Heschel and I disagreed strongly about what Jews and Christians, qua Jew and
qua Christian, must disagree about, namely, the person and work of Jesus in the purposes of the God of Israel.
But liberal versions of Christianity, which can be both theologically and politically conservative, assume that what it means to be Christian
qua Christian is to have no enemies peculiar to being Christian.
Not exact matches
You called me out as being disingenuous when I said «that as time goes on however, I'm finding things that are helping to disprove things previously held as fact among
Christians», so I have provided you an example that not only wasn't it a disingenuous statement, but that I've done my homework, on both sides of the argument, and came up with something that no one has been able to give me a response with even either the slightest chance of being possible, or falling back to the old status
qua of «mysterious ways» and «having faith».
On the other hand, as memoria, faith makes it clear that
Christian faith is a dogmatic faith which is tied to a certain content, a fides
quae creditur.
He points to women's ordination as a sine
qua non for women's rights, and castigates
Christian denominations that don't allow it.
It is prevenient to the gospel and it is the sine
qua non for communicating the nature of the
Christian world - view.
The point is that
Christian faith is not reducible to a noncognitive «blik,» or to a subjective form (fides
qua creditur) alone.
A genuine ecclesial life is in fact the sine
qua non of the very thing Mr. Benne thinks missing from neo-Augustinian ecclesiology, the impulse to provide a comprehensive
Christian witness to the world.