TRANSFORMING THEOLOGICAL SYMBOLS

Authors

  • F. LeRon Shults

    1. Professor of theology and philosophy at the University of Agder, Institute of Religion, Philosophy and History, Serviceboks 422, Lundsiden, Building 13, 4604 Kristiansand, Norway, and scientific director of the interdisciplinary and interreligious “Transforming Compassion” project at Stiftlesen Arkivet, a peacebuilding institute in Norway; e-mail leron.shults@uia.no.
    Search for more papers by this author

  • with Andrew Robinson and Christopher Southgate, “Introduction to Part 2”; Andrew Robinson and Christopher Southgate, “Semiotics as a Metaphysical Framework for Christian Theology”; F. LeRon Shults, “Transforming Theological Symbols”; Andrew Robinson and Christopher Southgate, “Broken Symbols? Response to F. LeRon Shults”; Jeremy T. Law, “Toward a Theology of Boundary”; Philip Clayton, “Critical Afterword”

Abstract.

In this essay I explore the need for transforming the Christian theological symbols of the Trinity, Incarnation, and Redemption, which arose in the context of neo-Platonic metaphysics, in light of late modern, especially Peircean, metaphysics and categories. I engage and attempt to complement the proposal by Andrew Robinson and Christopher Southgate (in this issue of Zygon) with insights from the Peircean-inspired philosophical theology of Robert Neville. I argue that their proposal can be strengthened by acknowledging the way in which theological symbols themselves have a transformative (pragmatic) effect as they are “taken” in context and “break” on the Infinite.

Ancillary