Response to Michael Rea

For several years now, Michael Rea has been working to foster a fruitful discussion between theologians and analytic philosophers, and his article review nicely exemplifies those efforts. Rea recognises that he and I agree on several key points, the most important of which is that ‘cataphatic theolo...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Scottish journal of theology
Main Author: Hector, Kevin (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Cambridge Univ. Press [2015]
In: Scottish journal of theology
Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains:B Theology / Language / Conception
RelBib Classification:FA Theology
VA Philosophy
Further subjects:B apophatic theology
B Concept
B Language
B Predetermination
B Norm
B cataphatic theology
Online Access: Volltext (Verlag)
Volltext (doi)
Description
Summary:For several years now, Michael Rea has been working to foster a fruitful discussion between theologians and analytic philosophers, and his article review nicely exemplifies those efforts. Rea recognises that he and I agree on several key points, the most important of which is that ‘cataphatic theology can be done without idolatry or violence'. He wonders, though, whether Theology without Metaphysics succeeds in providing a model for such theology, since he thinks it is liable to several objections. By addressing them, I hope to demonstrate that my model is indeed viable, though I would be surprised if this were sufficient to persuade Professor Rea to adopt it. As I see it, more than one model, including Professor Rea's, may do justice to the relevant phenomena; here I want to argue, against Rea's criticisms, that mine does too.
ISSN:1475-3065
Reference:Kritik von "Theology without idolatry or violence (2015)"
Contains:Enthalten in: Scottish journal of theology
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1017/S003693061400091X