Page History

...

4. Because of the first of these necessary presuppositions, a priori christology, properly understood, is more than simply thought and speech about the decisive re-presentation of the meaning of ultimate reality for us, or, as may also be said, the explicit, primal, ontic source authorizing a particular faith/witness of faith/religion. Although a priori christology is indeed thought and speech about such a decisive re-presentation or source of authorization, the converse statement is false: thought and speech about such a re-presentation or source mayor may not be a priori christology. It is a priori christology, properly so-called, if, and only if, it presupposes that the decisive re-presentation or source of authorization – -- whatever else it is – -- is a fully real human being, and not someone or something else.

...

In other places, however, I take the concept in question to be "being the explicit primal (ontic) source of authority authorizing authentic human existence." Not surprisingly, then, there are still other places where I can say that it is both concepts \-\- that all ways of understanding Jesus christologically, whether mythological or legendary, "must be understood as indirect experience of Jesus as decisive for human existence \-\- as the explicit primal \[ontic\] source of Christian existence and of an authentic human existence."

...