Creation stricto sensu

Informed study of Aquinas suggests that absolute idealism and realism do not differ about the relation of created and uncreated freedom (praemotio physica) but rather, if at all, about created vis à vis uncreated being generally. Both cannot be in the same sense. Nor, therefore, have we grounds for...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Theron, Stephen (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Cambridge University Press 2008
In: New blackfriars
Year: 2008, Volume: 89, Issue: 1020, Pages: 194-213
Further subjects:B Monism
B Creation
B Otherness
B Aquinas
B Hegel
B Theologians
B Analogy
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Parallel Edition:Electronic

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1780349025
003 DE-627
005 20211204043410.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 211204s2008 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1111/j.1741-2005.2007.00186.x  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1780349025 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1780349025 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Theron, Stephen  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Creation stricto sensu 
264 1 |c 2008 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Informed study of Aquinas suggests that absolute idealism and realism do not differ about the relation of created and uncreated freedom (praemotio physica) but rather, if at all, about created vis à vis uncreated being generally. Both cannot be in the same sense. Nor, therefore, have we grounds for distinguishing divine or infinite thinking from real production, if nothing else really is. The Thomist doctrine that God has no real relation to anything outside God is thus, implicitly, absolute idealism. Positing “ontological discontinuity” denies the absolutely infinite transcendence in affirming it. We have no being as God, uniquely, has. This is the meaning of “image”, while “face to face” is ultimately one face (intimior me mihi). Seeing and being are one. Thus Hegel should be seen as rather explicating than reducing creation, thus deepening the doctrine and not offering an alternative. R. Gildas merely assumes the latter. Infinity requires union with “alterity”within God and intra-Trinitarian and ad extra processes are thus analogous. So self-renouncement as explaining either creation (originating an origin) or incarnation (kenosis) is anthropomorphic paradox. God has to be “all in all”. 
650 4 |a Theologians 
650 4 |a Analogy 
650 4 |a Monism 
650 4 |a Otherness 
650 4 |a Creation 
650 4 |a Hegel 
650 4 |a Aquinas 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t New blackfriars  |d New York : Cambridge University Press, 1964  |g 89(2008), 1020, Seite 194-213  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)377274860  |w (DE-600)2132190-5  |w (DE-576)258584254  |x 1741-2005  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:89  |g year:2008  |g number:1020  |g pages:194-213 
776 |i Erscheint auch als  |n elektronische Ausgabe  |w (DE-627)1646652495  |k Electronic 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/43251217  |x JSTOR 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2005.2007.00186.x  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1741-2005.2007.00186.x  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4013860104 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1780349025 
LOK |0 005 20211204043410 
LOK |0 008 211204||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2021-12-03#64390472C18407B8ECB37F2BBA381B0311899038 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/43251217 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
SUB |a REL