|
there must be a pretty narrow definition of christianity at play there because questions of belief itself--you know, pascal, kierkegaard---should be fundamental to a theological debate, and if you are going to allow that, then you have to allow the possibility of unbelief--because it follows---for pascal, belief is a Problem; for kierkegaard, both belief and expressions that refer to it in any meaningful way are Problems. they'd have to exclude the entire tradition of negative theology by extension, and the internal problems within christian theology to do with the relations between finite beings and an (or the) infinite that frame them. they probably would have difficulty with aquinas at the level of the ontological proof---so the forum seems more an applied forum than a philosophical one---so i wonder what they mean by the word "theology"....
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|