Recently the paleoanthropologist Pat Shipman has proposed what she calls the animal connection as the human trait that connects all other traits. Theologians and biblical scholars have proposed many relational, functional, and ontological interpretations of the image of God in humans and human nature, but have generally not included a connection with animals. Genesis 1–3, however, weaves human and animal creation in a variety of ways, and Adam's naming of other species implies they are understood as family or kin. (...) Thus Genesis 1–3 understands a relationship with other animals as integral to human becoming and uses family or kinship as a root metaphor for human–animal relations. (shrink)

Recently the paleoanthropologist Pat Shipman has proposed what she calls the animal connection as the human trait that connects all other traits. Theologians and biblical scholars have proposed many relational, functional, and ontological interpretations of the image of God in humans and human nature, but have generally not included a connection with animals. Genesis 1–3, however, weaves human and animal creation in a variety of ways, and Adam's naming of other species implies they are understood as family or kin. (...) Thus Genesis 1–3 understands a relationship with other animals as integral to human becoming and uses family or kinship as a root metaphor for human–animal relations. (shrink)

The development of a robust, holistic theological anthropology will require that theology and biblical studies alike enter into genuine interdisciplinary conversations. Depth psychology in particular has the capacity to be an exceedingly fruitful conversation partner for theology because of its commitment to the totality of the human experience (both the conscious and unconscious aspects) as well as its unique ability to interpret archetypal symbols and mythological thinking. By arguing for a psycho-theological hermeneutic that accounts for depth psychology's conviction that myths (...) about the origin of the world are always simultaneously myths about the origin and emergence of human consciousness, I demonstrate that the presence of numerous Jungian archetypes in Genesis 1–3 suggests that the narrative can be read from a psychological perspective without diminishing or marginalizing the dominant theological themes of exile and return. Furthermore, such a reading fundamentally suggests that the narrative is not about how sin entered into creation, but rather how consciousness emerged in human community. (shrink)

The development of a robust, holistic theological anthropology will require that theology and biblical studies alike enter into genuine interdisciplinary conversations. Depth psychology in particular has the capacity to be an exceedingly fruitful conversation partner for theology because of its commitment to the totality of the human experience as well as its unique ability to interpret archetypal symbols and mythological thinking. By arguing for a psycho‐theological hermeneutic that accounts for depth psychology's conviction that myths about the origin of the world (...) are always simultaneously myths about the origin and emergence of human consciousness, I demonstrate that the presence of numerous Jungian archetypes in Genesis 1–3 suggests that the narrative can be read from a psychological perspective without diminishing or marginalizing the dominant theological themes of exile and return. Furthermore, such a reading fundamentally suggests that the narrative is not about how sin entered into creation, but rather how consciousness emerged in human community. (shrink)

Nos primeiros parágrafos do livro XIII das Confissões, Agostinho interpreta os primeiros versículos do Gênesis de maneira a entrelaçar criação do mundo, surgimento da consciência e história da conversão. Para isso, lança mão tanto da literatura neoplatônica quanto de uma tradição cristã já quase consolidada. Uma das fontes poderia ser o conjunto de tratados sobre a Trindade de Mário Vitorino.

English summary: G.W. Leibniz's philosophy represents a fundamental chapter in the constitution of what we mean by modernity. Leibniz can be considered a source of inspiration for both the moment of the emergence of modernity as well as for the moment of the crisis of Enlightenment. Despite his influence on various authors, Leibniz does not let himself be identified with the core of Enlightenment thinking that was prevalent in the Western world in recent centuries. We are therefore faced with a (...) thinking that in its development depends neither on the enlightened modernity, nor on the principal alternative, hermeneutics. Thus, the span of Leibniz's thought ranges from the time before the Enlightenment through to post-hermeneutics. This volume presents a selection of articles from the "IV Congreso Internacional Leibniz: G. W. Leibniz entre la genesis y la crisis de la Modernidad" which was selected by the "Sociedad Espanola Leibniz" held in Granada. German, English, & French text. German description: Die Philosophie G. W. Leibniz stellt ein grundlegendes Kapitel fuer die Konstituierung dessen dar, was wir unter Modernitat verstehen. Leibniz kann als eine Inspirationsquelle sowohl im Moment der Entstehung der Modernitat als auch im Moment der Krise der Aufklarung verstanden werden. Trotz seines Einflusses auf verschiedene Autoren lasst sich Leibniz nicht mit dem Kern des aufklarerischen Denkens identifizieren, das in der westlichen Welt in den letzten Jahrhunderten vorherrschend war. Wir stehen also vor einem Denken, das in seinem Werdegang weder von der aufgeklarten Modernitat noch von deren hauptsachlicher Alternative, der Hermeneutik, abhangt. Somit spannt sich der Bogen des Denkens Leibniz von der Zeit vor der Aufklarung bis hin zur Post-Hermeneutik. Dieser Sammelband prasentiert eine Auswahl der Beitrage auf dem IV Congreso Internacional Leibniz: G. W. Leibniz entre la genesis y la crisis de la Modernidad, der von der Sociedad espanola Leibniz in Granada abgehalten wurde. Die Studien umfassen vier thematische Bereiche: Leibniz und die Entstehung der Modernitat, die Prinzipien der Philosophie und der Naturwissenschaften, die Sprachphilosophie und die Erkenntnistheorie, Ontologie und Theodizee. (shrink)

English summary: G.W. Leibniz's philosophy represents a fundamental chapter in the constitution of what we mean by modernity. Leibniz can be considered a source of inspiration for both the moment of the emergence of modernity as well as for the moment of the crisis of Enlightenment. Despite his influence on various authors, Leibniz does not let himself be identified with the core of Enlightenment thinking that was prevalent in the Western world in recent centuries. We are therefore faced with a (...) thinking that in its development depends neither on the enlightened modernity, nor on the principal alternative, hermeneutics. Thus, the span of Leibniz's thought ranges from the time before the Enlightenment through to post-hermeneutics. This volume presents a selection of articles from the "IV Congreso Internacional Leibniz: G. W. Leibniz entre la genesis y la crisis de la Modernidad" which was selected by the "Sociedad Espanola Leibniz" held in Granada. German, English, & French text. German description: Die Philosophie G. W. Leibniz stellt ein grundlegendes Kapitel fur die Konstituierung dessen dar, was wir unter Modernitat verstehen. Leibniz kann als eine Inspirationsquelle sowohl im Moment der Entstehung der Modernitat als auch im Moment der Krise der Aufklarung verstanden werden. Trotz seines Einflusses auf verschiedene Autoren lasst sich Leibniz nicht mit dem Kern des aufklarerischen Denkens identifizieren, das in der westlichen Welt in den letzten Jahrhunderten vorherrschend war. Wir stehen also vor einem Denken, das in seinem Werdegang weder von der aufgeklarten Modernitat noch von deren hauptsachlicher Alternative, der Hermeneutik, abhangt. Somit spannt sich der Bogen des Denkens Leibniz von der Zeit vor der Aufklarung bis hin zur Post-Hermeneutik. Dieser Sammelband prasentiert eine Auswahl der Beitrage auf dem IV Congreso Internacional Leibniz: G. W. Leibniz entre la genesis y la crisis de la Modernidad, der von der Sociedad espanola Leibniz in Granada abgehalten wurde. Die Studien umfassen vier thematische Bereiche: Leibniz und die Entstehung der Modernitat, die Prinzipien der Philosophie und der Naturwissenschaften, die Sprachphilosophie und die Erkenntnistheorie, Ontologie und Theodizee. (shrink)

In the Western studies of the texts of Mozi, three distinctive views have surfaced in the past few decades: (1) Mozi is inconsistent because he seems to have been committed to both a Utilitarian standard and a divine command theory; (2) Mozi is a divine command theorist who argues that it is right to benefit the world because it is the will of heaven; and (3) Mozi is a utilitarian thinker who has based morality on the criterion of whether actions (...) benefit the world. In this paper, I will argue that the whole debate about whether Mozi is a divine command theorist or a utilitarian is misguided, because it is based on an incorrect understanding of the fundamental cultural perspective associated with the notion of Tian. An adequate understanding of the notion of Tian will reveal its fundamental difference from the Western notion of heaven. Such an understanding will enable us to put Mozi's moral philosophy in the ancient Chinese perspective in which a tension and potential conflict between ‘the will of heaven’ and ‘the benefit of the world’ simply cannot arise. (shrink)

Abstract. This article offers one response from within Christianity to the theological challenges of Darwinism. It identifies evolutionary theory as a key aspect of the context of contemporary Christian hermeneutics. Examples of the need for re-reading of scripture, and reassessment of key doctrines, in the light of Darwinism include the reading of the creation and fall accounts of Genesis 1–3, the reformulation of the Christian doctrine of humanity as created in the image of God, and the possibility of a (...) new approach to the Incarnation in the light of evolution and semiotics. Finally, a theodicy in respect of evolutionary suffering is outlined, in dialogue with recent writings attributing such suffering to a force in opposition to God. The latter move is rejected on both theological and scientific grounds. Further work on evolutionary theodicy is proposed, in relation in particular to the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Murder in the Garden? The Envy of the Gods in Genesis 2 and 3 Paul DuffJoseph Hallman George Washington University University of St. Thomas According to Walter Brueggemann, "No text in Genesis (or likely in the entire Bible) has been more used, interpreted and misunderstood" than the story of Adam and Eve in the garden. "This applies to careless, popular theology as well as to the doctrine (...) of the church"(41). Augustine attempted to explain the first few chapters of Genesis on no fewer than five different occasions throughout his career. Based on his reading ofPaul, Augustine and Western Christianity after him believed that the entire human race inherited the disobedience ofAdam and Eve. The story in Genesis 2-3 represents the beginning ofthe J narrative, the so-called Yahwist account of the creation which originated in the early years ofthe Israelite monarchy.8 Commentators have long acknowledged a variety ofelements in the Yahwist creation account which complicate its interpretation and defy any satisfactory explanation. Among the more puzzling elements in the story are, first, the implication in Gen. 3:22 of a plurality of divine beings, a fact which seems to contradict the rest ofthe narrative and which also flies in the face of Israelite monotheism. Second, according to Gen. 2:17, God threatens Adam with the punishment of 8 The Yahwist document, originally independent, was later combined with three other strands of ancient material to form the Pentateuch. For a recent study ofthe "Documentary Hypothesis," see Richard Friedman. 1 84Paul DuffandJoseph Hallman immediate death for transgressing the deity's prohibition (cf. 3:3, 3:4). God does not carry out the threatened punishment, however, nor does the text offer the reader an explanation for the deity's commutation ofthe sentence (Westermann 224-5). Third, the origin and nature ofthe serpent in the story is unclear. Where did he come from? The identification ofthis figure with Satan in the later tradition has no support in the text (Westermann 237-9). Finally, the prohibition not to eat ofthe single tree in the garden appears to be arbitrary. Hence the crime of Adam and Eve is obviously contrived. Despite the fact that the original sentence of death for their disobedience was not carried out, the curses invoked on Adam and Eve seem hardly warranted by the offense. Consequently, some sections ofthe text depict the deity as a petty tyrant, certainly a very different picture than that given by other scriptures ofthe Jewish and Christian traditions. We believe these difficulties can be overcome by approaching Genesis 2-3 from a Girardian perspective.9 We propose that this story has evolved10 in order to hide its original meaning. As a result—following Girard's understanding of the function and evolution of mythology—we will endeavor to "deconstruct" Genesis 2-3 in order to trace the evolution ofthis myth from its origin in a primal crime. This will enable us to explain the inconsistencies in the text as it stands and to appreciate the final revisions made by the biblical author(s). We will begin with a brief discussion of Girard's understanding ofmyth. Then we will turn to the problems ofthe Genesis text. Girard on myth According to Girard, myth is, quite simply, a narrative about a primal murder, rewritten from the vantage point ofthe killers (1977a, 64-7, 91-5; 1986, 24-44). As such, mythology covers up the role of the victimage mechanism as the basis ofculture. Myths which disguise or cover up such a crime can take many forms. For instance, the foundational murder of an 9 In his recent book on Paul, Robert Hamerton-Kelly presents a Girardian interpretation of this passage which is completely different from ours (92-7). Since Hamerton-Kelly appears to read the myth at face value without a sense of development, he, like most interpreters, ends with somewhat tortuous conclusions. 10It is virtually certain that the account found in Gen. 2 and 3 did not come into being as a free composition of the Yahwist. But, as Claus Westermann has pointed out in his history ofthe exegesis ofthis passage (186-91), despite the fact that most see it as a product of a long... (shrink)

This article studies the rewriting of the second creation narrative in the Bible in Jubilees 3:1-31. It shows that the author of Jubilees 3 is not only putting his own views into the biblical text. He is in the first place a careful reader of Genesis 2-3 and other biblical texts. The biblical text posed some difficulties to him and he tries to solve many of these with his rewriting. Characteristic of this rewriting is especially harmonisation. Sometimes he supplies (...) details for explaining the text. The point of departure is most often the biblical text itself, although, at the same time, he seemed to be influenced by current interpretations of certain aspects of the text. (shrink)

(1999). Figures in (De)composition: The genesis of the paradoxical self in paul auster's moon palace (a fuzzy grammar of subjectivity) 1 . Angelaki: Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 75-91.

Antonio Argandoña, Norbert Bilbeny, Victòria Camps, Miquel Calsina, Àngel Castiñeira, Cristian Palazzi, Ferran Requejo, Raimon Ribera, Begoña Román, Ferran Sàez, Miquel Seguró, Francesc Torralba, Josep Maria Vallès, Rosamund Thomas Ramon Llull Journal of Applied Ethics 2012 3(3):9-16.

Erwin Panofsky explicitly states that the first half of the opening chapter of Studies in Iconology—his landmark American publication of 1939—contains ‘the revised content of a methodological article published by the writer in 1932’, which is now translated for the first time in this issue of Critical Inquiry.1 That article, published in the philosophical journal Logos, is among his most important works. First, it marks the apogee of his series of philosophically reflective essays on how to do art history,2 that (...) reach back, via a couple of major pieces on Alois Riegl, to the 1915 essay on Heinrich Wölfflin.3 Under the influence of his colleague at Hamburg Ernst Cassirer, the principal interpreter of Kant in the 1920s, Panofsky from 1915 on exhibits in his work ever more Kantian thinking and language.4 But Logos was not an art-historical review or one dedicated to aesthetics but a principal mainstream journal of the philosophy of culture. So ‘On the Problem of Describing and Interpreting Works of the Visual Arts’ has a good claim to be the culmination of Panofsky's philosophical thinking in his German period under the Weimar Republic. · 1. Erwin Panofsky, Studies in Iconology: Humanistic Themes in the Art of the Renaissance , p. xv; hereafter abbreviated SI. See Panofsky, ‘Zum Problem der Beschreibung und Inhaltsdeutung von Werken der bildenden Kunst’, Logos 21 : 103–19; trans. Jaś Elsner and Katharina Lorenz under the title ‘On the Problem of Describing and Interpreting Works of the Visual Arts’, Critical Inquiry 38 : 467–82; hereafter abbreviated ‘P’.· 2. See the discussion in Carlo Ginzburg, ‘From Aby Warburg to E. H. Gombrich: A Problem of Method’, Myths, Emblems, Clues, trans. John and Anne C. Tedeschi , pp. 17–59, esp. pp. 36–41.· 3. See Panofsky, ‘Das Problem des Stils in der bildenden Kunst’, Deutschsprachige Aufsätze, ed. Karen Michels and Martin Warnke, 2 vols. , 2:1009–18; ‘Der Begriff des Kunstwollens’,Deutschsprachige Aufsätze, 2:1019–34, trans. Kenneth J. Northcott and Joel Snyder under the title ‘The Concept of Artistic Volition’, Critical Inquiry 8 : 17–33; and ‘Über das Verhältnis der Kunstgeschichte zur Kunsttheorie: Ein Beitrag zu der Erörterung über die Möglichkeit kunstwissenschaftlicher Grundbegriffe’, Deutschsprachige Aufsätze, 2: 1035–63, trans. Lorenz and Elsner under the title ‘On the Relationship of Art History and Art Theory: Towards the Possibility of a Fundamental System of Concepts for a Science of Art’, Critical Inquiry 35 : 43–71.· 4. On neo-Kantianism in pre-Nazi Germany, see Michael Friedman, A Parting of the Ways: Carnap, Cassirer, and Heidegger , pp. 25–37; Éric Dufour and T. Z. R. Créteil, ‘Le Statue du singulier: Kant et le néokantisme de l’École de Marbourg', Kantstudien 93 : 324–50; Edward Skidelsky, Ernst Cassirer: The Last Philosopher of Culture , pp. 22–51; and Peter E. Gordon, Continental Divide: Heidegger, Cassirer, Davos , pp. 52–86. Specifically on the Cassirerian Kantianism of Panofsky, see Michael Podro, The Critical Historians of Art , pp. 181–82; Michael Ann Holly, Panofsky and the Foundations of Art History , pp. 91–92, 147–52; Silvia Ferretti, Cassirer, Panofsky, and Warburg: Symbol, Art, and History, trans. Richard Pierce , pp. 174–77, 182–84; David Summers, ‘Meaning in the Visual Arts as a Humanistic Discipline’, in Meaning in the Visual Arts: Views from the Outside, ed. Irving Lavin , pp. 9–24; Mark A. Cheetham, Kant, Art, and Art History: Moments of Discipline , pp. 68–77; Paul Crowther, The Transhistorical Image: Philosophizing Art and Its History , pp. 70–73; Allister Neher, ‘“The Concept of Kunstwollen”, Neo-Kantianism, and Erwin Panofsky's Early Art Theoretical Essays', Word and Image 20 : 41–51; Georges Didi-Huberman,Confronting Images: Questioning the Ends of a Certain History of Art, trans. John Goodman , pp. 4–6, 90–138; and Lorenz and Elsner, ‘Translators’ Introduction', Critical Inquiry35 : 33–42, esp. pp. 38, 40–42. (shrink)

The creation account of Gen 1:1–2:3 is only one of several accounts featured in the Old Testament/hebrew Bible. The one account that most closely matches its cosmic orientation is the poetic description of creation given in Job 38–41. Nevertheless, both accounts are worlds apart regarding how they describe creation and what they find most important about creation. Their theological and literary differences make for a lively intertextual conversation, as entertained in the interpreter’s imagination. Let the dialogue begin.

The ArgumentMy thesis in this text is that A. Ernst Cassirer outlines a philosophical theory that proves equally sensitive to historical change and to the consistency of conceptual thinking. B. Cassirer relies on the differential logic of an internally ruptured, and yet undivided “basis phenomenon.” Especially his reading of Goethe has led to the concept of the basis phenomenon existing in a differential symbolic mode. Cassirer's delineation of Goethe's conceptual trivium ofUrphänomene— “experience,” “deed,” and “life” — underscores the conceptual rupture (...) in the construction of any basis phenomenon. Furthermore, I argue that C. thePhilosophy of Symbolic Forms, takes up Goethe's notion of basis phenomena and eventually turns it into a modern, pluralistic theorem about the interrelation of science and culture. Cassirer reaches this aim by (1) focusing on the question of philosophical inquiry as a basis phenomenon in the sense of a basic philosophical activity. I also argue that (2) Cassirer's view retains an essentially ambiguous character, as opposed to a fundamentalist notion of basis phenomena. It is important to see that (3) this ambiguity also informs Cassirer's notion of culture (the plurality of symbolic forms), as well as his delienation of the relation between culture and science. (shrink)

The present paper is a kind of selective summary of my book The Genesis of Yogācāra-Vijñānavāda. [1.–2.] It deals with questions of origin and early development of three basic concepts of this school, viz., the ‘idealist’ thesis that the whole world is mind only or manifestation only, the assumption of a subliminal layer of the mind, and the analysis of phenomena in terms of the “Three Natures”. [3.] It has been asserted that these three basic concepts are logically inseparable (...) and therefore must have been introduced conjointly. [4.] Still, from Vasubandhu onward treatises have been written in which only one of the three concepts is advocated or demonstrated to be indispensable, without any reference to the other two being made. Likewise, in most of the earlier Yogācāra treatises, the three concepts occur in different sections or contexts, or are even entirely absent, as vijñaptimātra in the Yogācārabhūmi and ālayavijñāna in the Mahāyānasūtrālaṁkāra and Madhyāntavibhāga. [5.] It is therefore probable that the three concepts were introduced separately and for different reasons. [5.1.] As regards the concept of the “Three Natures”, I very hypothetically suggest that it was stimulated by the Tattvārthapaṭala of the Bodhisatvabhūmi. [5.2.1.] In the case of ālayavijñāna, I still think that my hypothesis that the concept originated from a problem emerging in connection with the “attainment of cessation” holds good and has not been conclusively refuted, but I admit that Prof. Yamabe?s hypothesis is a serious alternative. [5.2.2.] An important point is that in the Yogācārabhūmi we come across two fundamentally different concepts of ālayavijñāna, the starting point for the change being, probably, the fifth chapter of the Saṁdhinirmocanasūtra. [5.3.] As for ‘idealism’, we may have to distinguish two strands, which, however, tend to merge. [5.3.1.] The earlier one uses the concept cittamātra and emerges as early as in the Pratyutpanna-buddha-saṁmukhāvasthita-samādhi-sūtra in connection with an interpretation of visions of the Buddha Amitāyus. [5.3.2.] The later strand introduces the concept vijñaptimātra and seems to have originated in the eighth chapter of the Saṁdhinirmocanasūtra in connection with a reflection on the images perceived in insight meditation. [5.3.3.] In texts like the Mahāyānasūtrālaṁkāra, concepts from other Mahāyānasūtra strands become prominent in this connection, and it is only in the Mahāyānasaṁgraha that the use of vijñaptimātra is finally established. (shrink)

The concept of »transcendental« is undoubtedly one of the most important terms in Kantian philosophy. For over one hundred and fifty years major Kantian scholars have debated its origin and set out various interpretations. The Kant-Forschung has recently established four different possible sources: 1) Schulmetaphysik 2) Ch. Wolff; 3) A. G. Baumgarten; 4) J. H. Lambert. The aim of this essay is to suggest a different origin and genesis of the Kantian concept of »transcendental« by the methodologies of Quellengeschichte (...) and Begriffsgeschichte, investigating the philosophical and historical background of Königsberg from the beginning of the seventeenth century to Kant and to show reasons for the shift of the concept of »transcendental« from metaphysics to logic. The doctrine of transcendentals was very much alive in Königsberg and already in Scholastic philosophers the »transcendentals« shifted its interest from being to the knowable, from ontology to logic. However, up to 1763, Kant accepts the Wolffian doctrine of transcendentals and the concept of »transcendental« is synonymous to »metaphysical«. In the second half of the Sixties, probably in the wake of the preparatory works to the Beweisgrund, Kant goes deeply into the interpretation of Baumgarten and the »transcendental« becomes synonymous with »essential« in opposition to »metaphysical«. In the wake of Crusius' reflections, instead, »transcendental« becomes »logical« in contrast with »metaphysical«. Beginning in the Seventies, in the preparatory fragments to the Kritik der reinen Vernunft, the »transcendental« establishes itself as a synonymous of »logical« and »essential« in opposition to »metaphysical« and »real«, and it concerns the object of knowledge in general without any reference to the experience. From this conception derives the concept of »transcendental« of the Kritik der reinen Vernunft as an examination of the condition of the possibility of an a priori knowledge. In the conclusion I argue that Kant did not deduce the doctrine of transcendentals from his logic, but that both doctrines are developed simultaneously and that Kant always tried to integrate them with each other. Fragments of the second half of the Seventies show a progressive attempt of this integration, which was doomed to fail. (shrink)

This article considers Edward W. Said’s proposals on ‘imaginative geographies’ as suggested in his leading work Orientalism as a tool to analyse the ideological circumstances that shape geographical spaces in the Bible. My purpose is to discuss how these imaginative geographies are present in the patriarchal narratives of Genesis and how they have left their mark on the history of the interpretation of these texts and on the not always easy relations between members of the religious traditions inherited from (...) the Bible (Hebrews, Muslims and Christians). I propose four types of ‘imaginative geographies’: (1) ‘Equalness’ is the way to represent what is considered as sharing the own identity. The geography of ‘Equalness’ defines the spaces of Isaac, Jacob and their families. (2) ‘Otherness’ is the way to represent the ‘Other’ as opposite or juxtaposed to one’s own identity. A common border is shared, thus kinship relationships can be established. It defines the spaces of Ishmael, Esau/Edom, Lot (Ammon and Moab) and Laban. (3) ‘Foreignness’ is the way to define what is strange, odd or exotic considered as external to the own identity, in a space set beyond even the space of the ‘Other’. Egypt is in Genesis a land of ‘Foreignness’. (4) ‘Delendness’ encompasses whatever claims our same space and therefore threatens our survival and must be destroyed ( delendum ). As such, processes of annihilation and dominion of Israel on Canaanites and Sichemites are justified. Contribution: The article applies Said’s ‘imaginative geographies’ as an identity mechanism for the creation of biblical literary spaces. A quadripartite classification (‘Equal’/‘Other’/‘Foreigner’/‘Delendum’) instead of the usual bipartite one (‘Equal’ vs. ‘Other’) is proposed and the consequences for the current coexistence between religious identities inherited from Abraham are shown. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:The Center Blossoms, Part 1:The Pneumatological Fruit of the Incarnate Word in Bonaventure's BreviloquiumBr. Thomas A. Piolata OFM Cap. (bio)This paper asks the following question: What is the fruit of Saint Bonaventure's theological focus on Christ as the center of all theology? While Bonaventure's christocentric vision has rightly received ample scholarly attention and recognition, a clear and robust explication of the fruit—i.e., the culmination or goal—of this vision yet (...) remains to be articulated.1 The above question has not received a full answer. There is thus a lacuna and a need within the secondary literature on the Seraphic Doctor's thought. This study addresses and begins to remedy this lacuna. It offers a preliminary answer to the above question.2 To this end, I will argue that Bonaventure's christocentrism yields a theology that accentuates the Spirit's role in salvation—a pneumatological soteriology.To argue this point, I focus principally on Bonaventure's systematic masterpiece, the Breviloquium. I have chosen this text for two principal reasons. The first reason: the Breviloquium makes manifest the Seraphic [End Page 195] Doctor's distinctive christocentrism.3 After all, in a work consisting of seven parts,4 it is precisely Part 4—De incarnatione Verbi—that constitutes the text's undeniable structural center. Bonaventure's treatment of the Incarnate Word constitutes, as Part 4 of the text, the centerpiece of the seven-part theological synthesis developed in the Breviloquium.The second reason: the Breviloquium makes explicit the inherent— and specifically pneumatological—fruitfulness of Bonaventure's christocentrism. Significantly, that is, the centrality of Christ in the text does not end in Christ. Already in Part 4, the text's structural center, the centrality of Christ culminates and finds its fullness in a pneumatological, pentecostal reflection: "Postremo, ut inflammaret ad caritatem, misit [Christus] ignem Spiritus sancti in die Pentecostes."5 These words reveal the pneumatological climax of Christ's mission. They are taken from the tenth and final chapter of Part 4, where Bonaventure makes explicit reference to the "Spiritus sanctus" nine times.6 This pentecostal conclusion and cluster of references to the Spirit imbues this final chapter of Part 4 De incarnatione Verbi with a pronounced pneumatological accent and culmination. The centrality of the Incarnate Word already—within its own structure—begins to blossom into the Spirit. Indeed, the centrality of Christ is a blossoming center.This pneumatological apogee of the centrality of Christ does not go unnoticed by Joshua Benson in his careful study of the Breviloquium's Christology. Benson utilizes as a structural hermeneutic Bonaventure's triadic division of ortus, progressus/modus, and status/fructus introduced in the prologue of the text,7 and arrives at the following synthesis: "This chapter [Chapter 10 of Part 4] is the ultimate fructus of Bonaventure's investigation of the incarnate Word and also establishes Christ further as the ortus of the life of grace that Bonaventure will examine in part 5 [De gratia Spiritus sancti]."8 Benson thus eventually concludes: "The paschal mystery is the foundation for the pneumatological mystery of the church."9 [End Page 196]Ultimately, then, Benson's comments bear witness to the inherent trajectory of the Breviloquium's distinctive christocentrism. Indeed, the center not only anticipates, but even reaches into the subsequent parts that follow: Part 4 does not stand alone as an isolated monad, but betrays directionality, a movement toward the Spirit. Put differently, the text's undeniable christic center is a vibrant center that bears fruit, a center that breathes forth the mystery of the Spirit. In a word, the center blossoms: pneumatological presence pulsates within and so blossoms forth from the reality of the Incarnate Word.This insight motivates the present study. After all, it is this basic insight that lies at the genesis of, formulates an initial answer to, and evinces the theological gravity within the very question that opened this essay: What is the fruit of Bonaventure's theological focus on Christ the center? Answering this question constitutes the goal of this study. To answer it, I will explicate the—pneumatological—fruit of Christ the center. In brief, the answer I propose lies in what I will... (shrink)

Canning, Raymond I was born on 15 September 1947. That same year, on 5 August, the International Council of Christians and Jews, meeting in Switzerland, had issued what have become known as 'The Ten Points of Seelisberg'.1 As grief and shame over the Shoah took root, the necessity for a radical change of theological, cultural and political attitudes on the part of Christians became clear. These Ten Points articulate key dimensions of that growing perception. They can therefore be understood as (...) forming an initial basis for the Christian-Jewish dialogue that was already gathering momentum.2 They also represent a first step in the process that led, eighteen years later, to Nostra Aetate, the document on the Catholic Church's relation to non-Christian religions that would emerge from the Second Vatican Council in late 1965. At various stages during the council years, it had appeared that the bishops' engagement with the new demands and manifold ramifications of Christian-Jewish relations expressed at Seelisberg might fail to produce any new official statement of Catholic Church teaching on the matter. Would the council after all remain silent on this crucial question? Yves Congar expressed the sentiments of many when, faced with this prospect in May 1965, he wrote in his council diary: 'For myself, however, I am in no way in favour of the pure and simple withdrawal of the text. Twenty years after Auschwitz it is impossible for the Council to say nothing'.3 And, as we now know, with the declaration Nostra Aetate the 'something' the council did succeed in saying, however small it may have appeared at that time, continues to resonate more than fifty years later. (shrink)

Inhalt: A EINLEITUNG. 1. Das Sprachspielmodell. 2. Zur Entwicklung des Denkens von L. Wittgenstein. 3. Zusammenfassende Thesen. B ZUR GENESIS DES SPRACHSPIELMODELLS. 4. Die Umbruchsjahre 1928-1932. 5. Das Big Typescript. 6. Das Sprachspielmodell im BT. C ZUR GELTUNG DES SPRACHSPIELMODELLS. 7. Ein sekundärliterarischer Zugang. D Schlußbemerkung. E Abkürzungs- und Literaturverzeichnis.

In 1 Timothy 2:11-15 women are forbidden to teach and have authority over men in the church. The ground for this instruction is the creation account in Genesis 2 that asserts the priority of Adam over Eve in the order of creation. The second reason for the instruction is the deception of Eve according to the account of the Fall in Genesis 3. This pericope has elicited arguments between advocates of egalitarianism and complementarianism revolving over the issues of (...) grammar, the context of the Ephesian church with regard to false teachings and the comparison of this text with the other writings of Paul, for those that subscribe to the authorship of Paul. The contention of this article is that verse 15 provides a major clue as to how this text should be understood. In addition, the author's rhetoric in this text is interrogated with regard to the text's own internal literary and theological logic. In this regard, the author is found to be inconsistent in his outlook, for the grace that was poured out abundantly on him: a blasphemer, a persecutor and a violent man and on account of his ignorance and unbelief is apparently, being denied women on account of Eve's deception. (shrink)

Sources of evolutionary risk for stable strategy of adaptive Homo sapiens are an imbalance of: (1) the intra-genomic co-evolution (intragenomic conflicts); (2) the gene-cultural co-evolution; (3) inter-cultural co-evolution; (4) techno-humanitarian balance; (5) inter-technological conflicts (technological traps). At least phenomenologically the components of the evolutionary risk are reversible, but in the aggregate they are in potentio irreversible destructive ones for biosocial, and cultural self-identity of Homo sapiens. When the actual evolution is the subject of a rationalist control and/or manipulation, the magnitude (...) of the 4th and 5th components of the evolutionary risk reaches a level of existential significance. (shrink)

Counting on the weather Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-4 DOI 10.1007/s11016-010-9503-3 Authors Ruth Morgan, History Discipline, Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia Journal Metascience Online ISSN 1467-9981 Print ISSN 0815-0796.

The purpose of this article is to discuss some basic problems and methodological steps concerning the encounter between Hebrews and Greeks in the Classical period and its impact on the Hellenistic era. The relationship between the Old Testament and Ancient Greek literature will be examined on the basis of Genesis 2–3 and Alcibiades’s speech in Plato’s Symposium. The following considerations and models of interpretation can arise from the analysis of Alcibiades’s speech compared to M- and LXX-Genesis 2–3: Ancient (...) Greek writers were familiar with Old Testament oral or written traditions through improvised translations. They prepared the way for the LXX and, in their compositions, were in dispute with them although they do not make specific references to the Hebrews and their literature; Hebrew authors knew the works of Ancient Greek authors and used Greek philosophical terminology which they creatively adapted to Semitic models; Both models are possible. One should not rush to any decisions but examine each case individually, in the original language. (shrink)

Plato’s Euthyphro presents a puzzle about priority: is deity prior to morality, or vice versa? A Neoplatonic solution identifies God with the Good, claiming the dilemma to be illusory. If we treat the orders of being and power as distinct, however, the God of Genesis 1 may seem to be prior in one order, while goodness is prior in the other; the picture becomes complex, with the various senses of priority apparently balancing out. Without being either Neoplatonic or following (...) other ancient theologies, therefore, Genesis 1 challenges Plato’s dichotomy, highlighting the potential for finding philosophical resources in theological texts. (shrink)

The article focuses on the text of Genesis 1:27-28 within its broader context where the author, the Jahwist, describes humankind as charged with the responsibility to fill and to subdue the earth, which has generally been misunderstood by wealth prospectors. Our methodology is a simplified historical and exegetical study of the two verses of the creation narrative in order to join other contemporary theologians to argue the right of humans to treat the nonhuman as private property as source of (...) material wealth is immoral. As we re-read the text, our findings resonate with the contemporary clarion call for respect and protection of the environment such as COP 2015 in Paris. This provides the justification of our title 'Preaching the green gospel', especially in the Nigerian oil-rich states and in Africa in general. Whilst the paper presents a disquisition of the global efforts of the church through sensitisation of their members to appreciate the magnitude of the environmental pollution and the apocalypse it holds for the world, it draws attention to the possibility of the envisaged doomsday that may descend on Nigeria and other parts of Africa if the crass environmental degradation and the rate of pollution of flora and fauna are not checked. The paper takes cognisance of the positive views expressed by the evangelists of the 'New Theology' in Africa. Whilst the paper raises Biblically friendly ecological awareness in modern Africa, using Nigeria as a contact point, it concludes, inter alia, that the text demands humankind to partake in God's will for order and peace in the universe as it struggles to maintain the ecological sustainability of mother earth. (shrink)

In the first book of Physics, Aristotle is concerned with the question “What is Being?” Ti to on? The determinations of Being are obtained from our experience of things in movement: on kinoumenon. His discussion on Being and One, on matter and form, on subject and privation, etc. does not differ from metaphysics. Contents of the translated chapters: 1. Method, 2-3. Theories of the Presocratic physicists on the principles of nature; the essent exists not as one the way Parmenides and (...) Melissus supposed; the multiplicity of Being, 7. Analysis of becoming: the pair of contraries presupposes something third – a substratum, 9. Not-Being as the condition of becoming: Aristotle’s notion of matter. (shrink)