I'm intrigued by what I've learned of Rahner. I'd like to know if he described any specific spiritual practices to experience his philosophy in one's life. This is something that I appreciate about some Eastern religions, is the instruction of a path to enlightenment. Christian theology can at times feel overly cerebral and disembodied.
Prof. Kilby explains the Vorgriff well and rightly critiques misinterpretations of Rahner. However, her portrayal of the traditional nature/grace distinction is worse than a caricature; it's inaccurate. It's not a matter simply of whether you can experience grace in your concrete life; it's whether the grace received is SUPERnatural, raising one up. Rahner maintains the distinction; he simply explains nature's openness to receiving grace more positively via the Vorgriff concept.
Have you seen a more correct presentation of the concept in video or audio form (podcast, conference, etc)? Thank you, I'm very interested in exploring this apprehension of being further, but I don't read books much anymore, preferring the audio format. Is she doing a better job here: ua-cam.com/video/ZWeqGTaxJFM/v-deo.html&ab_channel=UniversityofNottingham
Rahner was lost in a world of subjectivity. A true Modernist, he clearly contradicted the plain sense of Scripture that Christ was physically raised from the dead and that we ourselves will rise in our present bodies to share God’s Glory.
@@robertwansink4996yes, the point of the resurrection is of the body, understanding that the soul is immortal; notwithstanding the entry into heavenly glory
Thank you Karen Kilby.
I'm intrigued by what I've learned of Rahner. I'd like to know if he described any specific spiritual practices to experience his philosophy in one's life. This is something that I appreciate about some Eastern religions, is the instruction of a path to enlightenment. Christian theology can at times feel overly cerebral and disembodied.
Prof. Kilby explains the Vorgriff well and rightly critiques misinterpretations of Rahner. However, her portrayal of the traditional nature/grace distinction is worse than a caricature; it's inaccurate. It's not a matter simply of whether you can experience grace in your concrete life; it's whether the grace received is SUPERnatural, raising one up. Rahner maintains the distinction; he simply explains nature's openness to receiving grace more positively via the Vorgriff concept.
Have you seen a more correct presentation of the concept in video or audio form (podcast, conference, etc)? Thank you, I'm very interested in exploring this apprehension of being further, but I don't read books much anymore, preferring the audio format. Is she doing a better job here: ua-cam.com/video/ZWeqGTaxJFM/v-deo.html&ab_channel=UniversityofNottingham
The last point is absolutely traditional in Orthodox theology.
Rahner was lost in a world of subjectivity. A true Modernist, he clearly contradicted the plain sense of Scripture that Christ was physically raised from the dead and that we ourselves will rise in our present bodies to share God’s Glory.
You might want to reread the pertinent texts yourself. According to Saint Paul, Christ was raised a *spiritual* body, not a physical.
@@vaska1999 The body in which Christ died on the cross is the same body he rose in on the third day.
@@robertwansink4996yes, the point of the resurrection is of the body, understanding that the soul is immortal; notwithstanding the entry into heavenly glory