Re: Response to Howard on Tillich & Bultmann

From: Howard J. Van Till (hvantill@chartermi.net)
Date: Thu May 22 2003 - 08:55:08 EDT

  • Next message: Howard J. Van Till: "Re: Response to Howard on Tillich & Bultmann"

    >From: douglas.hayworth@perbio.com

    > Given your generalization in the name of consistency, what is your theology
    > of Jesus's birth, death and resurrection? Were those supernatural, and if
    > not, how would you articulate an overall Christian theology? Whatever
    > other signs and miracles in scripture and redemptive history we can
    > "theologize" in various ways, to most of us it seems impossible to get
    > around the resurrection as being a "plain fact."

    These are huge questions that would take us far beyond the religion and
    science focus of this list. Just a few comments for now.

    1. I hope my comments re categories of divine action in my response to Rich
    Blinne will serve to clarify some of these matters.

    2. "Signs and miracles in scripture and redemptive history" need not be
    supernatural in order to have great significance. (See comments to Rich B)

    3. You are correct to presume that my Christology differs in substantial
    ways from the Christology associated with traditional supernaturalism. So
    does my concept of the character and authority of the biblical text. (On
    Christology, I presume that if I were placed back in the 4th century I
    would have sided with Arius over Athanasius.)

    Howard Van Till



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu May 22 2003 - 09:26:04 EDT