fuspo Lakhani

Application and fee: Applicants must complete the UW System online application and pay the undergraduate application fee.

Academic records: Official, certified, or attested copies of academic records from all secondary and post-secondary institutions attended are required, even if the program was not completed. Documents issued in languages other than English must be accompanied by certified English translations.

Proof of English language proficiency: Applicants for undergraduate study who are not native speakers of English must meet one of the following for admission:

Undergraduate applicants who do not have the required English proficiency may be considered for conditional admission. Students who are conditionally admitted are required to enroll in the English as a Second Language Institute (ESL). Conditionally admitted students must complete the ESL program or submit sufficient TOEFL, IELTS, PTE, or DET scores before they will be allowed to enroll in an academic program.

Proof of funding: A bank statement and affidavit or letter of support is required for students requesting an F-1 visa. Funding must be equal or greater than International Education & Engagement’s estimated costs for one year (two semesters) of undergraduate study. Students who are requesting F-2 visas for dependents (spouse and/or children) must submit additional proof of funding and passport copies for each dependent.

Passport copy: Submit a photocopy of the biographical data page in the applicant's passport. If the applicant is admitted to a program, this will ensure that immigration documents are issued accurately.

Among all these, the top 10 cryptos that have cornered the attention of investors include Bitcoin, Ethereum, Cardano, Dogecoin, Litecoin,

Juan Noemi is a professor. The Catholic University of Chile.

There is aTRACT

The realities of life and God are historically similar. Both realities are true. The acceptance of God and life does not exclude death as a reality, but rather challenges him with the sense of his radical finitude and immanence, and at the same time, questions the meaning given to infinity and transcendence.

Now then, the affirmation of faith in the God of Jesus Christ does not seem to be incompatible with affirming a dying of God, without, by overcoming the scheme of an immutably apathetic divinity and oblivious to the destiny of death that afflicts man, rather it resolves the contradiction between life and death insofar as it postulates an identification of God with a dead man, Jesus of Nazareth, whom he proclaims resurrected. The name of Jesus is given to the unity of the difference of life and death in order to establish him as a key to the Christian faith.

There is aTRACT

Life and God are realities that fit together in historical ways.

Both realities exist. The idea of God and life is not limited to death as a reality that concerns humanity, but rather to the idea of God's finitude and immanence, and at the same time questions the meaning made of God's infinite and unchanging. Now, the affirmation that faith in the God of Jesus Christ does not seem incompatible with affirming a death of God, but rather-upon overcoming the plan of an immutable divinity, apathetic and distant from the destiny of death that so afflicts humanity-resolves the contradiction between life and death much as it posits an identification on God's part with a dead man, Jesus of Nazareth, whom this faith proclaims resurrected. The person of Jesus is the key to the de-paradoxization of Christian faith because of his unity of life and death.

The theme of life has theological significance. When I began my theological studies, I was impressed by the text that summarized this: " God, who lives, calls us to eternal life."

From one end of the Bible to the other, a sense of life in all its forms and a sense very pure of God reveal to us in life, which man pursues with hope, a sacred gift in which God makes his mystery and generosity shine. The article continued, "THE LIVING GOD." Invoke 'the living God' (Jos 3, 10, Ps 42, 3), present oneself as the 'servant of the living God' (Dan 6, 21, 1Ki 18 , 10.15), to swear "by the living God" (Judges 8, 19; 1Sa 19, 6) is not only to proclaim that the God of Israel is a powerful and active God, it is also to give him one of the names he most esteems (Num. 14, 21; Jer 22, 24; cf. Ez 5, 11), is to evoke his extraordinary vitality, his devouring ardor "that does not tire or tire" (Is 40, 28), "the eternal king" before whose wrath he is impotent' (Jer 10, 10), the `who endures forever who saves and delivers us, works signs and wonders in heaven and earth' (Dan 6, 27s). The esteem that the Bible assigns to this name is a sign of the value that life has for her.

The fundamentality of life is further radicalized if we remember what the Old Testament specialist teaches us. "To speak of God is to speak of the whole" is how Claus Westermann introduces the subject in his introduction. The discourse of the Old Testament refers to the whole. The beginning of the world and humanity in creation is the beginning of the end of the world. It speaks of God to the extent that it speaks of the whole.

It is possible to speak of the whole in two fundamentally different ways, as what is or as what happens, as what exists or as what happens, according to Westermann. In the Old Testament, the whole is understood as what happens from creation to the end of the world. What happens before determines what exists.

According to the foregoing, we would have that life is not stipulated as another theological theme, as an objectively quantifiable topic that can be parallelized to others, but rather, originally, God himself is spoken of as life (5), as the "living God" , as of the "everything that happens". It's not possible to talk about God without talking about life.

The dimensions of reality that are consistent include life and God. Talking about God as a fundamental reality that happens as life, which, for its part, is sustained by God himself as its beginning and end, as its foundation and future, is an important part of talking about life.

God happens in life.

Being happening.

A complex requirement is derived from the theological fundamentality with which life is spoken of in the Bible and which points to the conjunction of a totalizing and dynamic double dimension, absolutizing and eventual at the same time. The prototypical theological discourse of Judeo-Christianity has not been respected in the West according to Westermann.

The existent is God himself. When speaking of God as the ens or the summum ens, he is degraded as a creature since everything existing is being created. The preeminence of the existent over the eventual is visible in the usual vocabulary of theology that is used until today. The usual to refer to the discourse on God, Christ, the salvific acts of God, sin and the future is to make a union with the word logos: Christology, soteriology, anthropology, eschatology, etc. When establishing such a union, clearly logos is not understood in the Hebrew sense of dabar, but in the sense that logos has in Greek. It's not a word that happens between people.

Westermann's complaint has nothing to do with the romantic claim of an isolated specialist in the Old Testament, but resonates as yet another voice that joins a chorus of thinkers who during modernity thematize a "crisis in Western metaphysics" and more specifically, they focus on a "critique of ontotheology". It is not relevant to elaborate on this subject.

The challenge that the "crisis of Western metaphysics" poses today to a truly dogmatic theology is enough to mention in reference. As well summarized by A. Gesché (7), "the crisis of Western metaphysics" must be calibrated according to the importance of the support that theology has historically sought and found in metaphysics: "The general orientation of theology was a 'patriotic "Reliance on the resources of philosophical reason, of which he made his main auxiliary. It is not possible for theology to use mediation without ignoring the changes that affect metaphysics in its own field.

The critique of ontotheology that considers God as supreme being and being in the form of being, without doing justice to God or to being is the decisive change that has taken place. This critique of ontotheology , expounded by Kant, continued by Nietzsche and brought to an end practically with Heidegger, can lead us to a better appreciation of our presuppositions, to a greater mastery of the rights proper to faith and to a new adventure of Being in the human spirit By pointing out that Western metaphysics had forgotten the difference between being (in its primordial and permanent source) and beings (a form of being in a certain phenomenal manifestation), Heidegger has shown the way to a new ontology.Being must not be deciphered through starting from being (meta-physics), even if it is the supreme being (onto-theology), because this must not be considered as a simple being, but from itself (onto -lodge)".

With the above, Gesché is not resigning himself to the end of metaphysics or a crude death of God, but rather clarifies that the "deconstruction of classical metaphysics is by no means the destruction of a project as old as the world and indispensable to his thought, but the invitation to a reconstruction in which the being returns to be heard in his native place and in his self-manifestation" (8).

It would be more appropriate to speak of an attempt to overcome what has been a certain historical itinerary of metaphysics. The limits that are evident in the history of metaphysics in Greece are overcome in a "historical metaphysics", which is what is taking shape. This was already said by Heidegger and he maintains it. In my opinion, if it makes sense to situate oneself in a post-metaphysical era and postulate a "post-metaphysical thinking" as Habermas does (11), this recognition becomes a suicide of thought if it is assumed as a blind and accomplished destiny and not as a kairotic incentive. to think more deeply and positively about history and freedom.

LIVE AND DIE.

Taking charge of the complexity of the biblical discourse on life is not resolved with the mere postulation of a metaphysical and historical approach at the same time, but appeals to an even more compromising and challenging requirement.

It forces us to talk about death beyond the silence that we've kept and the attempt to verify it as logically as possible. Talking about life with meaning requires having thought about life itself, but also the meaning of death in reference to the unity of difference that positively supports it as a contradictory term of life. It is impossible to talk about life without talking about death. The discourse that explicitly refers to life and death is called subcontrary life.

Talking about life and death are both possible. We are not just saying that there is a coincidence between terms.

N. Luhmann believes that the religious system is based on the difference between immanence and transcendence. It seems to me that this difference refers to a difference between life and death that is related to the level of personal experience. The first paragraph of "The Star of Redemption" is written by the author, and it is eloquent. To overthrow the anguish of the earthly, to remove Philosophy boasts its poisonous sting and its breath of pestilence to Hades.

Each new birth increases the reasons for anguish by one, because the mortal increases. Ceaselessly stop the bosom of the indefatigable Earth and all its births are placed at the mercy of death: all await with fear and trembling the day of their journey into the dark No matter how much man defends himself from the shots to the heart of blindly inexorable death hiding like a worm In the folds of the bare earth, he perceives by force and without remedy what he never perceives otherwise: that his I, if he died, would only be an It, and then he cries out his I, with all the he screams that his throat still contains, in the face of the Inexorable that threatens him with that inconceivable extermination, in such a trance philosophy smiles its empty smile and with its index finger points to the creature - whose members clash with anguish on the far side - towards a beyond that she wants nothing to hear. I don't know what chains man wants to stay in, he wants to live. Heidegger himself, explaining the meaning of "being for death", clarifies that "it is not about dissolving man in death and giving him for mere nullity, but vice versa: to introduce death into being there in its abysmal amplitude and thus fully measure the foundation of the possibility of the truth of being (Seyn)" (15).

According to the previous statement, we would have that a coherent discourse on life implies taking charge of a dynamic acceptance of life and God that does not exclude death as an abstract contradictory reality of life, but rather confronts it as a concrete having to and assumes it. consequently as a condition, not only negative, of a meaningful discourse about life. "Death essentially concerns life, and that finitude is the most comprehensive note, the most un-falsifiable hallmark of the human condition," says a posthumous writing by Ruiz de La Pea. It's in charge to prevent camouflage death. Death would be an irrefutable proof of the quality of reality in this case.

The question about death is first of all the questions about the meaning of life. It is the same requirement to think about the unity that sustains the difference between life and death as it was several years ago when I inquired about the meaning of theology of death.

A live before death.

Death is presented to us as the most certain thing that awaits our life and, at the same time, as what takes us out or makes us lose interest in life.

Such is the situation that makes it hard for us to talk about the subject.

Death is indefinable because defining something is an act of domination over what is defined. She dominates us in reality. Death is not a made experience.

Those who have had this experience are no longer talking to us. We only know of death through the testimony of others. We say things in relation to something that we think is a possibility. When a future or possibility is realized, we stop talking and die.

Death is a reality that awaits us. This "futurity" makes our reflection difficult in two ways: first, because it determines a type of discourse referring to an experience that is still foreign to us and that, from that future, disturbs us and encourages us to think of it as an unknown destination that questions humanity. time. We don't need to define "being-for-death" to know that it is a fact of life for every man.

It is similar to realizing that our life is going to end. This allows us to see death as the end of life.

Being aware of the reality that is not conscious of being alive is not neutral and appears to be unhappy awareness. No one is happy in the face of death, as a Latin proverb says. Being alive but having to die is not the apathetic confirmation of a normal and natural fact, rather it awakens a tension between the experience of being alive -which we experience as a good to which we instinctively cling- and having to die as a destiny that it scares us and awakens, therefore, in us rejection.

Being a reality relative to life and being the most intolerable heterogeneity is what having to die attacks us as.

To live is to be and to die is to be. Non-being is equal to death.

The death of man is only a natural phenomenon. The link between life and being is what makes death radical for man, because he "ceases to be" when he dies.

What biologists can tell us about death is only one aspect of the experience. Death is a natural phenomenon that is required by the life cycle.

Death is a result of a natural arrangement that is in the genetic constitution of each individual. The death of every human person is pre-programmed, according to biology. The loss of links in an organic structure is what biological death is about.

For biology, death is a natural phenomenon that is defined negatively in relation to life as "cessation". Death is presented as cessation of being when experiencing oneself alive. It is precisely in this area where biology and the essays that consider death in its mere "naturalness" find a limit. For now, the historicity of dying is not assumed: the inevitability of death is not an unrelated event, but refers to a subject that is capable of experiencing itself as free, that is, as the subject of a story, at the same time that as being constantly threatened by a destiny of non-being.

Death raises questions about the meaning of life.

Ethnology and psychology have studied this desire to live in a variety of ways.

Death is anomaly for primitives, even though it is permanent and immediate, and it must be explained through myth. Freud said that no one believes in his own death or what amounts to the same thing in the unconscious, thus revealing the rejection or man's eternal horror of dying. Death is not a normal outcome for a man, even though he knows that it is a "law of life". Psychologically, a "paradoxical attitude of denial towards the death of the human being is verified... the paradox is constituted as the impossibility of accepting our death in our unconscious, despite the fact that our perceptive apparatus continuously informs us of the absolute reality and inevitability of the event." event" (22).

The man is not satisfied with an explanation of death as a natural phenomenon and is constantly searching for a good that suits his being. The belief that physical death is survived is instinctive in man, and funeral rites attest to this since the dawn of civilization.

The fact that death is not a natural phenomenon for man is not verified by psychology or ethnology. The experience that man makes of himself as a free being is what leads to the rejection of death. Death does not fit since freedom is a necessary and founding moment of man's being.

Being open infinitely and without limits in being is a proper dimensions of human existence. The natural need to die is violated by experiencing himself as free. The incongruity of death is even clearer when he loves it. "To love a being is to tell him: 'you will not die'" was the statement of Gabriel Marcel.

Man experiences himself in being with a convenience to which the definitive cessation of being is repugnant. The one who dies is a being that has an infinite desire for life and a permanent openness to it.

Death is meaningless for the life of a man.

The death of man does not make sense, it is just a way of being. When someone dies, they lose their ability to relate to the outside world, and that is more than the expression of the loss of relationship with himself.

God and death are synonymous.

The difficulty of a discourse on death is greater if it tries to articulate itself as a theology, since if there is something alien and foreign to the God of Jesus Christ, it is death. The biblical tradition is extensive in this regard. Death is equivalent to distance and absence of God in the bible.

He is the source of life and the one who sustains it. Death is not something that God has created, but he did create man as a living being, in the shadow of the tree of life.

Death is a reality that is alien to God.

The place of the dead is considered to be the maximum distance from Him. This place, called Sheol, is described in the Old Testament as the land of no return (Job 3, 11ss; 7, 9 s), the land of oblivion (Ps 88, 7; Sir 9, 5), total silence (Ps 94, 17) or simply darkness (Ps 88, 7; Job 18, 18). Sheol and the dead don't praise God and neither does God remember the dead.

This does not mean that death is a kind of "other divinity", that is, a power parallel to the God of life.

What is wanted to express is that death and the dead designate the remoteness of the only God, who is defined, in an unequivocal way, precisely as "God of life" (Ps 6, 6; 30, 10; 88, 6; 115, 17; Is 38, 11; Sir 17, 27ff).

In the Old Testament, the idea of a theology of death in its proper sense is cut off since it implies that what is not God and does not concern Him, is not God.

This difficulty is not limited to the theological horizon of the Bible. When we refer to God from an ontotheology of absolute being, it arises.

What is it that we are suggesting a theology of death when we are talking about an "incommittential" death? What is the point of talking about theology of death if death doesn't concern God?

The reason for the difficulty is different for the yavista believer than for the thinker who understands God as an unchanging being. There is a positive contradiction between life and death, between what is God and what is not.

There is a lack of reference between the immutability and apatheia of God and the mutability and pathos implied in death, which makes it difficult for a theology of death in the perspective of an ontotheology of absolute being.

If the God of Jesus Christ has nothing to do with death, if it doesn't affect him, then we only speak of "theology of death" in an improper sense. Many reflections have been written with the purpose of enlightening and consoling man as he is inexorably faced with such a destiny. It's not a theology of death, but about theological considerations in reference to death. If it makes sense to speak of a death of God, then one should speak of a theology of death.

The development of theology in the last century testifies to various essays that attempt to rescue a positive theological sense in the discourse on a death of God that is not appropriate to review here. It's a critical and reactive discourse, which questions the limits of a certain way of thinking and a certain metaphysics that have prevailed in theology. The essays involve a critique and distance from the Greek theo-ontology of "Absolute Being".

This criticality can be a reason for scandal and rejection of the post-Hegelian discourse on the "death of God" for some. It confuses Christian thought with a certain metaphysics, so it's not justified.

The function of theology is not to sanction a certain philosophy but to announce the truth. One cannot ignore the results reached by a Greek ontotheology about the impassibility of God.

Critical discourse can be valid if it is self-critical and aware of its own historical conditioning. Otherwise, it is distorted as a reaction.

Hegel's proposal clearly shows that the theology of the death of God assumes a problematic characteristic of post- Enlightenment thinking.

It is a discourse that claims to be responsible for modernity, because it claims to be responsible for modern man's experience of reality and death as meaningless and absurd.

Answering the questions and questionings of modern-contemporary reason is an urgent challenge that theology has neglected for a long time. The discourse on the death of God fills a void. Affirmative, illuminating and responding do not only mean "sanctioning", but also imply. The self-critical requirement is already indicated above.

The discourse of the death of God has a synthetic claim that it claims to mediation between a theistic scheme and a determined atheism. It is intended to respond to the homme revolté, who stopped seeing in the affirmation of God an answer to the problem of evil and death. It intends to overcome the limits of a certain theistic scheme that fails to mediation between God and evil, and it also intends to trivialize evil as a mere lack.

The death of God is made explicit as a Christological discourse in the next section.

Several of the theologians who speak of the death of God see Luther as a progenitor. And with good reason. The condition of possibility of this discourse is not dependent on a new delimitation of the divinity achieved ontologically, but on a reconsideration of the death of Jesus Christ.

Luther asks the digne theologus if it is an approximation to God per passionem et crucem conspecta. But this radical Christocentrism must not lead to a fideistic reductionism, but rather, to be truly Christological, it must mediate with what reason manages to capture as God per ea qu facta sunt (28) (by means of created things), given that the God who dies on Good Friday is the same one who created us.

The theology of death is a Trinitarian discourse.

The contribution that this topic can have for the required renewal of Trinitarian theology is obvious without having to endorse theMoltmanian approach. Paraphrasing Moltmann, Forte writes "History of the Son, of the Father and of the Spirit, the cross is the trinitarian history of God The trinitarian figure is offered on the cross in the unity of the Son who gives himself, of the Father, who gives him up, of the Spirit , delivered by the Son and received by the Father...

The cross therefore says that the Trinity makes the exile of the world subject to sin its own, so that this exile enters the homeland of the trinitarian communion at Easter. it is history because it is Trinitarian history... it proclaims... the good news of the death of God, so that man may live from the life of the immortal God..." (30).

Jesus' death.

The New Testament discourse on death presupposes a development and evolution on the death of man that is outlined in the writings of the Old Testament and that goes from a gloomy resignation before it, either as a consequence of his creatureliness or of his sin, and culminates in a hope in the resurrection of the dead (31). The death of Jesus is the focus of the New Testament's discourse on death.

The reflection offered by E. Jngel stands out for its speculative scope, because it is not immediately accessible via historical-critical method. I will outline it below.

In his book God as a mystery of the world, Jngel asks himself, "what can theology learn from the Hegelian discourse on the death of God?" Theology has to take atheism more seriously than it would take itself, according to him.

This is the part that is considered the most. In Jüngel's opinion, "the dark words of the death of God imply a problematization not of the divine existence, but of the essence of God... the traditional concept of the divine essence did not allow the contact or tangency of God with reality of the perishable" (34). Hegel would be the first to reconsider the idea of merging the idea of God with the idea of change, which would be the event of death. Hegel is trying to determine in a new and radical way the essence of the divine on the basis of the denial of the existence of God.

The determination seeks to overcome the aporia reached by a "natural" reflection on God.

There is an implicit position in the traditional concept of divine essence, which Jngel calls "being above". The expression of how intolerable the idea of the divine essence becomes is what apostasy is about. The need to overcome both traditional theism and atheism is what Jngel derives from there.

The "Christological origin of these words" is one of the things Hegel reminds us of. In his writing entitled Tod, Jngel develops this theme in more detail.

We refer to what is exposed in the book. The death of Jesus Christ is referred to in the fifth chapter by Jngel. This gives him the possibility of mediation between death and God, to the extent that death is understood as God's passion. There would not be a genuine Christian understanding of the word "god" without the death of Jesus.

Later on, and once he recalls that the resurrection does not abolish but rather gives all its weight to the death of Jesus, Jüngel notes that the paschal event, as the work of the Father in favor of the Son, "reveals the relationship of God with the death of Jesus of Nazareth" (38). God identifies himself with the dead Jesus, that's what this relationship is all about. The announced of the Kingdom of God is done in this way. The life of God becomes a reality with a dead person.

This identity between the living God and the dead Jesus puts God in contact with death.

The approach of the Old Testament is that God is far away from death and that Jesus assumes the contact of death in his death.

God exposes his own divinity to the force of denial if he identifies himself with the dead Jesus.

The identification is produced by all men. "To the extent that God identifies with Jesus of Nazareth, a man who died in favor of all men, he is the being who infinitely loves finite man," said the Bible.

Love, which is the motor of acting but also of God's very being, is what is breaking, as well as the prohibition of movement imposed on the divine being. The relationship between God and death involves a struggle between love and destruction, and they question each other.

God's victory over death is due to the fact that he bears within himself the denial of death. The death of Jesus is a sacrifice for divine transcendence, intangibility, and absoluteness.

The God of man is a man who suffers. The death of Jesus is a concern for each of us because it concerns God.

Jngel thinks that not much can be said about Jesus' attitude towards his death.

Jesus is not a dying hero and his death is not like that of an idealized Socrates.

Jesus becomes an announced of the reign of God after his death.

The paschal faith says that faith in the resurrection of Jesus by God does not express anything other than God's relationship to the death of Jesus the Nazarene.

The death of Jesus establishes a negative condition of faith in Jesus, but also a positive condition of faith in God, because he has identified himself with the dead Jesus. "It is important to make it clear that faith in Jesus does not arise alongside faith in God, but that faith in Jesus is not about anything other than faith itself in God", says Jngel.

The soteriological aspect of Jesus' death is understood as the relationship between God and the death of man, according to Jngel. The New Testament states that God exposed himself to the force of denial when he identified himself with the dead Jesus, and that he exposed himself to the aggressive divine remoteness of death.

A novelty derives from this "exposing" God to death: "When God does not cease to relate (verhalten) with us, not even in death, when he identified himself with the dead Jesus, so that through the Crucified he might show himself close to us." (gnädig) to all men, then arises from the midst of the non-relationality (Verhältnislosigkeit) of death a relationship of God to man". God supports the idea of death being a non-relationality of death, where relationships and ties end.

God reveals himself as an infinitely loving being of finite man if he identifies himself with Jesus dead in favor of all men. God's own being is the reason for his actions. The primitive Church believes that God shares with man the misery of death, and that is what Jngel thinks about this new relationship.

God's victory over death is due to the fact that he denies death. "Death has left its sting, the instrument of his domination, in the very life of God", Jngel said.

Sin is aggression against God. It leads to death because it is the sting of death that prevails. By enduring this denial that was directed against Him, God has taken away the power of death, and at the same time has revealed himself above all as God, the one who suffers for him.

God is the One who can suffer infinitely, not the One who cannot.

If it makes sense to speak of sacrifice in relation to the death of Jesus, it should not be seen as a sacrifice to a God that would require expiation, but as a sacrifice to God that is intangibility and absoluteness. The sacrifice of the total opposition of God with respect to the sinful creature is the subject of this story.

Life and death are related.

We should put together the steps taken so far in the theological reflection. Life and God are historical realities that are not conditioned as abstract entities. Both realities are true.

The acceptance of God and life does not exclude death as a reality that concerns man, but it does confront him with the sense of his radical finitude and immanence and asks the meaning of the affirmation that is made of life. Now then, the affirmation of faith in the God of Jesus Christ does not seem to be incompatible with affirming a death of God, but rather, by overcoming the scheme of an immutably apathetic divinity and oblivious to the fate of death that afflicts man, rather it resolves the contradiction between life and death insofar as it postulates an identification of God with a dead man, Jesus of Nazareth, whom he proclaims resurrected. The person of Jesus is a key to the "unparadoxicalization" of the Christian faith.

A negative and abstract recourse to the paradoxes that ends up with faith to subjectivism is overcome.

Prolonging Jüngel's previously mentioned statement, it is possible to affirm that God, by identifying himself with the dead Jesus, appropriates the death of man, that of each and every one, and thus this, the death of each and every one, no longer refers to itself, but is outlined and transformed as a death in God. With this, the infinity proper to the God of Jesus Christ is not verified as neutral, but as a loving infinity that welcomes and reaffirms our fragile finitude as its own in its all-powerful infinity.

As the Easter hymn poetically proclaims, the unity of the difference between life and death occurs once and for all and for all in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ: "mors et vita duello conflixere looking: dux vitae mortuus regnat vivus" (death and life fought in a prodigious duel: the author of life dead reigns alive).

GRADES

In the magazine sal Terrae 85, there is a presentation about J. L. Ruiz de la Pea.

J. Guillet, Art. is the author of A. A. Viard - J. Guillet.

Vie is in the book "X. Léon - Dufour dir., Paris 1962,"

C. Westermann wrote Das Alte Testament und die Theologie in G.Picht Ed., Theologie. Von Ganzen reden was the scene of a reden robbery. Eine Eigenart des Alten Testament besteht darin. In den Apokalypsen, das Ende der Welt und das Ende der Menschheit, ist es kndigt.

Es umfasst Anfang und Ende; es redet von Gott. Westermann then elaborates: "Das Alte Testament umfasst zwischen Anfang und Ende alles, was die Welt und was in der Welt ist; es umfasst die Ganze Menschheit und den ganzen Menschen in seinem Daseinsbogen von der Geburt bis zum Tod. Es redet von Himmel, Erde und Gestirnen, von Blumen und Bäumen, von Strömen und Bächen, von Tieren aller Art, von Meeren und Wüsten Es redet von der Menschheit in allen Völkern und in allen Rassen; die Verheissung an Abraham: In dir sollen sich segnen alle Geschlechter der Erde. Es redet vom einzelnen Menschen in seinem ganzen Daseinsbogen: die ganz kleinen Kinder und die ganz alten Leute gehören dazu, die Kranken und die Gesunden, die Freien und die Gefangenen, die Könige und die Hausfrauen.

The Alte Testament is gross, redet es von Gott. Es könnte nicht von Gott reden, würde es nicht von diesem grossen Ganzen reden".

(4) O.a.c., 49-50 : "Vom Ganzen kann auf zwei grundverschiedene Weisen geredet werden: es kann verstanden werden als das, was ist, oder als das, was geschieht; als das Seiende oder als das Geschehende. Im Alten Testament ist das gespeicherten Testament, das von der Schpfung. The Geschehende ist.

In the same way H. Hbner states that life is a relationship concept. Historisches Wrterbuch der Philosophie 5 was published in 1980.

O.a.c., 50

The "dogmatic theology" is an initiation into the practice of theology. Volume I. B. Lauret-F is the first.

Refoulé Eds., Madrid 1984, was published.

O.a.c. 475. The Spanish translation used to translate deconstruction by demolition was incorrect. H.Hoping points out that the controversy over metaphysics cannot be reduced to the end of metaphysics or the return to metaphysics, in D.Hattrup-H. Mnster 1989, 2. Hoping Eds., Christologie und Metaphysikkritik.

He pointed out that the self-knowledge of positive philosophy surpasses and is the perfect of the negative to the extent that it leaves the field of merely possible and confronts and thinks what really exists. Positive philosophy refers to the concrete, it is ahistorical philosophy, and it is beyond the sphere of mere essences and possibilities. It has its condition of possibility as the absolute first (Prius) to which reason is confronted is known as content of itself, or as Schelling expresses: `God is the transcendent that has become immanent' (XII, 170).The `Philosophy of Revelation' is thus previously defined as an essay in the philosophy of what is real and concretely existent, is outlined as a metaphysics of history and as a history of being". In Faith in search of intelligence, Santiago 1993, 63-64, "On the theological validity of Schelling".

We can't get rid of Metaphysics as we get rid of an opinion. It can't be left behind as a doctrine that no one defends. The fact that man has to wander through the desert of the earth could be a sign that Metaphysics takes place as a form of be. "Overcoming Metaphysics" was in Conferences and Articles. One can read the introduction to the bilingual edition of M. Heidegger by Arturo Leyte.

Barcelona 1990, 7-54.

The conference is called the eleventh conference.

J. Habermas is the author of Nachmetaphysisches Denken.

The problem of death is the problem of death to physical and real life according to X. Zubiri.

In Gesellschafsstruktur und Semantik B.3 1989, you can see "Die Ausdifferenzierung der Religion".

The year was 1997 and it was Salamanca.

Contributions to philosophy are listed. The event was about Dina Picotti in Buenos Aires.

"Death, failure and fulfillment" is a poem by J. L. Ruiz de la Pea.

B.A.C. 96.

One can consult J. Grondin, On the meaning of life. An essay on philosophy, Barcelona 2005.

The following is a list of the words that are used in (18) The world creation and promise of God was written in Santiago de Chile.

The conference is called (19) Conf. E. Jngel was from Tod.

The biological sense of death, in Man facing death, Buenos Aires 1964, 9 is a work by C. Favarger. Tod was in the Handbuch.

"Death is not generally considered a natural event in primitive thought...", S.G.F. Brandon.

Death in the Dictionary of Comparative Religions. In the same way, in Religion in der Geschichte und Gegenwart VI, C.M. Edsman, Art Tod, and Totenreich are religions.