him to the visible Helios (the Sun), or to tempting identifications to Amelius' and Theodorus of Asine's three Demiurges, I suggest that a better idea would be to compare Julian's text to Proclus' system of Demiurges (as exposed and explained in a Jan Opsomer article, "La démiurgie des jeunes dieux selon Proclus", Les Etudes Classiques, 71, 2003, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Process Theology 1 Process Theology
    Process theology 1 Process theology Process theology is a school of thought influenced by the metaphysical process philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead (1861–1947) and further developed by Charles Hartshorne (1897–2000). While there are process theologies that are similar, but unrelated to the work of Whitehead (such as Pierre Teilhard de Chardin) the term is generally applied to the Whiteheadian/Hartshornean school. Process theology is unrelated to the Process Church. History The original ideas of process thought are found in the philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead. Various theological and philosophical aspects have been expanded and developed by Charles Hartshorne (1897–2000), John B. Cobb, Jr., and David Ray Griffin. A characteristic of process theology each of these thinkers shared was a rejection of metaphysics that privilege "being" over "becoming," particularly those of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas. Hartshorne was deeply influenced by French philosopher Jules Lequier and by Swiss philosopher Charles Secrétan who were probably the first ones to claim that in God liberty of becoming is above his substantiality. Process theology soon influenced a number of Jewish theologians including Rabbis Max Kadushin, Milton Steinberg and Levi A. Olan, Harry Slominsky and, to a lesser degree, Abraham Joshua Heschel. Today some rabbis who advocate some form of process theology include Bradley Shavit Artson, Lawrence A. Englander, William E. Kaufman, Harold Kushner, Anton Laytner, Michael Lerner, Gilbert S. Rosenthal, Lawrence Troster, Donald B. Rossoff, Burton Mindick, and Nahum Ward. Alan Anderson and Deb Whitehouse have attempted to integrate process theology with the New Thought variant of Christianity. The work of Richard Stadelmann has been to preserve the uniqueness of Jesus in process theology.
    [Show full text]