Tag: Perfect

The following is an excerpt from my Master’s thesis on first Corinthians 1: 17-25. This will be a quick discussion on the phrase “Christ crucified” found in verse 23. I will follow with a closing word. _____________________ This phrase serves as the content of the proclamation of foolishness, back in verse 21. The term Christ crucified is a perfect passive participle, and it is functioning as an adjectival- substantive participle, meaning the one who was crucified. The perfect participle carries the force of,” … describing an event that, completed in the past …,” and “… has results existing in the present time”…

Helmut Thielicke offers an important anthropological distinction, one that stems early on from someone as astute as Irenaeus, and then becomes appropriated and modified by someone as seismic, in the Latin church, as Thomas Aquinas. If this is not understood as a basic theological-anthropological datum vis-à-vis some form of classical theism, engaging with the theological past into the present will become immediately unintelligible—which I would suggest is why so much of popular apologetics and theologics that we see pervasive, particularly in the online theological world, ends up being an exercise in futility. I digress. Let’s hear from Thielicke on this all-important…

Kenneth Oakes’ book Karl Barth on Philosophy and Theology, which I reviewed a few years ago for the blog, presses the same point that Keith Johnson does in his book Karl Barth and the Analogia Entis. The point is the way Barth sees the relationship between philosophy and theology; he doesn’t, not in the way that post-mediaeval classical theism does in its effort to synthesize so-called faith-and-reason. This is one of the primary factors that has drawn me to Barth over the years. His prolegomenon is conditioned solely by what he considers to be both the formal and material principle…