Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 16

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Boethius
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
PL
Po upływie prawie siedmiuset lat od śmierci Boecjusza św. Tomasz z Akwinu pojawia się, aby skomentować dwa dzieła Boecjusza: De Trinitate i De Hebdomadibus. W ostatnich latach XX wieku komentarze Akwinaty wzbudziły wiele dyskusji i pytań wśród uczonych. Stawiano pytanie: dlaczego Akwinata podjął komentowanie tych tekstów Boecjusza. Niektórzy uczeni, tacy jak Marian Kurdziałek, polski filozof, argumentowali, że intencją Akwinaty było pozbycie się starej metody argumentacji, która dominowała zarówno w filozofii, jak i teologii. Inni uczeni, tacy jak Etienne Gilson, Pierre Duhem i Cornelio Fabro, krytykowali Akwinatę, argumentując, że wykorzystał teksty Boecjusza jako platformę do stworzenia metafizyki, która była zupełnie inną. Ostatnia grupa uczonych, takich jak Ralph McInerny, odrzuca powyższe zarzuty i twierdzenia. Autor artykuł włącza się do toczącej się debaty, argumentując, że komentarze Akwinaty do Boecjusza miały na celu rozwinięcie dalszych argumentów przeciwko heretykom, którzy żyli w jego czasach na tle autorytetu jakim był Boecjusz, który według Timothy’ego Noone reprezentowal charakterystyczny styl uczonego od dwunastego do siedemnastego wieku. W dalszej części artykułu poruszono kwestię, czy komentarze Akwinaty były poprawnymi interpretacjami tekstów Boecjusza. W swojej ocenie Autor artykułu twierdzi, że interpretacje tekstów Boecjusza dokonane przez św. Tomasza z Akwinu jest wiarygodna i może być najlepszym komentarzem do Boecjusza. Należy jednak uwzględnić modyfikacje wynikające z różnych kultur naukowych, które panowały w czasach dwóch wielkich uczonych.
EN
Nearly seven hundred years after the death of Boethius, Saint Thomas Aquinas appears to comment on the two works of Boethius: De Trinitate and De Hebdomadibus. In the last years of the 20th century, Aquinas’ comments aroused many discussions and questions among scholars. The question was asked why Aquinas was commenting on the texts of Boethius. Some scholars, such as Marian Kurdziałek, a Polish philosopher, argued that Aquinas intended to get rid of the old method of argumentation that dominated both philosophy and theology. Other scholars, such as Etienne Gilson, Pierre Duhem and Cornelio Fabro, criticized Aquinas, arguing that he used the texts of Boethius as a platform to create a metaphysics that was completely different. The last group of scholars, such as Ralph McInerny, rejects these allegations and claims. The article author joins the ongoing debate, arguing that Aquinas’s comments to Boethius aimed to develop further arguments against the heretics who lived in his time upon the authority of Boethius, who according to Timothy Noone represented the characteristic style of the scholars from the twelfth to the seventeenth century. The other part of the article discusses the question of whether Aquinas’ comments were correct interpretations of Boethius’ texts. In his opinion, the author of the article claims that the interpretations of the texts of Boethius made by Saint Thomas Aquinas is credible and may be the best commentary on Boethius. But, it is necessary to keep in mind the modifications resulting from various scientific cultures that prevailed in the time of the two great scholars.
EN
The theory of “music of the spheres” (musicamundana) introduced by Boethius in his treaty De institutione musica is an original contribution in development of mediaeval theory of music. However, it’s roots trace back to the Greek antiquity. When considering the sources of medieval theory of musicamundana, one shall underline three most important sources: (1) mythology with its complex cosmogony (esp. by Homer and Hesiod), (2) early cosmology by pre-Socratic philosophers (incl. Anaximander, Heraclit), (3) Pythagorean school. Despite of the fact that idea of the music of the spheres – as presented by the Pythagoreans – was criticized by Aristotle in his De caelo, it became one of the most infl uential cosmological concept. One of the most important periods – from the point of view of the reception of discussed theory – is the twelfth century. It is often called the aetas Boethiana as it is distinguished by an increased interest in the works of Boethius, with special emphasis on his theological writings and Consolatio, which was very popular at the time. The reason behind this phenomenon was a growing specialization of issues relating to the theory of music, which fi nally led to its independence from the other areas of knowledge; yet this is not the only reason why the subject of the harmony of the spheres was again widely discussed in philosophical circles. An essential factor was the development of Neo-platonic philosophical schools, such as the famous School of Chartres. The interest in natural sciences in the School of Chartres and later in the Oxford School made the scientists of the time focus on the works of authors whose ideas were essential to the concept of the harmony of the spheres, among them such philosophers as Calcidius, Macrobius and Boethius
|
2020
|
vol. 9
|
issue 1
167-188
EN
The article is an attempt to answer the question of why Aquinas stops his commentary on Boethius’s De Trinitate at question six, article four, whereas this is before the point in the treatise where Boethius gets to the heart of the subject matter. The author shows that Aquinas (1) decides to do so because the treatise cannot afford him the means of demonstrating the existence of the Trinity, (2) holds that, although rational explanations could be given in terms of proof of God’s existence, one cannot come to the knowledge of the truth of the existence of the Trinity by reason alone, and (3) concludes that, although we cannot prove the doctrine of the existence of the Trinity through philosophical demonstration, we can, however, show that this doctrine and other doctrines known through the light of faith are not contradictory.
Logos i Ethos
|
2014
|
issue 1(36)
111–128
EN
The aim of this paper is to present metaphilosophical issues in Boethius’s De consolatione. His work takes up and continues the discussion of some ways of understanding philosophy and dimensions of philosophy, the sources of which are in the ancient tradition. In this paper I am going to point out that for Boethius philosophy is an art and a way of life. Having made this assumption, two other aspects of philosophy can be considered – the “tragic” and the “therapeutic” ones. While philosophical therapy has been frequently discussed by scholars as a dimension of Boethius’s “love of wisdom”, the “tragic” and “the way of life” aspects have not been rightly appreciated in their unity. The close relationship of these ways of understanding philosophy is evidenced by the fact, that their presentation in Boethius’s work takes the form of the sequence of events. At first we can see philosophy as a way of life, next there is a tragic end, and finally we can see philosophical therapy as a reaction to the tragedy. This paper aims at resolving the problem of philosophical ethos which combines the multidimensional approach to philosophy and makes the drama of “the way of life” so closely linked to the need of consolation.
EN
The theory of “music of the spheres” (musica mundana) introduced by Boethius in his treaty De institutione musica is an original contribution in development of mediaeval theory of music. However, it’s roots trace back to the Greek antiquity. When considering the sources of medieval theory of musica mundana, one shall underline three most important sources: (1) mythology with its complex cosmogony (esp. by Homer and Hesiod), (2) early cosmology by pre-Socratic philosophers (incl. Anaximander, Heraclit), (3) Pythagorean school. Despite of the fact that idea of the music of the spheres – as presented by the Pythagoreans – was criticized by Aristotle in his De caelo, it became one of the most influential cosmological concept. One of the most striking results of this situation is the fact, that for many ages (during mediaeval era) music was regarded as a scientific discipline, despite its aesthetical dimension.
PL
The theory of “music of the spheres” (musica mundana) introduced by Boethius in his treaty De institutione musica is an original contribution in development of mediaeval theory of music. However, it’s roots trace back to the Greek antiquity. When considering the sources of medieval theory of musica mundana, one shall underline three most important sources: (1) mythology with its complex cosmogony (esp. by Homer and Hesiod), (2) early cosmology by pre-Socratic philosophers (incl. Anaximander, Heraclit), (3) Pythagorean school. Despite of the fact that idea of the music of the spheres – as presented by the Pythagoreans – was criticized by Aristotle in his De caelo, it became one of the most influential cosmological concept. One of the most striking results of this situation is the fact, that for many ages (during mediaeval era) music was regarded as a scientific discipline, despite its aesthetical dimension.
EN
The article undertakes to interpret two poetical pieces by Mikołaj Sęp Szarzyński: Pieśń o Frydruszu and Epitaphium Boleslao Audaci, Regi Poloniae, while including considerations contained in Czesław Hernas’s Barok (along with the scholar’s other synthesis, Literatura baroku). The said texts are interpreted in the context of epic tradition and those traditions that relate to Bolesław Śmiały (Szczodry; king of Poland, Bolesław II the Bold or the Generous) and also to the impact of Boethius’s thought. Another issue analysed by the author is the method of comparing Sęp Szarzyński’s works in the both mentioned syntheses by Hernas.
EN
The term “nature” in the Middle Ages was used (not to say: overused) commonly to denote a lot of things, often mutually exclusive. The source of this confusion seems, at least in the thirteenth century, the “educational” heritage of Boethius, from whom the divisions of nature and the Aristotle’s metaphysics were taught. They were studied diligently at the beginning of this century. Analyzing the views of nature in the texts of Saint. Thomas, it’s hard not to get the impression that Aquinas is not talking much about it. Not only does he not incorporate the concept of nature into his existential metaphysics, but he does not even do anything to sort out the terminological confusion that Aristotle and Boethius have introduced to the problems of nature. Calling „natural” the things that are mutually exclusive is causing trouble to himself. In the Treatise of Man he recognizes reason and the freedom resulting from it as the most important distinguishing features of a human being. As far as the freedom derives from rationality, obviously state of slave is totally unnatural. However, in the Treatise on Marriage, Thomas writes about slavery as a punishment imposing for original sin, which has been prescribed by law, but comes from natural law, as something determined from the determining.
EN
The article is devoted to little known and rarely appreciated late-Baroque Dominican Jan Alan Bardziński who was a keen preacher and translator of bothsecular and religious texts. Bardziński’s literary activity is strongly connected to his duties performed in the order as one of the main values he searches for in his texts is of a didactic nature. Simultaneously, he may certainly be perceived as an adapter of some ancient works which puts him among other 17th and 18th-century followers of the culture of Classicism. In the article we briefly discuss his works and provide the readers with their distinctive features. Moreover, we shall take into consideration Bardziński’s notes which allow us to define his goals and priorities and underline the moral values included in his works.
EN
The eminent German medievalist, Joseph Koch, assumed that Neoplatonism had been handed down to the Middle Ages basically in two forms: the one given to the Neoplatonist outlook by St. Augustine, the other being the result of the reworking of Neoplatonist themes by Pseudo-Dionysius. Rev. Prof. Kurdziałek, when quoting Koch’s opinion, used to remark, that this bipartite typology was not adequate as it failed to take account of another variety of Neoplatonism that had been operative in the shaping of medieval intellectual culture, namely the Boethian Neoplatonism. Few scholars in Poland in the second half of the 20th century devoted much attention to Boethius’ philosophy; yet contrary to the general trend, Rev. Prof. Kurdziałek constantly discussed issues and themes concerning Boethius in his lectures, monographs and articles. The author of the Consolation of Philosophy was never viewed by him as a mere intermediary or transmitter standing between antiquity and the Middle Ages; rather he presented Boethius as a thinker that was seminal in shaping medieval philosophy up to and inclusive the 12th century and even later on, even though his later influence had not been predominant. This article, based upon the study and analysis of Rev. Prof. Kurdziałek’s output aims to present his contribution to the area of Boethian studies as well as contributions made in this field by his disciples and followers.
PL
Wybitny mediewista niemiecki, Joseph Koch twierdził, że neoplatonizm został przekazany wiekom średnim w dwóch zasadniczych postaciach, a mianowicie augustyńskiej i dionizjańskiej. Ksiądz profesor Marian Kurdziałek nawiązując do tej wypowiedzi Josepha Kocha zwykł był mawiać, że tę typologię średniowiecznych nurtów neoplatońskich należy uzupełnić o jeszcze jedną odmianę neoplatonizmu, neoplatonizm boecjański. W drugiej połowie XX wieku filozofią Boecjusza zajmowało się, zwłaszcza w Polsce, niewielu badaczy. Tymczasem, ks. Kurdziałek stale poświęcał Boecjuszowi wiele uwagi w swoich wykładach kursorycznych i monograficznych, czy też w swoich artykułach. Boecjusz nie był przez niego traktowany jako jedynie „pośrednik” pomiędzy starożytnością a średniowieczem, ale jako ten myśliciel, który w sposób zasadniczy uformował filozofię średniowieczną do XII wieku włącznie, a i później jego wpływ jest widoczny, choć już nie tak dominujący. Artykuł na podstawie analizy artykułów ks. prof. Kurdziałka przedstawia jego wkład do studiów nad Boecjuszem oraz prezentuje dokonania jego uczniów w tej właśnie dziedzinie.
EN
A.S. Boethius in each of the five books of his philosophical treatise De consolatione philosophiae included poetic fragments, the so-called meters, a total of 39. In the Carolingian era, an anonymous composer created melodies to the first words of these meters, initiating a tradition, evidence of which is found in more than 30 manuscript sources in Western Europe. There are many indications that this practice served a didactic purpose: it was intended to make it easier for students to recite ancient poetry. In the 15th century, most probably in Cracow, another tradition was born, which assigned different melodies to the same meters. So far, eight old prints with handwritten notes of those melodies have been found. Interestingly, the two traditions do not intermix. Moreover, the “Polish” melodies were developed polyphonically, possibly by Jerzy Liban of Legnica (c. 1464 – after 1546). The content of the books in which the “Polish” melodies are recorded also points to the didactic purpose of this practice. This article is an attempt to compare the repertoire of both traditions.
PL
A.S. Boecjusz w każdej z pięciu ksiąg traktatu filozoficznego De consolatione philosophiae umieścił fragmenty poetyckie, tzw. metra – łącznie 39. W epoce karolińskiej, do pierwszych słów tych metrów anonimowy kompozytor stworzył melodie, zapoczątkowując tradycję, której dowody znajdują się w ponad 30 źródłach rękopiśmiennych Europy Zachodniej. Wiele wskazuje na to, że praktyka taka służyła celom dydaktycznym: miała ułatwić uczniom recytację antycznej poezji. W XV w., najprawdopodobniej w Krakowie, narodziła się inna tradycja, która tym samym metrom przydała odmienne melodie. Dotąd udało się odnaleźć osiem starodruków z odręcznie zapisanymi przekazami tych melodii. Co interesujące, obie tradycje nie przenikają się wzajemnie. Ponadto, melodie „polskie” zostały opracowane polifonicznie, być może przez Jerzego Libana z Legnicy (ok. 1464 – po 1546). Treść ksiąg, w których widnieją zapisy melodii, również wskazuje na cel dydaktyczny tej praktyki. Niniejszy artykuł jest próbą porównania repertuaru obu tradycji.
|
2019
|
vol. 53
|
issue 2
47-78
EN
The author, referring to the presence of Boethius’ thought (The Consolation of Philosophy – De consolatione philosophiae) in the poetry of Mikołaj Sęp Szarzyński (c. 1550–c. 1581), indicates the presence of the “Model of the Universe” (Clive S. Lewis), Aristotelian vision of the cosmos (Edward Grant) in his work, consistently omitted in Czesław Hernas’ academic textbooks Barok, earlier in the book of Jan Błoński. This non-inclusion leads to misleading interpretations, especially in the context of the theological dimension of this poetry. This sort of literary criticism led to the controversial status of the poet in the history of ancient Polish literature. Sęp Szarzyński took up the tradition of using the Model, even pagan, in the interest of religious content, his faith. The model based on Aristotle’s doctrine brings religious certainty. In fact it strengthens it, but does not weaken faith.
PL
Autor, nawiązując do obecności myśli Boecjusza („O pocieszeniu, jakie daje filozofia”) w poezji Sępa-Szarzyńskiego (ok. 1550–ok 1581), wskazuje na obecność Modelu (C.S. Lewis), arystotelesowskiej wizji kosmosu (E. Grant) w jego twórczości, konsekwentnie pomijanego w podręczniki akademickim Czesława Hernasa, wcześniej zaś w książce Jana Błońskiego. Nieobecność ta prowadzi do mylących interpretacji, zwłaszcza w kontekście teologicznego wymiaru tej poezji. Prowadziła także do kontrowersyjnego statusu poety w historii dawnej literatury polskiej. Sęp podejmuje tradycję korzystania z wyobrażeń Modelu, jeszcze pogańskich, w interesie treści religijnych, swej wiary. Model oparty na doktrynie Arystotelesa przynosi pewność, wzmacnia, nie osłabia wiarę.
PL
De praedestinatione Eriugeny miało być jego głosem w kontrowersji wywołanej przez Gott­schalka z Orbais wokół predestynacji. Dzieło to, choć odrzucało poglądy Gottschalka na temat podwójnej predestynacji, spotkało się z ostrą krytyką i potępieniem. Jednym z powodów takiego stanu rzeczy było niewątpliwie Eriugeny specyficzne rozumienie wolności woli, czemu przyjrzę się w innym tekście. Tutaj chciałabym się skupić na drugiej, istotnej przyczynie od­rzucenia dzieła Eriugeny, którą był — jak sądzę — jego prescholastyczny projekt racjonalizacji wiary w duchu św. Augustyna, ale z zastosowaniem „metody” Boecjusza i Capelli. Wydaje się, że współcześni Eriugeny nie byli jeszcze gotowi na przyjęcie jego idei vera philosophia, która zarazem jest vera religio. Mistrzami Eriugeny byli tutaj Ojcowie Kościoła i jego intencją było kontynuowanie na swój własny sposób ich drogi zrozumienia wiary.
EN
The De praedestinatione of John Scottus Eriugena was intended as a con­tribution to a con­troversy sparked off by Gottschalk of Orbais concerning predestination. This work met with tren­chant criticism and condemnation even though it firmly rejected Gottschalk’s views on double predestination. One of the reasons for this hostile reception was undoubtedly Eriugena’s singular con­ception of the freedom of will, a subject I intend to discuss elsewhere. In the present text, however, I would like to focus on another important cause of the rejection of Eriugena’s treatise. In my opinion, this second reason was a pre-scholastic project of rationalization of the faith in the spirit of St. Au­gu­stine and using the method of Boethius and Martianus Capella. It would ap­pear that Eriugena’s contemporaries were not ready for the favorable reception of his idea of the vera philosophia that was the same as the vera religio. Yet, as Goulven Madec once rightly observed, the vera ratio of Scotus was closely bound up with the lux mentium which is nothing else than God revealing himself in the human language of the Scriptures. Eriugena’s masters and models were the Church Fathers and his intention was to continue their efforts to achieve an under­stand­ing of the faith in his own, personal way.
PL
Śmierć jest jednym z ważniejszych tematów filozoficznych już od czasów antycznych. Niniejszy artykuł jest próbą analizy ostatniego dzieła Boecjusza Consolatio philosophiae właśnie w kontekście problematyki śmierci. Artykuł dzieli się na dwie części, w których autor najpierw stara się przedstawić punkt widzenia poprzedników Boecjusza. Wśród nich do najważniejszych postaci należą: Platon, Plotyn, św. Augustyn i Proklos. Dzięki temu w drugiej części analiza fragmentów Consolatio… odnoszących się do śmierci, zyskuje swoją głębię i zarazem jasność.
EN
Death has been one of the major themes of philosophy since the ancient times. The article attempts to analyze last works of Boethius Consolatio philosophiae with particular reference to this subject. It is divided into two parts in which the author tries to present Boethius predecessors’ point of view such as Plato, Plotinus, St. Augustine and Proclus. Consequently, the second part of the fragments’ enquiry related to death finds its depth and clarity.
EN
While expressing his innovative theory of existence (esse) as an act of being in many his texts Thomas Aqunas recalls different historical sources to support his thesis: Aristotle’s views, Arabic philosophers’ depictions, mainly of Avicenna, Boethius’ distinction entia quo od entia quod and some theses of Liber de causis. In earlier subject literature, mainly Gilson’s influence (in Poland it was under Krąpiec’s influence) adopted a view about religious inspirations of Thomas’ thesis and that the only philosophical way to his thesis is an analysis of Avicenna’s depictions which are contained mainly in work De ente et essentia. Every other Thomas’recalls should be treated as some earlier ploy for a protection against possible reservations. The first statement which arises during the analysis of historical sources which Thomas refer to expressing his theory of existence (esse) as an act of being is ascertaining that reasoning is a crucial argument to accept esse as an act of being. It should be emphasized that in his theory of esse Thomas Aquinas does not refer to argument of Revelation. The result is that Thomas expressed this thesis only in a philosophical area within the analysis of structure of real being. The attitudes which are recalled sometimes are used by Thomas Aquinas as a background or context by which he states his view. Recalled statements sometimes are a reference to the authority. It seems that the erudition recalled by Thomas in a matter which is interesting for us appears in a different aspects. That is why it should be make a fuss of that the issue of existence (esse) did not appear with Thomas Aquinas’ metaphysics or Avicenna’s metaphysics. It seems that it was on the contrary: the issue of existence (esse) was worrying Plato and earlier philosophers, Aristotle, and Neoplatonists, Boethius and Arabic philosophers. So Thomas’ thesis about existence (esse) as an act of being is a result of the analysis of the issue which is existed in the history of philosophy
15
57%
Roczniki Filozoficzne
|
2018
|
vol. 66
|
issue 4
99-114
EN
This paper discusses the main lines of medieval Latin approaches to future contingents with some remarks on Marcin Tkaczyk’s paper “The antinomy of future contingent events.” Tkaczyk’s theory shows some similarity with the general frame of the views of Ockham and Scotus, the difference being that while medieval authors argued for the temporal necessity of the past, Tkaczyk is sceptical of the general validity of this necessity. Ockham’s theological view was that God eternally has an intuitive and immutable knowledge of all possibilities as well as whether they are ever actualized or not (PANACCIO & PICHÉ 2010). The content of God’s past knowledge attitude remains contingent before the free choice takes place because God’s knowledge could be different similarly as the truth-value of the proposition. While Ockham held that no past or present thing follows from future things as an effect follows from its cause, this causal link is defended by Tkaczyk. Later thinkers thought that the doctrine of the scientia media sheds light on this question; perhaps it is easier to understand than the retroactive model which is not contradictory but difficult to imagine, as Tkaczyk concludes his paper.
PL
Artykuł omawia główne średniowieczne ujęcia zagadnienia przyszłych zdarzeń przygodnych (futura contingentia) z kilkoma uwagami na temat artykułu Marcina Tkaczyka „The antinomy of future contingent events” [„Antynomia przyszłych zdarzeń przygodnych”]. Podejście Tkaczyka wykazuje pewne podobieństwo do ogólnego obrazu poglądów Ockhama i Dunsa Szkota, z tą różnicą, że chociaż średniowieczni autorzy argumentowali za czasową koniecznością przeszłości, Tkaczyk jest sceptyczny wobec ogólej obowiązywalności tej konieczności. Zgodnie z poglądami teologicznymi Ockhama Bóg wiecznie posiada intuicyjną i niezmienną wiedzę o wszystkich możli¬wościach, a także o tym, czy zostaną one kiedykolwiek zaktualizowane, czy też nie (PA¬NACCIO & PICHÉ 2010). Treść przedwiedzy Boga pozostaje przygodna, zanim dokona się wolny wybór, ponieważ wiedza Boga może być inna, podobnie jak wartość logiczna zdania dotyczącego tego wyboru. Podczas gdy Ockham utrzymywał, że zdarzenia przyszłe nie pociągają przeszłych ani teraźniejszych, jak przyczyna pociąga skutek, Tkaczyk broni takiego związku przyczyno¬wego. Późniejsi myśliciele sądzili, że światło na tę kwestię rzuca doktryna scientia media; być może jest ona łatwiejsza do zrozumienia niż model retroaktywny, który — jak konkulduje Tka¬czyk w swoim artykule — choć nie jest sprzeczny, jest trudny do wyobrażenia.
EN
In this article the Author proves existence of an intrinsic and inseparable connection between anthropology and ecclesiology. The necessity of the Church as a community of believers can be demonstrated not only by the will of God explicitly expressed in the Holy Scriptures, but also by an anthropological analyses of the very nature of man, who is a social being opened towards God and towards other human beings. In the first part of the article, referring to a long philosophical tradition dating back to pre-Christian times and ending in the modern era, the Author illustrates by many examples the social dimension of human nature deliberately ignoring the biblical data and the teaching of the Magisterium. In the second part, he shows how the Conciliar teaching on the human person based on the Revelation remains in harmony with philosophical, anthropological and scientific arguments depicting human person as a relational (social) being. In the third part of the article, the Author demonstrates the correlation of the Conciliar teaching on the Church as community with anthropological data. The necessity of the Church can be justified not only by the authority of God (Revelation), but also by reflecting on the man’s nature (anthropology). Individualistic conception of faith, to which the Second Vatican Council wanted to react by its ecclesiology of communion, not only does not correspond to the biblical teaching, but also runs counter to the rational thinking on the human person who, in the light of diff erent sciences, is a relational being.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.