You know: when most people get ready to write a little something for the Christmas season, they fire up the Yule log, and they have a little eggnog, and toss a little tinsel, and eat a cookie, and then they have this sweet smell on their breath as they talk about how joyful a season this . . . . Continue Reading »
One: There is no absolute dualism except that of Creator and creature. Two: While “faith and reason” might be a reasonable discussion, debates on “reason v. revelation” rest on a category mistake. It would be an exaggeration to say that all theological wisdom . . . . Continue Reading »
MC Steenberg’s Of God and Man: Theology As Anthropology from Irenaeus to Athanasius concludes with the claim that for Irenaeus, Cyril, Tertullian, and Athanasius, “it is in and through the human, the anthropos in which the eternal Son is known, that God is disclosed to the creature, and . . . . Continue Reading »
Barth did not see Nazism as a reaction to or restriction on the untrammeled freedom of choice celebrated by modern liberals. On the contrary, it was itself the product of the same “false concept of freedom” that shaped post-Enlightenment Europe. If freedom means life “in . . . . Continue Reading »
Ask anyone who recognizes the name Anselm, and they will tell you that he was the formulator of a theory of the atonement in which God is an exacting accountant of honor. Damaged honor has to be restored; and, tallied up, the damaged honor proves infinite, and so demands infinite restoration. . . . . Continue Reading »
Graced nature, yes. We are always already encountering God, of course. But not this: “Insofar as this subjective, nonobjective luminosity of the subject in its transcendence is always oriented toward the holy mystery, the knowledge of God is always present unthematically and without . . . . Continue Reading »
John Milbank throws down a challenging gauntlet to Protestants in the Afterword to The Radical Orthodoxy Reader . He explains Radical Orthodoxy as a continuation of the attack on extrinicism launched by the nouvelle theologie . Barth, he argues following the critiques of Przywara and . . . . Continue Reading »
Arianism is not just about Christology. It’s about theology proper. Arius said that God made His Son before the creation because the creation could not endure the “untempered hand” of the Father. It needed the Son as mediator. Athanasius sees in this a false idea . . . . Continue Reading »
Robert Jenson writes, “the identity of Israel’s God, his difference from other gods, is precisely that Israel’s God is not eternal in the way other gods are, not God in the same way. That the past guarantees the future is exactly the deity of the gods, but Yahweh always . . . . Continue Reading »
Turner corrects a widespread misunderstanding of the Pseudo-Dionysian view of religious language. For the pseudo-Denys (Turner’s designation), everything comes from God and thus “every creature retains within it a trace of its divine source, every creature in some way reflects, or . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
