Credible because it is silly
Tertullian’s paradoxical statement that Christ’s death is credible because it is silly has been understood as a rejection of human rationality. However, there is scholarly consensus that this interpretation cannot be sustained. This raises the question of how Tertullian’s paradox should then be inte...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis
2024
|
| In: |
Studia theologica
Year: 2024, Volume: 78, Issue: 1, Pages: 106–117 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Tertullian’s paradoxical statement that Christ’s death is credible because it is silly has been understood as a rejection of human rationality. However, there is scholarly consensus that this interpretation cannot be sustained. This raises the question of how Tertullian’s paradox should then be interpreted, which, surprisingly, has received very little attention in research. This article proposes a new interpretation of the famous text: While, according to Tertullian, the incarnation follows directly and necessarily from God being Creator, the crucifixion and death of the Son constitute a genuine paradox. It should not have been possible, given who God is. Nevertheless, this impossible event happened, and did so with the same necessity as did the incarnation, as a consequence of God entering sinful humanity. This, in turn, raises the question of what place this paradox – and paradoxicality as such – should have in Christian thought. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1502-7791 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Studia theologica
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/0039338X.2024.2341613 |