Search results

Your objection rests on a category mistake. You keep treating a theoretical proposal as though it were a dogmatic pronouncement. But a theory is evaluated by whether its internal logic holds, not by whether it settles every metaphysical question once and for all. Very few philosophical articles...

Yes, I stand by it. The sentence "If this is correct, then the unity‑of‑the‑Trinity problem is resolved" is not a boast; it is a conditional argument. I put forward a theory. If the theory stands, the problem collapses. That is how reasoning works. To present a theory is not to claim...

I state that I have presented a theory, and that it may be a hard pill for some to swallow. I do not claim to have solved the problem of Trinitarian unity. The article offers a theory, not a definitive proof (very few articles do). Your allegation that the article "fails" is therefore unfounded...

It seems you stopped reading halfway through the article. Bradley did in fact regard this regress as vicious. Gaskin, however, argues that it is harmless and even constitutive, because its regressive stages are not epistemically discrete moments that must be processed one after another by the...

I am saying that God is a living God, and a living God requires a living, participatory exegesis, not an "objective" extraction of information. There is no such thing as a "natural" or "neutral" reading of Scripture. Every act of interpretation is shaped by a horizon of assumptions, habits, and...

Your flattened biblical reading stands in stark contrast to the medieval way of reading Scripture. Medieval exegesis was nothing like the modern literal‑historical method. It was layered, symbolic, participatory, and metaphysical, a way of entering the divine economy rather than extracting...

No, there is no natural or neutral way of reading the Bible. One always reads it through a lens, with prejudiced eyes, as Gadamer insists. There is simply no way around it. "The prejudices of the individual, far more than his judgments, constitute the historical reality of his being." (Gadamer...

Literalistic fundamentalism treats a sacred text as inerrant in every detail, self‑interpreting, and immune to historical, linguistic, or contextual analysis. This is remarkably naïve, because all reading is interpretation; there is no such thing as an "objective" frame of mind. Gadamer...

Paul says that "the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." You have chosen the opposite path, staking everything on the letter. Biblical literalism, combined with moral Manichaeism and a belief in being "chosen," produces not Christianity but an anti‑Christian movement, precisely the kind of...

Dispensationalism is yet another nineteenth‑century heresy, born in the mind of John Nelson Darby. It insists on a rigid separation between Israel as an "earthly people" and the Church as a "heavenly people," but Scripture teaches no such thing. Paul speaks of one olive tree, not two (Romans...

Here is a list of the internal tensions inside the Pauline corpus, which drive theologians mad: Contradictions About the Law (Torah) - Romans 7:12: "The law is holy, righteous, and good." - Romans 7:10: "The commandment… proved to be death to me." - 2 Corinthians 3:7: calls the law "the...

Here are some more errors: - Luke places Jesus' birth during the census under Quirinius (6 CE). - Matthew places Jesus' birth during the reign of Herod the Great (d. 4 BCE). These dates are ten years apart. No known historical reconstruction can reconcile them. - Matthew 27:5: Judas hangs...

Two examples of errors in the Bible: In Galatians 1:17–18 Paul says that after his conversion he "went away into Arabia, and again returned to Damascus and only after three years went to Jerusalem. Acts says nothing about Arabia but claims that he went directly to Jerusalem, with no mention of...

Luther effectively collapsed the distinction between heaven and earth by eliminating the traditional separation of the holy and the profane. God becomes equally present in all spheres of creation, including church, household, and state, thereby sidelining the classical conception of the...

I am myself a baptized and confessed Lutheran. I could never be a Catholic, standing with one foot in the Middle Ages and the other in modernity. But I remain critical of Protestantism as well. Luther did everything he could to flatten Christian cosmology, and the consequences for Christianity...

I am not proposing the reconstruction of a magisterium. I am simply identifying the causes that led to the spread of Protestant sectarianism. No, Luther was not faithful to Augustine. He dismantled Augustine's entire stratified Christian cosmos and flattened it completely. In the catechism...

When literalist Christians tell me to just open the Bible and read it, as if the truth were simply written there in black and white, I can't help thinking they must be joking. Lutheran scholars have never been able to agree on biblical interpretation, even though the Reformation principle says...

In fact, I am criticizing the concept of "a list of doctrines one must believe in order to be truly saved as a Christian," which has appeared in this thread. I am also challenging the view of the Bible as an instruction manual that one can simply open and read as straightforward, black‑and‑white...

Oh yes, many have done that and theologians have criticized this reduction of divinity. Fabien Muller argues that modern theology often reduces ideas about God to immanent, social, psychological, or political categories, abandoning the older sense of divine transcendence and mystery. He...

...