DOCSLIB.ORG

Jewish Philosophical Theology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Jewish Philosophical Theology UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME Spring 2011 Newsletter Notes from the Director Table of Contents Notes from the Director ....................................1 ear Colleagues also opened the 2010-2011 academic Michael Rea and Friends of the year with the announcement of an- History: Made and Making ...............................2 Center, other large-scale project, entitled “Ana- Mark Noll We are now in lytic Theology: The Convergence of Recent Events in the Center ..........................4-6 our second year Philosophy and Theology.” This proj- Leibniz Conference of the “Problem” ect, also funded with generous support of Evil in Modern and Contemporary from the John Templeton Foundation, Bayle Workshop D is part of a multi-national endeavor to The Annual Alvin Plantinga Fellow Lecture Thought” project, which has funded three of our residential research fel- promote greater dialogue and cross- The Problem of Evil Project: Year One ...........6-7 lows this year and supported a major fertilization between the fi elds of Samuel Newlands academic conference in September in philosophy and theology. We will be Interview with Plantinga Fellow, honor of the 300th anniversary of the running conferences, supporting re- Paul Draper ......................................................7 publication of Leibniz’s Theodicy. We search fellows, funding interdisciplin- ary courses and discussion 2010-2011 Center Fellow Profi l e s.................8-9 groups, and much more Pierre Bayle on the Problem of Evil .................10 both here at Notre Dame Michael Hickson and also abroad in Ger- Living in the Cracks ........................................11 many, Austria, and Israel. William Abraham (For details, see www.ana- Jewish Philosophical Theology .......................12 lytictheology.org) We are Aaron Segal also continuing to spon- sor several programs for Book Review: Wandering in Darkness, by Eleonore Stump ...................................13-15 undergraduates, including the Food for Thought series Announcement of 2011-2012 and the second installment Center Fellows ...........................................15 of “The God Debate,, fea- Upcoming Events in the Center ......................16 turing Sam Harris and Wil- The God Debate liam Lane Craig. Be sure to Food for Thought Workshop check out our re-designed web page to see if any of what we are doing might benefi t you. Center Director, Michael Rea 1 Plantinga Conference History: Made and Making By Mark A. Noll, Francis A. McAnaney Professor of History, University of Notre Dame he Alvin Plantinga alive and well due in substantial part transparency of Christian concern. retirement conference to the efforts of Plantinga, Plantinga’s For a historian witnessing such an at Notre Dame on like-minded colleagues, the students event, it was inevitable that thoughts May 20-22, 2010, was they had trained, and the broad impact would go to how such maturity in a feast for the philo- they had exerted. Wolterstorff, in other Christian philosophy had come about sophically minded. As words, expatiated explicitly on what and what that maturity represented. a non-philosopher privileged to sit was being demonstrated implicitly as T Those thoughts, in turn, led on to in on many of the sessions, I saw no the conference unfolded. broader considerations of what schol- reason to doubt the judgment of C. Christian philosophy, as illustrated at ars in other intellectual domains might Stephen Evans from Baylor’s philoso- the May gathering, does not mean a gain from observing what has hap- phy department that “many papers triumphalist or party-line parade of pened in philosophy. displayed dazzling virtuosity and boisterous assertions; it means instead technical ingenuity.” (Books & Culture Three related questions arose naturally careful, analytical, refi ned, and pen- website) Yet in addition, although the from observing what was on display etrating philosophical inquiry where papers, with one exception, featured at the conference. How, intellectually Christian questions, Christian frame- the philosophers’ usual fastidiousness considered, did Christian philosophy works, Christian dogma, and Christian about precision of statement and logi- revive? How, considered in terms of attitudes are simply taken for granted cal ordering of propositions, they were social networks, did Christian phi- as part of the enterprise. Moreover, obviously dealing with large questions losophy spread so as to infl uence the although I’m quite sure I did not catch affecting humankind in general discipline as a whole? And how, instead of just in-group consid- considered as a comment on the erations of interest only to the Plantinga celebration, does con- guild. Making an effort to fol- temporary Christian philosophy low the arguments resulted not refl ect its Christian character? just in clarifi ed argumentation, but also in challenges to think The outline of an answer to the carefully about real-world ethics, fi rst question was set out clearly human mental capacities, human in Plantinga’s 1983 “Advice to moral responsibility, Christian Christian Philosophers,” his doctrine, and God. inaugural lecture as the John A. O’Brien Professor of Philosophy The one paper that broke the at Notre Dame. In that lecture, mold was Nicholas Wolter- Plantinga stated explicitly as storff’s autobiographical tour hortatory advice what he, Wolter- d’horizon, “Then, Now, and Al.” storff, and a small circle of others It offered Wolterstorff’s refl ec- had already been doing for at tions on the sixty years since as least two decades. It was neces- Mark Noll, courtesy of William Koechling a sophomore at Calvin College sary, he said, for Christian phi- he had fi rst met Plantinga, on losophers to pay careful heed to the dramatic alterations in professional the nuances of what was happening in the preoccupations and procedures of philosophy that have taken place dur- many of the sessions, some of the best the discipline, but even more necessary ing the intervening six decades, and of them seemed to involve unbelievers not to allow those preoccupations and on the contribution of Al Plantinga to challenging various points defended procedures to dictate what Christian those dramatic alterations. The critical by Plantinga and other believers, or be- philosophers tried to do. It was also point of Wolterstorff’s insightful and lieving philosophers taking on various necessary to think with greater integ- often moving address was that in 1950 points in Plantinga’s version of Chris- rity—or, in a philosopher’s character- the notion of Christian philosophy was tian philosophy. The sessions, in other istic coinage, integrality—about how almost unimaginable, while in 2010 words, exhibited a remarkable intellec- broader life concerns should properly Christian philosophy was very much tual openness as well as a remarkable encompass narrower disciplinary 2 concerns. And it was necessary to do together philosophical and theological universities, and with another fourth philosophical work with courage of concerns. By doing so courageously from evangelical Christian colleges. On Christian convictions and self-confi - and with integrity, they have not only the program were two philosophers dence in Christian confession. redirected professional philosophy, from the Netherlands and one from Is- but also given a much needed shot in rael. Attending were philosophers from As an outsider to the discipline, it the arm to professional theologians England, Iran (!), and China (!!). And seems that the Plantinga injunctions and great benefi t to the interested lay the meeting was convened at the Uni- come close to summarizing what has public at large. Signifi cantly, however, versity of Notre Dame where Plantinga actually transpired. Christian phi- has taught for more than 25 years. losophers have engaged fully in The meeting witnessed, in other disciplinary practices and have in words, Abraham Kuyper and that process excelled in painstak- Thomas Aquinas in harness with ingly careful analysis of language the spiritual grandchildren of the and also in deeply self-conscious philosophically inert D. L. Moody refl ection on how human perspec- and aided by disparate representa- tives shape the use of language. tion from the old Christian West They have, in other words, con- and the new Christian Non-West. tributed to both the scrupulosity Sixty years ago, most evangelicals of analytical philosophy and the colleges did not have philosophy heightened self-consciousness departments; philosophy depart- attending the modern “linguistic ments at secular universities might turn.” Yet, crucially, Christian have tolerated philosophers who philosophers have gone beyond were Christians but not Chris- the standard academic fi xations on tian philosophy; and the bridges language, its inner relationships, between Dutch and American and its hegemonic uses to insist Alvin Plantinga Christian traditions were few and that philosophers must never far between. Fifty years ago Ro- abandon concern for what lan- man Catholics and confessional or guage refers to. One of the most telling they have done so mostly in service to evangelical Protestants had very little moments in Wolterstorff’s paper was generic “mere Christianity,” to a broad use for one another for any purpose, when he pointed out how important conception of traditional Christian- including philosophy; China was it was that Plantinga’s 1967 book was ity, rather than to any denominational considered “lost” to Christianity; and entitled God and Other Minds and not variety
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "Why Adams Needs to Modify His Divine-Command Theory One More Time"
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Asbury Theological Seminary Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers Volume 11 Issue 1 Article 5 1-1-1994 "Why Adams Needs to Modify His Divine-Command Theory One More Time" Stephen J. Sullivan Follow this and additional works at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy Recommended Citation Sullivan, Stephen J. (1994) ""Why Adams Needs to Modify His Divine-Command Theory One More Time"," Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers: Vol. 11 : Iss. 1 , Article 5. Available at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy/vol11/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers by an authorized editor of ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. "WHY ADAMS NEEDS TO MODIFY HIS DIVINE­ COMMAND THEORY ONE MORE TIME"* Stephen J. Sullivan Robert Merrihew Adams has twice modified the divine-command theory of morality in interesting and plausible ways. The resulting theory says that rightness and wrongness consist respectively in agreement and disagreement with the commands of a loving God, and that a causallhistorical account of the reference of moral terms is correct. I argue, first, that Adams's theory must face up to the objection that it depicts morality-implausibly-as arbi­ trary; second, that the account of reference he accepts does not permit him to adopt either of two natural strategies for rebutting the objection; and finally, that this account does allow him recourse to a third, somewhat less natural strategy which requires modifying the theory one more time.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Evil
    The Problem of Evil PHIL6305 New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary Defend Conference January 2-6, 2017 Office: Dodd 112, extension #3245 [email protected] Assistant: Katy Platt [email protected] Seminary Mission Statement The mission of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary is to equip leaders to fulfill the Great Commission and the Great Commandments through the local church and its ministries. Course Description The course introduces students to contemporary philosophical issues related to the Christian concept of God and the problem of evil. Issues addressed include the nature of evil, the cause of evil, the intelligibility and coherence of the Christian concept of God in light of evil, solutions offered by various world religions to the problem of evil, as well as representative solutions offered by a selection of contemporary philosophers addressing the topic of evil. The thrust of the course will focus upon personal reading, research, and writing. Core Value and Key Competency The primary core value of the Seminary addressed in this course is Doctrinal Integrity. The primary key competency in ministry addressed is Christian Theological Heritage. The core value for the 2016-2017 academic year is Characteristic Excellence. Core Values Addressed The course will address the core value of Doctrinal Integrity directly and Spiritual Vitality indirectly. Reflection on the problem of evil is intimately related to reflection on the nature and existence of God as well as to considering the doctrine of creation. The vitality of one’s spiritual life is directly related to the degree of trust one places in God, which derives from one’s understanding of God’s nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Kierkegaard on Selfhood and Our Need for Others
    Kierkegaard on Selfhood and Our Need for Others 1. Kierkegaard in a Secular Age Scholars have devoted much attention lately to Kierkegaard’s views on personal identity and, in particular, to his account of selfhood.1 Central to this account is the idea that a self is not something we automatically are. It is rather something we must become. Thus, selfhood is a goal to realize or a project to undertake.2 To put the point another way, while we may already be selves in some sense, we have to work to become real, true, or “authentic” selves.3 The idea that authentic selfhood is a project is not unique to Kierkegaard. It is common fare in modern philosophy. Yet Kierkegaard distances himself from popular ways of thinking about the matter. He denies the view inherited from Rousseau that we can discover our true selves by consulting our innermost feelings, beliefs, and desires. He also rejects the idea developed by the German Romantics that we can invent our true selves in a burst of artistic or poetic creativity. In fact, according to Kierkegaard, becom- ing an authentic self is not something we can do on our own. If we are to succeed at the project, we must look beyond ourselves for assistance. In particular, Kierkegaard thinks, we must rely on God. For God alone can provide us with the content of our real identi- ties.4 A longstanding concern about Kierkegaard arises at this point. His account of au- thentic selfhood, like his accounts of so many concepts, is religious.
    [Show full text]
  • Trinity, Subordination, and Heresy: a Reply to Mark Edwards
    2020 TheoLogica An International Journal for Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology S. I. CONCILIAR TRINITARIANISM DOI: https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v4i2.52323 Trinity, Subordination, and Heresy: A Reply to Mark Edwards R. T. MULLINS University of Edinburgh [email protected] Abstract: In this article, I offer some analytic reflections on Mark Edward's paper, "Is Subordinationism a Heresy?" I shall discuss the desiderata for a conciliar Trinitarian theology, the divine essence, and the different notions of subordination that Edwards identifies. Then I shall consider two arguments that certain accepted, conciliar notions of subordination lead to heretical notions of subordination. Thus raising the worry that conciliar Trinitarian theology might involve some internal incoherence between the homoousios doctrine and the subordination of the Son and Holy Spirit to the Father. Keywords: Trinity, subordination, eternal generation, analytic theology Mark Edwards has provided us with an excellent overview of the different notions of Trinitarian subordination throughout parts of church history. Some readers will be surprised to find that certain notions of subordination are affirmed in conciliar Trinitarian thought, whilst others are not. I for one greatly appreciate the clarity that Edwards brings to this issue in his essay. His essay is not intended to be historically exhaustive, but rather offers snapshots into different time periods. Edwards starts his survey with the biblical material before moving on to the debates leading up to the Council of Nicaea, and the continuation of those debates in the aftermath of the Council. After this, Edwards takes a glance at the Protestant Reformation, and then offers an interesting discussion of the Trinitarian thought of John Milton, Ralph Cudworth, and George Bull.
    [Show full text]
  • On Reading the Bible As Scripture, Encountering the Church
    Perichoresis Volume 18.5 (2020): 67–86 DOI: 10.2478/perc-2020-0029 ON READING THE BIBLE AS SCRIPTURE, ENCOUNTERING THE CHURCH * STEVEN NEMES Fuller Theological Seminary ABSTRACT. As an exercise in the ‘theology of disclosure’, the present essay proposes a kind of phenomenological analysis of the act of reading the Bible as Scripture with the goal of bringing to light the theoretical commitments which it implicitly demands. This sort of analysis can prove helpful for the continuing disputes among Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox insofar as it is relevant for one of the principal points of controversy between them: namely, the rela- tionship between Scripture, Tradition, and Church as theological authorities. It proceeds by analyzing both the objective and subjective ‘poles’ of the act, and it illuminates the presence of the Church and her Tradition on both sides. The Church—i.e., the community of God’s peo- ple—is both that which is immediately encountered in the text, as well as the factor which ena- bles scriptural reading in the first place. The article terminates with an application of the in- sights of the preceding discussion to the controversy about icons. KEYWORDS: phenomenology of Scripture, Tradition, Bible, ecclesiology, icons Preliminary Remarks on the Phenomenology of Scripture The quincentenary of the Protestant Reformation invites careful reflection on persistent divisions which characterize Christian existence in the modern world. Though typically the disputes between Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox are often addressed hermeneutically, through the careful inter- pretation of particular critical passages, there is a prior question to be an- swered, one which promises fruit for the resolution of the seemingly inter- minable exegetical debates.
    [Show full text]
  • Why William Rowe's Argument from Natural Evil Fails
    Scholars Crossing Other Graduate Scholarship School of Divinity 2015 Why William Rowe’s Argument from Natural Evil Fails Douglas Taylor Liberty University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lts_grad_schol Part of the Christianity Commons, Metaphysics Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Taylor, Douglas, "Why William Rowe’s Argument from Natural Evil Fails" (2015). Other Graduate Scholarship. 2. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lts_grad_schol/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Divinity at Scholars Crossing. It has been accepted for inclusion in Other Graduate Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholars Crossing. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LIBERTY UNIVERSITY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY Why William Rowe’s Argument from Natural Evil Fails Submitted to the Evangelical Theological Society Southeastern Region Meeting by Doug Taylor February 14, 2015 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................3 BUILDING THE THEODICY ............................................................................................6 Culpability ...................................................................................................................6 Growth .........................................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • A Conversation with Jonathan Edwards and William Alston
    Towards a Model of Indwelling: A Conversation with Jonathan Edwards and William Alston Ray S. Yeo Carolina Graduate School of Divinity Abstract: In this paper I attempt to provide a model for understanding the theological, psychological and metaphysical dimensions of the Spirit’s indwelling in sanctifying grace by synthesizing Jonathan Edwards’ theological psychology with William Alston’ model of indwelling. However, despite its promise, the Edwards-Alston synthesis faces substantial difficulties associated with a literal and direct union between divinity and humanity. Nevertheless, the difficulties could be avoided if we take the mediatory role of Christ’s humanity more seriously and conceive of indwelling grace as an infusion of Christ’s human unitive drive through the Holy Spirit’s abiding presence within his people. 1. Introduction Central to the thought of Jonathan Edwards is his theologically sophisticated psychology of grace or what is sometimes called his “religious psychology of the heart” (Walton 2002, 5).1 Discussion of this important subject can be found not only in his famous Treatise Concerning Religious Affections but also throughout his vast corpus of writings including his sermons and miscellanies entries. Edwards’ understanding of the psychological functioning of grace may not be entirely original; much of what he says can be found in some form in his Puritan and Protestant forbearers.2 However, his treatment of the subject is unsurpassed in the Puritan literature in terms of the level of precision, thoroughness and systematic sophistication.3 Hence, it remains one of the deepest and most fecund theological psychologies of grace in the Protestant tradition and the heart of his account comes 1 Harold Simonson (2004, 5) claims that the notion of the sense of the heart “summarizes Edwards’s whole system of thought”.
    [Show full text]
  • A Brief Inquiry Into the Meaning of Sin and Faith: with on My Religion Free
    FREE A BRIEF INQUIRY INTO THE MEANING OF SIN AND FAITH: WITH ON MY RELIGION PDF John Rawls,Joshua Cohen,Thomas Nagel,Robert Merrihew Adams | 288 pages | 20 May 2010 | HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS | 9780674047532 | English | Cambridge, Mass, United States A Brief Inquiry into the Meaning of Sin & Faith with On My Religion by John Rawls Sign in Create an account. Syntax Advanced Search. JohnHG Rawls. Harvard University Press Faith in Philosophy of Religion. Edit this record. Mark as duplicate. Find it on Scholar. Request removal from index. Revision history. Download options PhilArchive copy. From the Publisher via CrossRef no proxy Setup an account with your affiliations in A Brief Inquiry into the Meaning of Sin and Faith: With On My Religion to access resources via your University's proxy server Configure custom proxy use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy. Configure custom resolver. Chapters BETA. Robert Merrihew Adams. A Note on the Text. Chapter Four. The Meaning of Sin. Chapter Five. The Meaning of Faith. Chapter One. A General Prospectus. Chapter A Brief Inquiry into the Meaning of Sin and Faith: With On My Religion. The Extended Natural Cosmos. Chapter Two. Vindication of the Natural Cosmos. General Index. Index of Biblical Passages. On My Religion. Epistemology Personalized. Matthew A. Benton - - Philosophical Quarterly 67 God and Interpersonal Knowledge. Benton - - Res Philosophica 95 3 Kristina Stoeckl - - Philosophy and Social Criticism 43 1 Mackenzie Bok - - Modern Intellectual History 14 1 Harvard University Press. John Rawls - - Harvard University Press. Added to PP index Total views 13of 2, Recent downloads 6 months 2of 2, How can I increase my downloads? Sign in to use this feature.
    [Show full text]
  • What Does It Mean to Grieve the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 4:30)? 27 Joshua M
    1 Spring 2019 • Volume 16, Number 1 Spring 2019 • Vol. 16, No. 1 The Baptist Center for Theology and Ministry New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary Editor-in-Chief 2019 EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD Charles S. Kelley, ThD Bart Barber, PhD Executive Editor First Baptist Church of Farmersville, Texas Steve W. Lemke, PhD Rex Butler, PhD Editor & BCTM Director New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary Adam Harwood, PhD Research Assistant Nathan Finn, PhD Hoyt Denton North Greenville University Book Review Editors Eric Hankins, PhD Archie England, PhD First Baptist Fairhope, Fairhope, Alabama Dennis Phelps, PhD Malcolm Yarnell, PhD Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary The Baptist Center for Theology and Ministry is a research institute of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. The seminary is located at 3939 Gentilly Blvd., New Orleans, LA 70126. BCTM exists to provide theological and ministerial resources to enrich and energize ministry in Baptist churches. Our goal is to bring together professor and practitioner to produce and apply these resources to Baptist life, polity, and ministry. The mission of the BCTM is to develop, preserve, and communicate the distinctive theological identity of Baptists. The Journal for Baptist Theology and Ministry is published semiannually by the Baptist Center for Theology and Ministry. Copyright ©2019 The Baptist Center for Theology and Ministry, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. All Rights Reserved. This peridiocal is indexed in the ATLA Religion Database® (ATLA RDB®), http://www.atla.com. CONTACT BCTM (800) 662-8701, ext. 8074 [email protected] www.baptistcenter.com SUBMISSIONS Visit the Baptist Center website for submission guidelines. TABLE OF CONTENTS Editorial Introduction 1 Adam Harwood The Role, Purpose, and Nature of Women according to Martin Luther 2 Joe Early Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Problem of Evil and the Limits of Governmental Power
    Liberty University Law Review Volume 5 Issue 3 Article 3 July 2011 Lessons from Theodicy: The Problem of Evil and the Limits of Governmental Power David E. Gilbert Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lu_law_review Recommended Citation Gilbert, David E. (2011) "Lessons from Theodicy: The Problem of Evil and the Limits of Governmental Power," Liberty University Law Review: Vol. 5 : Iss. 3 , Article 3. Available at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lu_law_review/vol5/iss3/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Liberty University School of Law at Scholars Crossing. It has been accepted for inclusion in Liberty University Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholars Crossing. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLE LESSONS FROM THEODICY: THE PROBLEM OF EVIL AND THE LIMITS OF GOVERNMENTAL POWER David E. Gilbert† Why is there any misery at all in the world? Not by chance, surely. From some cause then. Is it from the intention of the Diety? But he is perfectly benevolent. Is it contrary to his intention? But he is almighty. Nothing can shake the solidity of this reasoning, so short, so clear, so decisive, except we assert that these subjects exceed all human capacity, and that our common measures of truth and falsehood are not applicable to them. 1 David Hume, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion I. INTRODUCTION Although I teach law, I am fascinated by the philosophy of religion. And I am fascinated, in particular, by the Problem of Evil, which asserts that the 2 following propositions cannot be reconciled: † A version of this article was presented on May 31, 2010 at a symposium entitled “The Monotheistic Religions and the Human Liberties.” The symposium was held in Constantza, Romania and was sponsored by The Centre for Religious and Juridical- Canonical Study and Research of the Three Monotheistic Religions (Mosaic, Christian and Islamic) of Ovidius University of Constantza.
    [Show full text]
  • Retrieval and the Doing of Theology
    Volume 23 · Number 2 Summer 2019 Retrieval and the Doing of Theology Vol. 23 • Num. 2 Retrieval and the Doing of Theology Stephen J. Wellum 3 Editorial: Reflections on Retrieval and the Doing of Theology Kevin J. Vanhoozer 7 Staurology, Ontology, and the Travail of Biblical Narrative: Once More unto the Biblical Theological Breach Stephen J. Wellum 35 Retrieval, Christology, and Sola Scriptura Gregg R. Allison 61 The Prospects for a “Mere Ecclesiology” Matthew Barrett 85 Will the Son Rise on a Fourth Horizon? The Heresy of Contemporaneity within Evangelical Biblicism and the Return of the Hermeneutical Boomerang for Dogmatic Exegesis Peter J. Gentry 105 A Preliminary Evaluation and Critique of Prosopological Exegesis Pierre Constant 123 Promise, Law, and the Gospel: Reading the Biblical Narrative with Paul SBJT Forum 137 Gregg R. Allison 157 Four Theses Concerning Human Embodiment Book Reviews 181 Editor-in-Chief: R. Albert Mohler, Jr. • Editor: Stephen J. Wellum • Associate Editor: Brian Vickers • Book Review Editor: John D. Wilsey • Assistant Editor: Brent E. Parker • Editorial Board: Matthew J. Hall, Hershael York, Paul Akin, Timothy Paul Jones, Kody C. Gibson • Typographer: Benjamin Aho • Editorial Office: SBTS Box 832, 2825 Lexington Rd., Louisville, KY 40280, (800) 626-5525, x 4413 • Editorial E-Mail: [email protected] Editorial: Reflections on Retrieval and the Doing of Theology Stephen J. Wellum Stephen J. Wellum is Professor of Christian Theology at The Southern Baptist Theo- logical Seminary and editor of Southern Baptist
    [Show full text]
  • Being Is Double
    Being is double Jean-Luc Marion and John Milbank on God, being and analogy Nathan Edward Lyons B. A. (Adv.) (Hons.) This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Philosophy School of Philosophy Australian Catholic University Graduate Research Office Locked Bag 4115 Fitzroy, Victoria 3065 1st March 2014 i ABSTRACT This thesis examines the contemporary dispute between philosopher Jean-Luc Marion and theologian John Milbank concerning the relation of God to being and the nature of theological analogy. I argue that Marion and Milbank begin from a shared opposition to Scotist univocity but tend in opposite directions in elaborating their constructive theologies. Marion takes an essentially Dionysian approach, emphasising the divine transcendence “beyond being” to such a degree as to produce an essentially equivocal account of theological analogy. Milbank, on the other hand, inspired particularly by Eckhart, affirms a strong version of the Thomist thesis that God is “being itself” and emphasises divine immanence to such a degree that the analogical distinction between created and uncreated being is virtually collapsed. Both thinkers claim fidelity to the premodern Christian theological tradition, but I show that certain difficulties attend both of their claims. I suggest that the decisive issue between them is the authority which should be granted to Heidegger’s account of being and I argue that it is Milbank’s vision of post-Heideggerian theological method which is to be preferred. I conclude that Marion and Milbank give two impressive contemporary answers to the ancient riddle of “double being” raised in the Anonymous Commentary on Plato’s “Parmenides,” a riddle which queries the relation between absolute First being and derived Second being.
    [Show full text]