2017-09-06T23:50:47+06:00

This is fuzzy, but let me try to write toward clarity. The great problem for the nouvelle theologie , Rahner, and neo-scholasticism was to preserve the gratuity of grace. If man is created with an inbuilt orientation toward a supernatural fulfillment, then God cannot deny the supernatural fulfillment “without offending against the meaning of this creation and his very creative act” (Rahner). (more…) Read more

2017-09-07T00:02:54+06:00

A friend and former student, Aaron Cummings, writes: “If Ruth is ‘adopted’ as a daughter to Boaz, then her story becomes the reversal of the original story of Moab (Gen. 19). Lot’s younger daughter successfully seduced her father while he slept, and she conceived Moab. Ruth, Elimelech’s younger daughter in law, fails to seduce her ‘father’ while she sleeps. He is honorable and persuades her to behave righteously. In essence, we have the restoration of the Moabite people pictured here.”... Read more

2017-09-07T00:04:05+06:00

A class discussion of Proverbs brought out some interesting points. Proverbs 11:18 says that whoever sows righteousness will receive a sure reward. The verb “sow” is zr’ , the verbal form of “seed.” Righteousness is a seed sown, and the metaphor implies that righteousness is potent. What a seed produces is far greater than itself, and so with righteousness. Righteousness is to its results as the acorn is to the oak. This is the righteousness that surpasses that of the... Read more

2017-09-06T23:48:06+06:00

James Jordan points out that Boaz “adopts” Ruth into his household when he first meets her. The use of the Hebrew na’ar hints at this. Boaz speaks to his na’ar when he first arrives on the scene (2:5), and invites Ruth to drink water along with his na’arim (2:9). In his first conversation with Ruth he tells her to “stay among my maids” ( na’arot ). The Hebrew word can mean young man/young woman as well as servant. Boaz addresses... Read more

2017-09-06T22:51:59+06:00

Boaz calls Ruth “my daughter” (2:8), as does Naomi. This indicates the age difference between them, but also points in a typological direction. After all, Boaz marries his “daughter,” just as Yahweh is both Father and Husband to “Daughter Zion.” Read more

2017-09-07T00:10:22+06:00

Garber notes that Jaques’s “seven ages” speech numerically links the ages of man with “the number of the planets, and the virtues and vices, and the liberal arts.” Specifically the planets: “the schoolboy is mercurial; the lover, venereal; the soldier, martial; the justice, jovial; the old man, saturnine.” Read more

2017-09-07T00:09:16+06:00

Pastoral was a huge fad in Elizabethan England. Marlowe’s brief song of the shepherd exemplifies the conventions of the genre: Come live with me and be my love, And we will all the pleasures prove That valleys, groves, hills, and fields, Woods or steepy mountain yields. (more…) Read more

2017-09-06T22:46:33+06:00

Margaret Garber points out that Arden, the name of the forest in As You Like It , is also the maiden name of Shakespeare’s mother, “so it is arguable that some nostalgia for childhood would double the geographical place with a psychological, or at least a remembered, place of ideal past-ness and fantasy.” Charles the wrestler describes the life of exiled Duke Senior and his pastoral “court” as a “golden world,” an allusion to ancient mythologies of the golden age.... Read more

2017-09-07T00:03:06+06:00

Rusty Reno’s discussion of nature and grace ( The Ordinary Transformed ) is not so satisfying as Jenson’s. Reno says that theology’s challenge is to explain the real relationship between nature and grace without detaching them or conflating them. Too intimate a relationship “implies a partnership between the ordinary and the extraordinary which threatens the sovereign gratuity of grace. How could the extraordinary be truly grace if it were already bound up with the ordinary, whether in the form of... Read more

2017-09-06T23:45:20+06:00

In the second volume of his systematic theology, Robert Jenson summarizes and critiques de Lubac’s theology of nature and grace. He agrees with de Lubac’s conclusion that the supernatural is not owed to nature because “the reverse in the case.” Quoting de lubac: “Nature . . . owes itself to the supernatural if that supernatural is offered to it . . . . The supernatural . . . is (not) explained by nature; . . . nature . . .... Read more

Follow Us!



Browse Our Archives