Systematic Theology

Compelling voices charge that the theological notion of “sacrifice” valorizes suffering and fosters a culture of violence by the claim that Christ’s death on the Cross paid for human sins. Beneath the ‘sacred’ violence of sacrifice, René Girard discerns a concealed scapegoat-murder driven by a distortion of human desire that itself must lead to human self-annihilation. I here ask: can one speak safely of sacrifice; and can human beings somehow cease to practice the sacrifice that must otherwise destroy them? Drawing on Gregory the Great (ca. 540–604), I propose an understanding of sacrifice that both distinguishes Christian sacrifice from sacred violence and accounts for how to overcome the roots of the sacred violence identified by Girard.

I make four claims: First, Girard recognizes two kinds of sacrifice—one, the scapegoat murder, overcomes community rivalries by unanimous imitation of an accuser, shifting blame onto a third party who is collectively murdered; the other sort of sacrifice practices renunciation and forgiveness in imitation of God. These I respectively designate the “Satanic” (Girard’s term) and the “theomimetic” (mine). Second, I analyze the intrinsic instability that keeps the Satanic from sustaining the societal order and unity that it promises. Third, by a constructive reading of Gregory the Great, I posit that satanic sacrifice overlooks and indeed exacerbates the root of human covetousness—a failure to love. Fourth, Gregory’s teaching on the imitation of Christ enables us to expand on Girard’s account of the theo¬mimetic sacrifice of renunciation, to clarify how this latter might not only oppose but also systematically subvert the Satanic by healing the disorder out of which mimetic rivalry and scapegoating first take their rise.

https://doi.org/10.14321/contagion.27.2020.0177
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.14321/contagion.27.2020.0177
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/757320
https://philpapers.org/rec/WALTSA-15

Owen, John (1616-1683)
Publisher: Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library --
Description: Pneumatologia--or, 'Owen on the Holy Spirit,' as the work has generally been called--is perhaps one of the best known, and most highly esteemed of John Owen's treatises. Pneumatologia is divided into five parts. The first part contains a general and preliminary account of the Holy Spirit. The second part addresses the operations of the Holy Spirit in the Old and New Testaments. The third part discusses the doctrine of regeneration. The fourth part addresses the doctrine of sanctification, and the role of the Holy Spirit in it. The final part contains arguments extolling the reader to holiness. This is a beloved treatise, as John Newton once wrote to a correspondent: "We are favoured with many excellent books in our tongue, but I with you agree in assigning one of the first places as a teacher to Dr. Owen. I have just finished his discourse on the Holy Spirit which is an epitome, if not the masterpiece of his writings."

It is hard to think of an area of Christian theology that provides more scope for interdisciplinary conversation than the doctrine of creation. This doctrine not only invites reflection on an intellectual concept: it calls for contemplation of the endlessly complex, dynamic, and fascinating world that human being inhabit. But the possibilities for wide-ranging discussion are such that scholars sometimes end up talking past one another. Productive conversation requires mutual understanding of insights across disciplinary boundaries. Knowing Creation offers an essential resource for helping scholars from a range of fields to appreciate one another's concerns and perspectives. In so doing, it offers an important step forward in establishing a mutually-enriching dialogue that addresses, amongst others, the following key questions:

- Who is the God who creates?
- Why does God create?
- What is "creation"?
- What does it mean to recognize that a theology of creation speaks of a natural world that is subject to the observation of the natural sciences? What does it mean to talk about both a "natural" order and a "created" order?
- What are the major tensions that have arisen between the natural sciences and Christian thinking historically, and why? How can we move beyond such tensions to a positive and constructive conversation, while also avoiding facile notions such as a "god of the gaps"?
- Is it feasible for a natural scientist to maintain a belief in God's continuing creative activity?
- In what ways might a naturalistic understanding of the natural world be said to be limited?
- How can biblical studies, theology, philosophy, history, and science talk better together about these questions?

At a time when the doctrine of creation - and even a mention of "creation" - has been disparaged due to its supposed associations with anti-scientific dogma, and theological offerings sometimes risk appearing a little more than reactionary exercises in naive apologetics, ill-informed by science or distinctly wary of engagement with it, it is more important than ever to offer a cross-disciplinary resource that can voice a positive account of a Christian theology of creation, and do so as a genuinely broad-ranging conversation about science and faith.

At the beginning of the eleventh century, a great spiritual personality, Saint Symeon the New Theologian, struggled to teach his audience about the importance of being aware of the presence of God in their hearts, minds, and lives. His charismatic figure and mystical approach towards theology raised questions started a conflict and ended with an exile. Although there were multiple reasons why that happened, all can be summarized in a single line: the clash

Reviews the historical origins and principal elements of Karl Rahner's critique of Thomas Aquinas and Bernard Lonergan. Argues that Rahner's critique fails to come to terms with the basic problematic of Trinitarian theology, and misunderstands the significance of Thomas Aquinas's achievement.

This article tries to understand the prosperity gospel in a way that enables us to distinguish what is valuable and what is not in this phenomenon. The article starts by recognizing the puzzling aspects of the prosperity gospel. Someone might be tempted to dismiss it straightaway as simply unchristian and foolish. Looking at the people who are attracted to the prosperity gospel, however, helps in recognizing the prosperity gospel instead as a genuine protest against certain tendencies in the mainline churches. The article suggests that the prosperity gospel might be a celebration of the dignity in pure, spontaneous religious impulses and the dignity in enjoying or wishing to enjoy the good things in life This leaves us with the question of how we can distinguish between a genuine form of the prosperity gospel and forms that are simply is unchristian and foolish. To find answers to these questions the prosperity teaching's interpretation of Abraham is compared to Sören Kierkegaard's reading of Abraham as a knight of faith. This leads to a kind of litmus test to distinguish a genuine prosperity gospel from theologically unacceptable forms of it. Four criteria are presented: 1. Our faith should show gratitude rather than being a form of manipulation; 2. We should recognise the value of both tradition and resignation; 3. A genuine prosperity gospel would be a personal affair always enacted in fear and trembling; and 4. It should be about God and not about you. When these criteria are met, the prosperity gospel can be a theologically valid way to express dignity, so this article concludes-the dignity in pure, spontaneous religious impulses, and in enjoying or wishing to enjoy the good things in life.

When popular physicist Stephen Hawking dreams at the end of his best-selling Brief History of Time of a Great Unifying Theory (GUT) which would be able to merge the major physical theories describing the laws of nature, he goes on to say: “However, if we discover a complete theory, it should in time be understandable by everyone, not just by a few scientists. Then we shall all, philosophers, scientists and just ordinary people, be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason -- for then we should know the mind of God.”  John Polkinghorne, Hawking’s colleague at Cambridge University, is on the one hand critical of such an approach. “What is God doing in the book at all?”  On the other hand, he is himself searching for his own very particular version of a GUT. “There is indeed a Theory of Everything, but a theory that is much grander and more comprehensive and intellectually satisfying than any Grand Unified Theory of Particle Physics could ever be.”  For former particle physicist Polkinghorne, this theory is his new field of work: theology.  How does he come to this?

Contemporary theology probes into the role and normative nature of the first ecumenical councils in new ways. After putting the question in perspective, this article suggests a reply along two lines: 1) in the wider context of the function and structure of theology, suggestions are made about the valorization, the relative nature and the integration of the councils' declarations; 2) the reception of the first councils within the horizon of the validity and scope of theological discourse at the end of the hermeneutical and linguistic turn is the occasion, calling upon the registers of historicity, Tradition and language, to reflect on theology's agenda.

La théologie contemporaine s’interroge à nouveaux frais sur le rôle et la normativité des premiers conciles œcuméniques. Après une mise en perspective de la question, l’article propose une réponse en deux thèses : la première s’insère dans la problématique plus vaste de la fonction et de la structure de la théologie de manière à suggérer une valorisation, une relativisation et une intégration des énoncés conciliaires ; la seconde thèse inscrit la réception des premiers conciles sur l’horizon de la validité et la portée du discours théologique à l’issue du tournant herméneutique et linguistique, et c’est l’occasion, en convoquant les registres de l’historicité, de la Tradition et du langage, de réfléchir à l’agenda de la théologie.

This essay was published in The Bible and Early Trinitarian Theology, edited by Christopher A. Beeley and Mark E. Weedman, for the CUAP Studies in Early Christianity (Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2018); this is the uncorrected proofs. Exploring the humanity and divinity of Jesus, the Son's relation to the Father, and the agency of the Holy Spirit, it is one of five essays suggesting Johannine contributions to trinitarian discussions in the early church.

Edith Stein (1891–1942) was a German-Jewish philosopher who joined the Carmelite Order after her conversion to the Roman Catholic faith in 1922. She has written a number of books, out of which the Potency and Act (1931) and the Finite and Eternal Being (1937) stand as monumental works, in which she probes the wonder and mystery of human being in relation to the divine being. She suffered an untimely death under the
Nazi regime at Auschwitz in 1942. She was later canonized as a martyr and saint by Pope John Paul II in 1998 as Sister Teresa Benedicta of the Cross.
In this book, Donald Wallenfang is presenting a holistic theological anthropology as he distills this theme from the works of Edith Stein.

Travail de Master réalisé en 2017 cherchant à développer des fondements éthiques proprement chrétiens pour répondre aux questions écologiques qui sont les nôtres.
La réflexion prend pour point d'ancrage une péricope bien connue de la lettre aux Romains (8, 18-30) qui est analysée sur la première moitié du travail. L'exégèse se veut complète et propose une interprétation à la lumière de la lettre aux Romains dans sa totalité.
La deuxième moitié est consacrée au développement d'une herméneutique verte sur la base de l'exégèse en insistant sur l'ancrage juif de la pensée de Paul. Le travail se termine par des pistes de réflexions éthiques.

God's Missional Nature The important term Missio Dei (Mission of God) needs a biblical foundation. The sending of God by God is a foundational motive in the New Testament. Even at the very beginning of salvation history, shortly after creation, God became the first missionary. In Jesus, God is the missionary par excellence, and in the Holy Spirit, God is the most successful missionary. Mission is part of the nature of God, and therefore mission can only be described holistically and in a manner that transforms human mission into the image of God's mission.

This was a research paper for a course entitled Feminist and Multicultural Theologies. I unpack what gender complementarianism is, examine its history, and compare it to how Scripture and earlier Christian Tradition understood gender. This allows me to establish that gender complementarianism is a recent innovation in secular and Christian thinking about gender, and that it can be described as a "trajectory" from Scripture and Tradition on gender, influenced by social, ideological, and intellectual developments in secular societies. I then pursue a critique of gender complementarianism, arguing that it is an "unsatisfactory trajectory" because it has troubling implications for orthodox theology, is not borne out by empirical experience and observation, and has harmful effects on human beings and societies and on ethical development.

Building on my paper presented at SVS 2013, which sketched out the proposal that the manner of Jesus’ own coming into the world defines the manner of the coming of his kingdom into the world, this paper argues that the concept of kenosis provides vitally important insight for a robust understanding of the ways and patterns of the kingdom of God as experienced in this “time between the times.” The paper first examines the Christological question of how the Son’s incarnation and his kenosis are related to one another, arguing that the two should not be confused and clarifying that incarnation is the logical prerequisite for Christ’s kenosis, rather than vice-versa as is often assumed. With this clarification in hand, the paper next argues that the reason Christ’s incarnation took place initially in the mode of kenosis was so that the advent of his kingdom could be saving rather than destructive for our fallen world. Finally, several implications this has for the present mode of his kingdom are drawn out. This includes consideration of how the new order created by God’s reign in the present is characterized by weakness and vulnerability to suffering, self-giving service, obedience to and sheer trust in God, and a laying aside of any claim to authority of one’s own.

In this text I look at Eastern Orthodoxy pneumatology in relation to the theology of the Icon. I argue that the exclusivity of the Icon as the only expression of art within the Eastern Orthodox Church has inconsistencies with the doctrine of theosis and the Holy Spirit as the sanctifier of the whole of creation. Instead the pneumatology of Eastern Orthodox theology has the potential for a wider artistic expression.

An examination of Rahner’s theology and cognitive linguistics
shows that the two are basically in accord concerning sacramental efficacy. This article also puts cognitive linguistics into conversation with Rahner’s theologies of expression. In Rahner’s theology of the symbol, he argues that all beings express themselves in that which is not themselves. Furthermore, Rahner noted the existence of uniquely powerful “primordial words” (Urworte), which mediate the reality to which they point. Cognitive linguistics sees all human knowing as mediated by the “embodied mind,” and characterized by concept integration, wherein a given thing comes to be known in terms of another. This understanding of embodied mind, poses a significant challenge to the Christian tradition. This challenge is answered, though, by Rahner’s distinctive anthropology and christology.

At the heart of James B. Torrance’s theological project was a concern to demonstrate the importance of an evangelical account of repentance, over against a legal account. This was a concern that he inherited from John Calvin, who stood as the greatest theological influence on Torrance. Out of his respect for Calvin, Torrance did not seek to commandeer Calvin’s work on this topic for his own project. Rather, he sought to communicate Calvin’s own vision of evangelical repentance to a new generation. Accordingly, this essay will primarily devote itself to exploring Calvin’s position. Before so doing, however, I shall provide a brief analysis of the distinction between the “covenant God” and “contract God,” which underlays Torrance’s emphasis on Calvin’s distinction between legal and evangelical repentance. Also, following our exploration of Calvin, I shall look briefly at Torrance’s own account of evangelical repentance, as it followed Calvin’s trajectory.

In late June 2017, Amos Yong’s Renewing Christian Theology: Systematics for a Global Christianity (Baylor University Press, 2014) was the subject of a specially organized Theology Forum at the University of Bern, Switzerland. Four of the discussants wrote up their reflections, and the author then penned a rejoinder. The following reviews, followed by a response from the author, track some of the questions and conversations being catalyzed by the ongoing development of Pentecostal theology, particularly as it has been received by theologians on the European continent. They suggest that much work remains for those seeking to work out of an explicitly Pentecostal confessional context, but also indicate how ecumenical interaction can be mutually beneficial for all sides of the wider theological endeavor.

La pregunta por el modo de orientar la vida se revela como una de las más serias y apremiantes. Tanto en su acepción sacra, que remite a una llamada trascendente, como en su concepción laica, que vincula el sentimiento de felicidad con la propia realización personal, la palabra vocación quiere indicar el modo adecuado que sigue el sujeto para desempeñarse con éxito en la vida.

Quizá por ello, cuando se habla de vocación resuenan aquellos elementos que componen la identidad del ser humano: corporeidad y espiritualidad, intimidad y relacionalidad, inteligencia y sensibilidad, conciencia y libertad, biografía personal e historia colectiva.

El desencanto causado por la «liquidez» axioló­gica, la demagogia política, el pragmatis­mo económico, la incertidumbre eco­lógica, el narcisismo digital y la uniformidad cultural en los que parece haberse instalado la antropología del trashombre, urge a elaborar un nuevo modelo de orientación vocacional que enseñe a vivir desde la «autotrascendencia» y la «ultimidad personal», o sea, desde la alteridad, la relación, la libertad y el don. Puesto que, sin vocación, el ser personal se condena a tratarse y ser tratado con indiferencia.

The books of 1 and 2 Samuel offer a three-fold thematic scheme that supports the central claim of the Pentateuch, the claim found in Deuteronomy 6:4 and known to the Jews as “the Shema,” a verse that declares the God of Israel is one, true and living God, a theme that undergirds all of the historical books as well. Thus, the foundational theme of 1 and 2 Samuel is the central claim of the Pentateuch, a theme shared by all books of the Holy Scriptures. The secondary, structural theme of the book of 1 Samuel supports the primary theme of the historical books by offering the testimony that God has called out David to establish the Davidic lineage to bring about Israel’s redemption as supporting evidence that YHWH is the true and living God. The secondary, structural theme of the book of 2 Samuel supports the primary theme of the historical books by offering the testimony that God has justified David in his role as king. The third, imperative theme of the books of 1 and 2 Samuel states that Israel loved the Lord their God with all of their strength by accepting the one whom God called and justified as their king and redeemer. The application of this third theme for today’s reader is to believe that God has called and justification the Lord Jesus Christ as King of Kings in the establishment of the Kingdom of Heaven. The New Testament believer should trust in Jesus as the fulfillment of prophecies concerning the Messiah coming from the Davidic lineage who will reign eternally over all nations. As believers, we have been called to be a part of the Kingdom of Heaven, and we are justified as members of this Kingdom through faith in Jesus Christ.

It is frequently charged by critics of classical Christian theism that its core tenets are incompatible with the doctrine of the Incarnation. This accusation is plausible so long as one is compelled to hold either that the divine Word subtracted something from himself in assuming a human nature or added something to himself. But contrary to widespread recent opinion, subtraction and addition are not the only options. Thomas Aquinas, among others, repudiates both these approaches, expounding instead a doctrine of terminative assumption. Termination eludes the liabilities of subtraction and addition by requiring neither privation of being nor passive potency in the divine Word in order to account for his becoming man. If terminative assumption is the correct way to understand the Word's assumption of a human nature, then classical theism is not in conflict with the doctrine of the Incarnation.

This is the (earlier) electronically-submitted version of my M.Th. thesis, wherein I explore the question of whether a Eucharistic consecration in sign language is valid.  I explore the question from both a systematic (emphasising Aquinas) and dogmatic (emphasising the dogmatic canons) perspective to arrive at the conclusion that 'sound' or 'utterance' lends no force to validity, but rather the force of sacramental validity inheres in the faith proclaimed by the Church that is expressed in the sacramental, and therefore Eucharistic, form.

Focusing on the work of N.T. Wright, J. Louis Martyn, and Douglas Harink, in this essay I offer a theological analysis of the debate between salvation-historical and apocalyptic readings of Paul as a debate in Christology. I argue that in the end they are Christologically deficient in ironically similar ways: both positions conceive of Christ as accidental to the divine intent for creation, a notion that falls short of the robust Christology Paul adheres to. I offer an alternative that preserves both the notions of a salvific history and an apocalyptic revelation, but is also imbedded in what I call a supralapsarian Christology

For my talks and debates on the resurrection of Jesus and other topics, see my youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK7fMevhmEe8hR_S0aTsV1Q

"One of the best Analytic Philosophy ebooks of all time" - BookAuthority .
‘By the end of Andrew Loke’s excellent book, he concludes that the most rational viewpoint is that the original percipients saw Jesus himself…. Loke is to be commended for an accessible and systematic approach to the resurrection of Jesus that helps the reader understand the full range of available options in considering the epistemic warrants for believing in the foundational claim of the Christian faith.’ –The Journal of Theological Studies (Oxford University Press)

This book provides an original and comprehensive assessment of the hypotheses concerning the origin of resurrection Christology. It fills a gap in the literature by addressing these issues using a transdisciplinary approach involving historical-critical study of the New Testament, theology, analytic philosophy, psychology and comparative religion. Using a novel analytic framework, this book demonstrates that a logically exhaustive list of hypotheses concerning the claims of Jesus’ post-mortem appearances and the outcome of Jesus’ body can be formulated. It addresses these hypotheses in detail, including sophisticated combinations of hallucination hypothesis with cognitive dissonance; memory distortion; and confirmation bias. Addressing writings from both within and outside of Christianity, it also demonstrates how a comparative religion approach might further illuminate the origins of Christianity. This is a thorough study of arguably the key event in the formation of the Christian faith, and the basis of the Christian hope of eternal life.

I am currently revising and expanding the material presented in this paper in preparation for an upcoming Theopolis Explorations volume. The forthcoming book will explore some important areas that I was not able to cover at length in this paper, notably how the imago Dei relates to humanity's destiny as council as well as Enochic literature and other Pseudepigrapha.

This paper was first presented to Dr. Peter J. Leithart and Dr. James B. Jordan at Theopolis Institute on March 11, 2017.

My treatment of the Divine Council really is the exploration of a story.  In this story man was created by God as a child—an infant, really—and is steadily brought to maturity.  The fall of Adam immediately presents an obstacle to how this maturation is supposed to progress, but it does not frustrate God’s plan; instead it directs the story to an even more glorious conclusion.  This is the story of how God elevated mankind to his place in Council through Jesus Christ, the man.

Our personal study of this topic cannot begin to satisfy the need.  We hope that is encourages others to begin their own eventful pilgrimages in this direction.  It is the blood of Christ, not our perfection of doctrine that saves us.  Be One.  Be well.