If reality is grounded in Christ, and being in Christ is by definition being in community, does that mean reality is intrinsically relational? This would make sense to me. If this is true, then, does that mean that real being is only possible in community? If both language and actual being demand community, them perhaps true human existence can only be had in community.
The Biomechanics of Pragmatism
A blog of sound and fury, signifying nothing
Scattered Thoughts on Theology and Ministry...
Seeking truth and beauty from the heavenly city.
A desktop app that gives WordPress a permanent home in your dock
An exploration of the works of poet Charles Williams (1886-1945)
Some Thoughts on the Book of Acts and Pauline Theology
“Either we are fools for the world because of Christ or we are fools for Christ because of the world. O how short-lived is the sound of a word of the world! If the world would say to us ‘fool,’ the world will die and its word will die! What then is the value of its word? But if the heavenly, immortal ones say to us ‘fool,’ that will neither die nor is it removed from us as eternal condemnation.” + St. Nikolai Velimirovich
Blogging about philosophy, by a part-time student
A venue for anti-passivist thinking, from metaphysics to social theory
Miscellaneous Musings
A blog devoted to the translation of German New Testament scholarship
A Sydney based theological reading and discussion group
Theology. Philosophy. Life.
| a faith worth keeping |
The name of this blog is A Rigid Designator
"religion is above all an external word" (Lindbeck)
βιβλιο: "book"; σκώληξ: "worm"
Theologians, Inc. 
Yes, though this is hardly an insight unique to Christianity. Most premoderns thought this way, although it wasn’t manifested in their metaphysics and cosmologies. In contrast, moderns assume atomism. With the rejection of a participatory metaphysics in the late middle ages and early modern period, the borders between particularities harden and become self-contained. There can then only be discrete and particular individual things that do not naturally exist in harmony, but need to be grafted into a whole. To use Milbank and Hart’s phrase, this is an “ontology of violence” that fails to respect the “ontological interval” between beings or persons. The last 500 years of economic theory and political thought has adopted this approach in its thinking about rights, freedom, sovereignty, etc. The contemporary West is built upon post-Christian grounds.
LikeLike
It’s interesting to trace the history of the more atomistic ideas that form modern thought.
LikeLike
The Genesis creation account would certainly support your contention. When Adam was alone it was “not good;” not until Eve joined him was the result “very good.”
LikeLiked by 1 person