Regnum Caelorum

I've been seeing a lot of discussion recently suggesting that those who have a high view of the authority  and accuracy of Scripture assert its "univocality." Frequently this is asserted without defining the term, but when it is defined, it is often defined as if it essentially means "inerrant" or "infallible." I find this deeply problematic on multiple levels, at least for those who want to have an open and honest conversation about the concept of Biblical authority and what that entails. I want to make a case here that, even for those with the strongest convictions of Biblical inerrancy, there is absolutely no reason to simultaneously assert its univocality. These are entirely different concepts - in principle, the Bible could be inerrant and multivocal; it could also be errant and univocal. We need to begin with a good definition of "vocality."[1] The term "vocality" has to do with what we should expect of the Scriptures if we as...

If you had any doubts about whether Trump is the leader of a personality cult, look no further than the AI-generated images from his followers. The propaganda posters use a combination of religious and political/nationalistic symbolism to exalt Trump as a (near) object of reverence and worship. Notice the similarities to similar propaganda posters from the cult of Chairman Mao in China. The religious symbolism is different but the combination of religio-political symbolism is clear. Similar types of religio-political symbolism is used to support the cult of Kim Jong Un in North Korea. The cult of Hitler in Nazi Germany is in the same tradition. Let me be clear. I don't care who anyone votes for, but MAGA followers fit every meaningful characteristic of a cult, and Trump is clearly a personality cult leader. Also, I'm not calling Trump a fascist or a nazi or a communist. The political views of these personality cult leaders are incidental to their overall strategies for gaining ...

From its beginning, Christianity has fundamentally seen itself as a monotheistic religion, affirming the existence of only one true God, the creator of the universe. Among monotheistic religions, Christianity is unique in that while we strictly adhere to the worship of one God, this single God exists in three distinct, coequal, and coeternal persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Nothing that follows here contradicts this. At the same time, there are many passages in both the Old and New Testaments that don't fit comfortably into a simplistic understanding of Christian monotheism. For instance, see Psalm 82 (NIV84):      1 God presides in the great assembly;           he gives judgment among the “gods”:       2 “How long will you defend the unjust           and show partiality to the wicked?  Selah       3 Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless;  ...

Recently I came across a video by Dan McClellan responding to a criticism of his view of Exodus 21:22-25. I agree with many of McClellan's criticisms of that content creator, who seems to be in over his head addressing the translation of Exodus 21. However, I also think that McClellan overstates his case, and I believe he's assigning more certainty to his view than is warranted by the evidence. McClellan's position is that these verses treat causing a miscarriage to be punishable only by a fine, while harm to the mother is punishable according to the principle of lex talionis . However, this is not clear in the text, and I consider this to be a less likely understanding of its meaning. Let's look at the text that expresses his view as it appears in the NRSVue: 22 “When people who are fighting injure a pregnant woman so that there is a miscarriage and yet no further harm follows, the one responsible shall be fined what the woman’s husband demands, paying as much as the ...