Neo-orthodox discourse in protestant theology

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Neo-orthodox discourse in protestant theology

O.L. Sokolovskyi**

Doctor of Sciences (Philosophy), Associate Professor (Zhytomyr Ivan Franko State University, Zhytomyr, Ukraine)

Neo-orthodox discourse in protestant theology

The post-war spiritual crisis of European society led to the destruction of the system of moral and religious values. The devastation of the meaning of life has led to the spread of pessimistic sentiments about the validity of the judgments of the human mind and the restructuring of society on the basis of social justice. In the conditions of secularization, there is an active search for the construction of such a model of Christianity that would harmonize with the modern world. By asserting the freedom of worldview and the right to deepen the rational understanding of the transcendent essence, Protestantism produces a neo-Orthodox theology, which defined the basic ideas of authenticity and morality of man on the basis of his existence. The aim of the article is to understand the specifics of neo-orthodoxy as a religious phenomenon and its importance in the progress of modern religious and philosophical anthropology and Christology.

In the process of studying the views of representatives of unorthodox theology, the phenomenological methodology of religious analysis was used in the field of systematization of neo- orthodox doctrines of various Protestant thinkers, which involves its consideration in the unity and diversity of social manifestations. The structural-functional method is reflected in the process of comparing anthropological, Christological and soteriological concepts in the teachings of theologians as fundamental to the evolution of Protestantism.

A new view of the spiritual heritage of previous generations and their acquisition of orderly diversity become for man a sense of self-identification. Ensuring sustainability in the processes of existential transformation has become possible through the existential understanding of the basic vectors of human subjectivity. Determining the need of society for internal revival, orthodoxy, as a direction of Protestant thought, proposed a reconstruction of ideas that met social needs. Military events in Ukraine, social cataclysms, economic, political and spiritual decline in many countries of the modern world highlight the need to find lost meanings within the Christian tradition.

Keywords: Neo-Orthodoxy, Theology, Protestantism, Globalization, Christology, Soteriology.

Неоортодоксальний дискурс у протестантській теології

О.Л. Соколовський

Післявоєнна духовна криза європейського суспільства призвела до руйнації системи моральних і релігійних цінностей. Смисложиттєве спустошення спричинило поширення песимістичних настроїв відносно достовірності суджень людського розуму та перебудови суспільства на засадах соціальної справедливості. В умовах секуляризації здійснюються активні пошуки побудови такої моделі християнства, яка б гармоніювала із сучасним світом. Утверджуючи свободу світогляду та право на поглиблення раціонального осмислення трансцендентної сутності, протестантизм продукує неоортодоксальну теологію, яка визначила основні уявлення про автентичність і мораль людини на основі її екзистенції. Метою статті є осмислення специфіки неоортодоксії як релігійного феномену і її значення в поступі сучасної релігійно-філософської антропології та христології.

У процесі дослідження поглядів представників неортодоксальної теології була використана феноменологічна методологія релігієзнавчого аналізу в площині систематизації неоортодоксальних доктрин різних протестантських мислителів, який передбачає розгляд її в єдності та різноманітті соціальних виявів. Структурно-функціональний метод знайшов відображення у процесі порівняння антропологічних, христологічних та сотеріологічних концепцій у вченнях теологів як засадничих для процесу еволюцію протестантизму. religious philosophical christology

Новий погляд на духовні надбання попередніх поколінь і набуття ними впорядкованого розмаїття стають для людини осенсуванням самоідентифікації. Забезпечення сталості в процесах буттєвих перетворень стало можливим завдяки екзистенційному осмисленню основних векторів людської суб'єктивності. Зумовлюючи потребу суспільства до внутрішнього відродження, неортодоксія, як напрямок протестантської думки, запропонував реконструкцію ідей, які відповідали суспільним запитам. Військові події в Україні, суспільні катаклізми, економічний, політичний та духовний занепад у багатьох країнах сучасного світу актуалізує необхідність пошуку втрачених смислів у межах християнської традиції.

Ключові слова: неоортодоксія, теологія, протестантизм, глобалізація, христологія, сотеріологія.

Formulation of the problem. The formation and development of European science in modern times has not only led to a rethinking of the traditional religious picture of the world, but also led to a fundamental change in the paradigm of Protestant theology. Transformations in the religious worldview led to the emergence of liberalism in theology in accordance with the demands of Western European culture. Liberals have focused on the idea of metaphorical world since the dawn of Christianity. The use of biblical conceptual and terminological system has led to the loss of modern man's understanding of the basics of Christian doctrine and its relevance in today's realities. Representatives of Protestant liberal theology tried to rethink traditional teaching in the light of new trends in the religious and philosophical worldview.

Representatives of liberal theology, rethinking the traditional dogmatic principles of Christian doctrine, sought to use scientific achievements and adapt their teachings in the face of growing historical variability. Ethical and aesthetic interpretations of biblical texts led to the transformation of Christianity into an ethical-humanistic system, while traditional theologians insisted on their literal understanding. Liberal theologians have tried to develop the study of the Scriptures in the context of the historical-critical method, as well as comparative linguistics, based on textual and hermeneutical analysis.

Trying to build a theology based on the rejection of Christian dogma, the liberals laid the basic content of the Protestant faith in the context of ethical interpretations of its essence. Not only did the process of radical intervention in the structure and system of

Protestantism begin, but there was also an active development of neo-orthodoxy. A new trend in Protestantism emerged during the spiritual crisis and radical social restructuring that European nations experienced after the First World War. Society was in a state of complete uncertainty, spiritual devastation, destruction of the system of moral and religious values and the need for internal revival. The post-war events demonstrated a loss of confidence in the values of the previous era and the inability of religion to solve the problems of the relationship between good and evil in the world. The need to search for lost meanings within the Christian tradition led to the emergence of unorthodox ideas in Protestant theology. A number of Protestant thinkers tried to organically and easily revive the image of the biblical God in the human worldview, explain the plan of earthly realization of the divine plan of war and social evil, and propose a new approach to interpreting theological postulates.

Degree of scientific development. The latest stage in the study of neo- orthodoxy in Protestantism is due to the influence of existential philosophy on the formation of the views of followers of the new theology, which directly influenced the emergence of dialectical beliefs. The first attempts to transform orthodox theology were made by G. Raimarus and G. Lessing, who criticized the New Testament for pretending to be Jesus and Protestantism for their dogmas of justification by faith and the Scriptures as the only source of faith. In modern times, the development of Protestant theology is reduced to four directions: liberal theology; Tьbingen Protestant School; theology of mediation; new orthodoxy. Theoretical analysis of the main features of the phenomenon of neo- orthodoxy is represented by a small number of works, among which it is necessary to name first of all significant works of P. Enns, M. Erickson, T. Lane, A. McGrath, C. Ryrie, G. Thyssen. They formulated the most important provisions and system of key issues of liberal theology and the new orthodoxy.

A significant place in the coverage of theological ideas on neo-Orthodox issues is occupied by the work of Paul Enns, in which the new orthodoxy is considered from the standpoint of biblical, systematic, historical, dogmatic and modern theology. Related to previous work is Millard Erickson's Christian Theology, which compares the strengths and weaknesses of "liberal" and "dialectical" theology.

Among the large number of works that have studied neo-orthodoxy in the context of Protestant theology, we should mention the works of B. Hegglund and L. Berkhov. Their authors subject to careful scientific consideration of certain provisions of neo-Orthodox doctrine in the plane of the subject field of philosophical and religious studies. Neo- Orthodoxy appears as a set of philosophical concepts, methodological principles and concepts that make it possible to comprehend the paradigmatic coordinates of Protestant theology in the diversity of its manifestations.

The aim of the article is to understand the specifics of neo- orthodoxy as a religious phenomenon and its importance in the progress of modern religious and philosophical anthropology and Christology.

Discussion and results. The condemnation of excessive liberalism in theology, which changed the notion of God and undermined the moral significance of the nature of Jesus Christ, contributed to a number of new doctrines and approaches to modernizing theological concepts that gave rise to a new orthodoxy in Protestantism.

Adherents of unorthodox doctrine criticized the views of liberals on the Scriptures as the result of purely religious and spiritual pursuits of man and debunked the view of Jesus Christ as a historical figure. Neo-Orthodox denied the understanding of religion as a manifestation of human nature and part of cultural history. For them, culture was

the result and expression of religion with an emphasis on the study of human beings and the universe before and after the extinction of life on earth. Thus, the representatives of unorthodox doctrine sought to correlate the doctrine with the realities of human existence and actively responded to acute social problems.

Protestant neo-orthodoxy represented several areas of philosophical and theological interpretations of Christian doctrine. K. Bart's concept proposed a new understanding of God's revelation based on the person of Christ, the Holy Scriptures and the traditions of the Church. In the context of existentialism, P. Tillich considers Christian doctrine, pointing to the need for man to get rid of fear of the unknown. The ontological proof of the existence of God in his interpretation is not reduced to things, and therefore the existence of man through the person of Christ, according to the theologian, is the knowledge of being as such.

The analysis of the doctrinal concepts of the representatives of Protestant neo- orthodoxy will begin with the teachings of the founder of this trend, the Swiss pastor and theologian K. Bart. The development of his theology was associated with the desire of representatives of liberal Protestantism to establish a correspondence between religious and scientific worldviews, sometimes neglecting their own beliefs, which was unacceptable to K. Bart. An attempt to revive traditional Reformed doctrine led to the interpretation of Protestant theology while preserving the tradition of the faith. The critical teachings of the Swiss theologian led his followers to revive the Christian idea of God, which was distorted in liberal theology [1:86].

The Swiss theologian denied the anthropologisation of theology, liberal theology, and insisted on a return to Lutheranism and Calvinism. The tragedy of human existence, according to K. Bart, was the inability to overcome the contradictions between God and sinful humanity, leading to understanding the absurdity of the world. Only with a vast mind can God point out the only way to overcome contradictions. Faith in the true meaning of gospel revelation and acceptance of God through his grace, man joins Him. Thus, faith in the Divine predestination, according to K. Bart, will help a person find justification for their decisions and actions.

Thus, true dynamic faith is due to the application of the dialectical method, through which a person gets the opportunity to find the truth in opposites. The use of rational approaches by liberal theologians to explain faith has leveled the dynamics of faith itself. Rational thinking is limited by semantic potential, and therefore cannot be the only way of human self- determination in the world. Such one- sidedness leaves no room for religious origin in the spiritual life of man and the comprehension of God as the absolute bearer of meaning. Neo-Orthodox noted that the sinful nature of man is not able to become responsible for the truth of the faith due to the limitations of the human mind. They abandoned the rational explanation of paradoxes, because there is no single and absolute method of Christian dogma.

K. Bart's hermeneutic methodology is focused on ontology and historicism and is characterized by a synthesis of orthodox and liberal understanding of sacred texts. Neo-Orthodox tried to reproduce the idea of insurmountable mental opposition between sinful man and God. Developing Kierkegaard's ideas about the paradoxical nature of man's relationship with God, Bart believed that such faith is a hidden sin, because paradoxicality is the possibility of sin. Convinced that man is left with only sincere and unshakable faith, its paradoxicality is defined by the theologian as a single and universal phenomenon. In this way, K. Bart made a theological turn of Christian thought, formulating faith as the final relationship to God, rather than the priority of religion and man. The essence of the paradox of faith in the teachings of neo- Orthodox is that it is obtained only as a result of human renunciation of evidence.

Bart's theology is based on Christology, which is the "core of the Christian faith" [2: 109]. In theological and religious literature, Bart's teachings are characterized as "Christ-centric" because of his deep conviction that no theological subject can be considered without the person of Jesus Christ: "Church dogmatism must be determined in general and in parts by Christology" [3:377-378]. An eloquent evidence of his Christ-centricity is the famous saying of the theologian: "Tell me what your Christology is, and I will tell you who you are" [2:112].

Characteristic of Christo Bart's Christology is that although he built it on Calvinist principles, for him the Christological dogma, fully outlined in the First and Second Ecumenical Councils, did not cause any doubt [4:121]. K. Barth holds the same opinion in the triadological question, when the Fathers of the Church affirmed in the Creed the oneness of the Father and the Son and confirmed the faith in the Deity of the Holy Spirit. Denying the ability of the mind to acquire an idea of God, Bart determined the meaning of revelation equivalent to the transcendent being, which is higher in the possibilities of knowledge [3:378]. Thus, the knowledge of God, according to the Swiss philosopher, is possible in Christ and through Him.

To reveal and analyze certain aspects of Christology, Barth paid due attention to the development of the triadological terminology, in which a separate hypostasis was defined by the concept of "nature" and the trinity by the concept of "person". The main problem for the theologian was laid in the term "person", which is used in different meanings. He suggested using the term "mode of being of God" instead. This approach was fully consistent with the dogmatic guidelines of the church [4:121]. Some aspects of Christological doctrine of Bart are devoted to the problem of incarnation, which the theologian considered in order to identify and eliminate some errors inherent in the early Christian philosophical and theological systems. According to the theologian, the incarnation of the Logos into human nature, overshadowed by original sin, testified to the unity of Christ with all mankind, which had common signs and properties. Analyzing the Christology of early Protestant currents, Bart established the fundamental principle of their doctrines, which declared the hypostatic unity of the Son of God: "Jesus Christ from the moment of incarnation to the resurrection was the unity of the divine Word with the human being accepted by Him" [3:379]. For K. Bart, Christ is a true example to mankind, not a moral man. The human essence of Jesus is His existence for man, therefore, according to the theologian: "The humanity of each person lies in the definition of his being as common with another person" [3:379]. In his Christological doctrine, Barth attaches great importance to soteriology, within which researchers distinguish two areas of theology - dramatic and dialectical. The idea of drama comes down to the theologian's denial that God himself realizes the history of salvation, and that man only observes this process without interfering. However, according to K. Bart, when it comes to saving a person, he must be an active party in this process. According to him, soteriology is a joint action of both God and man, given that this process is not mechanistic, but dramatic, like any interpersonal communication [5: 6]. It should be noted that the dramatic direction in the teachings of K. Bart was formed in a polemic with representatives of liberal theology, who dissolved God in man and understood Him in terms of the human mind.

Another area of K. Bart's soteriology is dialectical. It was on the basis of this method that he carried out a structural and functional analysis of the main aspects of theology. Understanding the doctrine of predestination, K. Bart depicts Christ, who distinguishes some people and separates them from other beings. According to this principle, people who have connected their lives with Christ are forgiven by God, but they do not know it [6: 262]. Therefore, the sacrifice of Christ is presented as a constant process in which God singles out his Son and opposes him to other people. In view of this, Bart assigns an insignificant role to the earthly life of Christ. For the Protestant theologian, the act of resurrection reveals the revelation through which man reveals Christ [7:182]. If the resurrection is considered outside of history, then man does not know its secret. Therefore, the coming of Christ to earth and His actions, according to K. Bart, are decisive through the transmission of knowledge about the meaning of salvation. They receive them in kerygma. In the context of dialectical teaching, the theory of salvation is considered by Bart in the aspect of knowledge, which gives man the idea of Christ's death and resurrection as eternal salvation, "not an escape to the afterlife" [2:268-269]. A person who realizes this and is reconciled to God is saved.

The unorthodox approach to the analysis of the doctrine of Jesus Christ initiated by K. Bart was reconsidered in the existential Christology of P. Tillich. Trying to bridge the gap between the theoretical and everyday levels of religious consciousness, he strongly condemns Bart's religious limitations, believing that Christianity will lose its meaning if it does not help man in today's realities. The Protestant theologian substantiates the importance of religion for the spiritual and social life of man, arguing that culture contains a deep religious component [8:172]. But if

K. Bart distinguishes secular life from religion, then P. Tillich, on the contrary, justified their existential relationship, with center of which were human actions, their content and goals.

In the question of faith, P. Tillich defined it as an act of life, centered in the center of existence of the individual. The theologian singled out ontological and moral types of faith, implying the progress of Christianity with the restoration of lost unity, including the mystical and rational. Thus, the views on the problems of faith of K. Bart and P. Tillich to some extent coincided. They proceeded from the fact that faith is completely impossible to possess.

Central to Christ Tillich's Christological reflection was the problem of the relationship between theology and history. According to him, the doctrine of Jesus Christ can be understood only in the form of a universal philosophical system [9:360]. Analyzing the concept of "religion", Tillich pays special attention to the category of "revelation", defining it as a means of self-manifestation of the Absolute. Theologian contrasts empirical history with super-history, arguing that the latter can only visually reproduce revelation. It is in the context of this distinction that Tillich's existential Christology is built, which defines the concept of God in the philosophical category of being: "God is the answer to the question posed in being" [10:51].

Being, according to the theologian, cannot be deduced or reduced to the being of things, and only the being of man is the way to the knowledge of God. Fear of death and the threat of non- existence, according to P. Tillich, allows a person to delve into the knowledge of God. Therefore, using the philosophy of existentialism, he justifies the importance of religion in depriving the fear of the transcendent. However, according to the theologian, the conversation about the existence of God introduces Him into the realm of existence, and any attempt to explain Him from the point of view of philosophy or theology forms a state of identity and contradiction. This idea is reflected in the concept of the antinomy of religious life, which is that man, on the one hand, experiences union (identity) with God, and on the other - feels separation (contradiction) from Him. P. Tillich tries to find a religious type that can overcome this antinomy, and concludes that this is possible only in Christianity through the synthesis of the doctrine of justification and Christology. This synthesis, according to the theologian, allows overcoming the basic antinomy of religious life.

In the theological context, God is understood as a force of being that opposes non-being. The comparison of God with other kinds of being subordinates Him to the categories of time and substance and thus equates them with other beings [9:175]. Given the infinity of God, P. Tillich proposes to apply to him the concept of self-being, which is transcendent and immanent to man. The self-existence of God is an unsymbolic statement of theology, despite the fact that "all human reasoning about God is symbolic" [11:62]. God as the basis of being, according to P. Tillich, does not speak to limited beings in their language, but He speaks to them through their language [11:62]. Thus, the self-manifestation of God has deep symbolic foundations.

Since God is the basis of being and man is ontologically committed to Him, the problem of alienation is overcome in Jesus Christ as the final revelation; He is the New Being. P. Tillich believes that theology can answer the existential question of man when the Gospel is revealed in the message of the "New Being". According to A. Reinen, P. Tillich builds his concept of existential Christology on the basis of texts of the Holy Scriptures and Christological positions of the Ecumenical Councils [12:59].

P. Tillich interprets the theory of salvation as healing, which corresponds to the state of alienation and determines existence. In this context, healing is interpreted as the union of the alienated and, most importantly, overcoming the rift between God and man. For P. Tillich, the path to salvation is purely individual - it is obtaining a New Being through personal connection to "eternity", i.e. to God. Characteristic of this concept is that it sees salvation not in the historical person of Christ, but in the symbol of His appearance as a sign of the New Being [13:616]. Another symbol that determines Christ's dependence on existence is the cross, and the symbol of overcoming this existence is the resurrection. Therefore, the New Genesis restores the unity of man and God. In the process of salvation P. Tillich identifies three stages: 1) "Renaissance" as complicity in the New Genesis; 2) "Justification" as the acceptance of the New Being; 3) "Sanctification" as a transformation of the New Genesis [10:443-444].

The first and second stages of salvation are always in dialectical unity. The third stage of "sanctification" involves the admission into the community of all those who have become involved in the New Genesis. The theologian argues that the objects of the New Being are all spheres of human life, which under the influence of the Holy Spirit awaken abilities that man already has, but they are awake, as well as equip man with new opportunities that he did not have before. Thus, P. Tillich tried to portray Christ so that his image was acceptable to religious and philosophical worldviews. The Christological doctrine of the theologian is imbued with an existential interpretation of the symbols and provisions of the Christian tradition. Conclusions and prospects of the study. In historical retrospect, the theology of neo-orthodoxy represents a return to the origins of the teachings of early Protestantism. An important reason for this step was the attempt of neo- Orthodox to weaken and destroy the unjustified by time and realities of life the concept of ethicization of Christianity by liberal theology. They tried to create a new concept on the fundamental principles of orthodox theology, which met the modern requirements of the time. The theological heritage of Lutheranism and Calvinism became the basis of unorthodox ideas. However, in the context of the crisis of European civilization and the desire to find the place of the biblical God in the modern worldview, unorthodox theology has departed from Protestant orthodoxy. Therefore, the views of the new doctrine took a centrist position between traditional and liberal theology. The active development of neo-orthodoxy and the use of the dialectical method have led to a lack of unity in the views and methodologies of neo-orthodoxy. The multiplicity of a single position has not diminished the importance of neo- orthodoxy in the theology of modern Christian churches. Followers of the new doctrine aroused interest in hermeneutics and Christology, which led to the actualization of the Holy Father's philosophical thought and its rethinking. The application of the methods of dialectical theology contributed to the spread of the movement for the unity of Protestant denominations.

Literature

1. Гренц С. Богословие и богословы ХХ века: учебник; пер. с англ. О. Розенберг. Черкассы: [б. и.], 2011. 520 с.

2. Очерк догматики. Лекции, прочитанные в Университете Бонна в летний семестр 1946 года. СПб.: Алетейя, 1997. 272 с.

3. Соколовський О. Христологія: еволюція доктрини: монографія. Житомир: Вид-во Євенок О. О., 2018. 472 с.

4. Шепетяк О. Тринітарне богослов'я Карла Барта і Карла Ранера. Вісник Дніпропетровського університету. Серія: Філософія. Соціологія. Політологія. 2014. Т. 22. Вип. 24 (2). С. 118-124.

5. Шепетяк О. Школы и направления современной религиозной мысли в немецкоязычном пространстве. Власть и общество (История, Теория, Практика). 2014. № 4 (32). Тбилиси: Ассиоциация открытой дипломатии. С. 5-20.

6. Шиманович А. Біблійна екзегетика Карла Барта: Монографія. Черкаси: Видавець Олександр Третяков, 2022. 184 с.

8. Шиманович А.О. Радикальний христоцентризм богословської екзегези Карла Барта. Evropskэ filozofickэ a historickэ diskurz. Praha, 2020. Volume 6, Issue 1. С. 177-185.

9. Стасюк Л.О. Ортодоксія у християнстві: протестантський вимір: монографія. Житомир. держ. ун-т ім. Івана Франка. Житомир: Євенок О. О., 2014. 294 с.

10. Tillich P. A History of Christian Thought: From Its Judaic and Hellenistic Origins to Existentialism; edited by Carl E. Braaten. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972. 550 p.

11. Кротов К.В. Теологія як антропологія у філософії неопротестантизму. Актуальні проблеми філософії та соціології. 2016. Вип. 9. С. 50- 54.

12. Данканич А. Пауль Тиллих и Карл Барт: переосмысление теизма. Філософія і політологія в контексті сучасної культури. 2016. Вип. 1. С. 58-66.

13. Reijnen A. Tillich's Christology. Cambridge companion to Paul Tillich: edited by Russell Re Manning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2009. P. 56-73.

14. Еннс П. Підручник з богослов'я: Пер. з англ. Львів: Благовісник Галичини, 2003. 758 с.

REFERENCES (TRANSLATED & TRANSLITERATED)

1. Grenc, S. (2011). Bogoslovie i bogoslovy HH veka: uchebnik [Theology and Theologians of the 20th Century: A Textbook]. per. s angl. O. Rozenberg. Cherkassy: [b. i.] (in Ukrainian).

2. Ocherk dogmatiki. Lekcii, prochitannye v Universitete Bonna v letnij semestr 1946 goda [Essay on Dogmatics. Lectures Delivered at the University of Bonn During the Summer Term of 1946]. (1997). SPb.: Aletejja (in Russian).

3. Sokolovs`ky`j, O. (2018). Xry`stologiya: evolyuciya doktry`ny`: monografiya [Christology: Evolution of Doctrine: Monograph]. Zhy`tomy`r: Vy`d-vo Yevenok O. O. (in Ukrainian).

4. Shepetyak, O. (2014). Try`nitarne bogoslov'ya Karla Barta i Karla Ranera [The Trinitarian Theology of Carl Bart and Carl Raner]. Visny`k Dnipropetrovs`kogo universy`tetu. Seriya : Filosofiya. Sociologiya. Politologiya, 24 (2), 118-124 (in Ukrainian).

5. Shepetjak, O. (2014). Shkoly i napravlenija sovremennoj religioznoj mysli v nemeckojazychnom prostranstve [Schools and Directions of Modern Religious Thought in the German-Speaking Space]. Vlast' i obshhestvo (Istorija, Teorija, Praktika), 4 (32), 5-20 (in Ukrainian).

6. Shy`manovy`ch, A. (2022). Biblijna ekzegety`ka Karla Barta: Monografiya [Biblical exegesis of Karl Barth: Monograph]. Cherkasy`: Vy`davecz` Oleksandr Tretyakov (in Ukrainian).

7. Shy`manovy`ch, A. (2020). Rady`kal`ny`j xry`stocentry`zm bogoslovs`koyi ekzegezy` Karla Barta [Radical Christocentrism of Karl Barth's theological exegesis]. Evropskэ filozofickэ a historickэ diskurz, Praha, 6 (1), 177-185 (in Ukrainian).

8. Stasyuk, L. (2014). Ortodoksiya u xry`sty`yanstvi: protestants`ky`j vy`mir: monografiya [Orthodoxy in Christianity: the Protestant dimension: Monograph]. Zhy`tomy`r. derzh. un-t im. Ivana Franka. Zhy`tomy`r: Yevenok O. O. (in Ukrainian).

9. Tillich, P. (1972). A History of Christian Thought: From Its Judaic and Hellenistic Origins to Existentialism; edited by Carl E. Braaten. New York: Simon and Schuster (in English).

10. Krotov, K. (2016). Teologiya yak antropologiya u filosofiyi neoprotestanty`zmu [Theology as anthropology in the philosophy of neo-protestantism.]. Aktual`ni problemy` filosofiyi ta sociologiyi, 9, 50-54 (in Ukrainian).

11. Dankany`ch, A. (2016). Paul` Ty`lly`x y` Karl Bart: pereosmыsleny`e tey`zma [Paul Tillich and Karl Barth: Rethinking Theism]. Filosofiya i politologiya v konteksti suchasnoyi kul`tury`, 1, 58-66 (in Ukrainian).

12. Reijnen, A. (2009). Tillich's Christology. Cambridge companion to Paul Tillich: edited by Russell Re Manning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 56- 73 (in English).

13. Enns, P. (2003). Pidruchny`k z bogoslov'ya [Textbook of Theology]. Per. z angl. L`viv: Blagovisny`k Galy`chy`ny` (in Ukrainian).

Размещено на Allbest.ru