Versions Compared

Old Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Michelle Rosenstock

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Andrew Scrimgeour

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Scanned PDF Version of this Document

1. The twofold assertion (or the two assertions) constitutive of Christian witness explicitly as such is (or are):

Jesus is (formally) the decisive re-presentation of the meaning of ultimate reality for us ; and
God is (formally) strictly ultimate reality in its meaning for us.

...

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 may or 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.

Wiki Markup5. This is why the formula for any type of a priori christology properly reads:
x, *{_}for any possible value of{_}* x, *{_}can be truly asserted to be ofd ecisive significance for human existence if, and only if{_}*, x *{_}is not only a fully real human being, but also . .._* \[whatever else, according to the type of a priori christology in question, is necessary to _x_'s being the decisive re-presentation of the meaning of ultimate reality for us, or, alternatively, the explicit, primal, ontic source authorizing a particular faith/witness of faith/religion\be of d-ecisive significance for human existence if, and only if, x is not only a fully real human being, but also . .. [whatever else, according to the type of a priori christology in question, is necessary to x's being the decisive re-presentation of the meaning of ultimate reality for us, or, alternatively, the explicit, primal, ontic source authorizing a particular faith/witness of faith/religion].

12 April 2006