Roczniki Teologiczne, 1993, T. 40, z. 2

Stały URI dla kolekcjihttps://theo-logos.pl/handle/123456789/4728

Przeglądaj

Przeglądaj Roczniki Teologiczne, 1993, T. 40, z. 2 wg Temat "cuda"

Wpisz kilka pierwszych liter i kliknij przycisk przeglądania
Teraz wyświetlane 1 - 2 z 2
  • Miniatura
    Pozycja
    Cud znakiem boskiego posłannictwa Jezusa
    Tomczak, Ryszard (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1993)
    Ancient theology took miracle in terms of a divine proof of the mission of Jesus. The traditional reasoning from miracle was the following: only God can make miracles; if somenone makes miracles, he must then come from God. Contemporary theology approaches to the question of miracles in a different way. The source of this new approach is the development of biblical and patristic theology along with such currents as: existentialism, phenomenology, and hermeneutics. The author has presented this new approach to the understanding of miracle and its function on the basis of an analysis of Christological titles (Son of David, Saint of God, Son of Man, the Master, the Lord, the Prophet of the eschatological times), as well as on the basis of miracles in which Jesus revealed himself as sent from God or even equal to Him (He is the Lord of sabbath, has the power to absolve from sins), and on the basis of the fundamental kinds of miracles (healings, raising people from the dead, exorcisms, supernatural miracles). This is the contemporary approach to miracles. In contradistinction to a traditional standpoint according to which miracle, has always been a proof for the divine mission of Jesus, the contemporary theologico-fundamental discussions assume the attitude that miracle on the one hand reveals Him as the divine Legate, and on the other motivate His claims. The contemporary function of miracle as a proof has to give way to the function of miracle as a sign which falls under an interpretation. Miracle bearing the structure of a sign has a double dimension: external (empirical) and internal (content, sense). While analyzing miracle one has to take into account both dimensions. Similarly, one should inclusively take both its functions: revealing and motivating, since they complement each other. Miracle alone does not decide about the absolute character of our proving the divine mission of Jesus, but puts into a row other signs of a similar argumentative power, such as prophecy, biblical arguments or the very resurrection. Miracle is then a sign but not exclusive, absolute, the only sign of the divine mission of Jesus of Nazareth. Having made this operation in contemporary theology, miracle has not lost its argumentative power but gained in proportion as it occurs linked with other arguments. Then it possesses a decisive argumentative, motivative and identity power in justifying the divine mission of Jesus of Nazareth.
  • Miniatura
    Pozycja
    Maryjny aspekt cudu
    Rusecki, Marian (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 1993)
    In the popular vein of theological opinions, in folk religiousness and casuistry one may Find some opinions about Marian miracles, or else that it is She who sometimes makes miracles, especially in Marian sanctuaries. In view of these opinions the author has taken a critical stand, since it is always God who is the maker of a miracle (miracles). Mary in view of the role which She plays in the economy of salvation (the Mother of the Son of God, the Mother of the Church, all-intercessor of favours) intercedes (with the Son for us and pleads for a favour of His taumaturgie action for the benefit of natural good (health) and supernatural good of particular persons who particularly need it. In keeping with this, one may follow Benedict XIV and be justified in talking about the Marian aspect of miracle.