Theology

Martin Luther's sharp distinction between human (inherent) and divine (forensic) righteousness necessitates a division of two levels of virtue within 'two Kingdoms': civic virtue acquired through action and proper motivation in the Earthly Kingdom and infused virtue, which is a participation in the perfect virtue of Christ in the Heavenly Kingdom, the ultimate perfection of which is not infused but imputed to the believer. 1 This distinction between the virtue of the Earthly and Heavenly Kingdoms is reflected in a series of altarpieces commissioned by Luther from the court painter for the Electors of Saxony, Lucas Cranach the Elder. The series is known 1 Luther refers to the inherent righteousness of faith as a 'little spark' of righteousness which depends upon the imputation of Christ's righteousness: 'Fides est quidem iustitia formalis, et tamen non est satis quia … Fides enim non dat Deo formaliter satis, quia est imperfecta, Imo vix est scintilla fidei quae incipit Deo tribuere divinitatem. Primitias spiritus tantum accepimus, non decimas. Neque ratio tota occiditur in hac vita. Ideo in nobis reliqua est adhuc concupiscentia, ira, impatientia et alii fructus carnis ac infidelitis … Concludimus ergo ex his verbis: 'Et imputatum est illi ad iustitiam.' Iustitiam quidem incipere per fidem ac per eam nos habere primitias spiritus, sed quia fides infirma est, eam non perfici sine imputatione Dei. Quare fides iustitiam incipit, imputatio perficit usque ad diem Christi.' WA 40/I:364; LW 26:230.

Peter Martyr Vermigli's elevation of faith over charity displays similarities and differences with Aquinas and other medieval authors. For Aquinas, faith does not perceive its object and thus denotes an uncertain assent to imperfectly revealed truths. Aquinas posits a reordering of will and intellect in order to explain how faith is more certain than 'scientia.' Vermigli on the other hand attempts to maintain the natural order between intellect and will in virtuous action (i.e., natural law) even for the theological virtues. Vermigli likens faith to vision and practical wisdom arguing that God illuminates the mind to make the object of faith apprehendable to the judgment of reason. This perspective presents a more optimistic account of temporal intellectual perfection via grace.

This volume sheds new light on Cusanus’ relationship to early modernity by focusing on the reform of church, the reform of theology, the reform of perspective, and the reform of method – which together aim to encompass the breadth and depth of Cusanus’ own reform initiatives. In particular, in examining the way in which he served as inspiration for a wide and diverse array of reform-minded philosophers, ecclesiastics, theologians, and lay scholars in the midst of their struggle for the renewal and restoration of the individual, society, and the world, our volume combines a focus on Cusanus as a paradigmatic thinker with a study of his concrete influence on early modern thought. This volume is aimed at scholars working in the field of late medieval and early modern philosophy, theology, and history of science.
As the first Anglophone volume to explore the early modern reception of Nicholas of Cusa, this work will provide an important complement to a growing number of companions focusing on his life and thought.

Scholarly treatments of Peter Sterry and the Cambridge Platonists often view their reception of Platonism as radically different from their Puritan or Calvinist contemporaries. This essay focuses on three individuals, John Sherman, Girolamo Zanchi, and Peter Sterry, in order to clarify the variety of opinions regarding the value of Platonism for Christian theology among Protestant theologians in the Early Modern period. An example of this comes from John Sherman's use of the Reformed scholastic, Girolamo Zanchi in a treatise that he delivered in the Trinity College chapel in 1641. In this treatise entitled A Greek in the Temple, Sherman argues for a pious reception of pagan wisdom based on the concept of perennial philosophy, ideas which led the early 20th century historian J.B. Mullinger to conclude that Sherman was the original influence behind Cambridge Platonism. Yet, Sherman claims to receive many of these ideas from Zanchi, an Aristotelian who recommends Ficino and Steuco's works in his writings and refers to Plotinus as “homo Christianus.” Peter Sterry was undoubtably familiar with Zanchi, though Sterry takes greater liberty in the ideas that he borrows from the Platonists and he rejects the Aristotelian method in favor of the method of coincidence developed by Nicholas Cusanus.

Reformed philosophers utilized, across the board, a participatory ontology, that is to say, they promoted a philosophy that centered on the idea that created being participates in the divine Being. From John Calvin’s use of philosophy to Philip Melanchthon Reformed philosophers were broadly Augustinian in their notion of union with God. This presentation shows how two lesser known theologians, Girolamo Zanchi (16th cent.) and the Cambridge Platonist, Peter Sterry (17th) made use of an explicitly Platonic metaphysics to articulate a participatory ontology.

Romans and the Corinthians have helped theologians over the centuries develop theological thought and dialogue. However, in his writings Paul, like other Biblical authors never used the term "trinity", this is no real surprise as the term was not widespread in the Biblical text itself and was not entirely defined until the Nicene Council where it was defined by what it is not. 1 However, some secular scholars, and even some "Christian" scholars attest that Paul along with other New Testament writers were not Trinitarian at all. Paul, prior to his conversion was a well educated Jew, he was as stated in Acts 23:6 "a Pharisee, a son of Pharisee's", so it is without doubt that Paul was more than familiar with the Jewish law and a devout Jew. He was a monotheist, and this is what some critics will point to towards their arguments that Paul was not in fact Trinitarian. Yet we know that Paul was Trinitarian, he was an Apostle of Jesus Christ, one whom had a personal encounter with Jesus following the death and resurrection of Christ, in this paper we will look at how the Apostle

Genesis 1, the creation story, and this is where the triune God speaks man into existence. It is a common theme in Christian circles and traditions to affirm that all of mankind is created in the image of our heavenly Father, it is an easy affirmation that gives validity and meaning to human beings, separating us from the rest of creation, affirming that we are not merely another animal, but we were given dominion over all of creation by God in the beginning. 1 Verse 26 continues "And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." When God created man, he created them, both man and woman in His own likeness, and he gave mankind a task, he gave mankind a job, to have dominion over all of the earth and over all of creation. This is a God given task and God given distinction given only to man, not to any other creature within creation. This separates man from all other creatures in creation. The Lord in his infinite wisdom and goodness separated man from other creation, giving him dignity and domain like no other. Yet, even with this divine commandment, as we know man fell short, sin entered the world through the first of mankind, Adam and Eve. Even though sin has entered the world and sin has made our ability to be image bearers like the Lord intended and to have domain like the Lord intended impossible, we still have that sacred responsibility and privilege. Sin has affected every aspect of creation, but it has not totally destroyed it. In this essay we will explore the initial plan for God's creation, man's ability to be an image bearer and our distinction of having dominion over the rest of creation.

The essay delves into the theological implications of the Day of the Lord as portrayed in the book of Amos. Set against the backdrop of social injustice, economic exploitation, and religious corruption in the Northern Kingdom of Israel during the 8th century BCE, Amos's prophetic message serves as a sobering reminder of God's covenantal relationship with His people and the consequences of covenant unfaithfulness. The Day of the Lord, often perceived as a time of divine judgment and intervention, is intricately woven into Amos's warnings of impending doom for Israel. While the people of Israel anticipated this day as a time of triumph over their enemies, Amos challenges their misconceptions, revealing that the Day of the Lord will bring judgment upon Israel itself for its sins. Through vivid imagery and prophetic warnings, Amos highlights the urgency of repentance and reconciliation as the only path to avert the impending judgment. Despite the impending doom, there is a glimmer of hope for restoration and redemption, rooted in God's unwavering faithfulness to His covenant promises. The Day of the Lord, while a day of darkness and judgment, also holds the promise of reconciliation and renewal for those who turn back to God in repentance, offering a glimpse of hope amidst the impending judgment. Through Amos's prophetic message, the essay underscores the tension between divine judgment and divine mercy, ultimately pointing towards the redemptive purposes of God and His desire to reconcile His people