<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
        <title>Perichoresis Feed</title>
        <link>https://reference-global.com/journal/PERC</link>
        <description>Reference Global RSS Feed for Perichoresis</description>
        <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2026 16:21:11 GMT</lastBuildDate>
        <docs>https://validator.w3.org/feed/docs/rss2.html</docs>
        <generator>https://github.com/jpmonette/feed</generator>
        
        <copyright>All rights reserved 2026, Emanuel University Press</copyright>
        <atom:link href="https://reference-global.com/2/rss/journal/PERC" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Thomas and Thomas in Confrontation: Dueling Dualisms in the Doctrine of God]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0013</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0013</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[This paper is an attempt to add to the contemporary discussion about Thomas Torrance’s criticisms of Augustinian dualisms by investigating whether or not Torrance’s criticisms would also apply to the Trinitarian theology of Thomas Aquinas. More specifically, this paper will explore the systematic and epistemic significance of the concept of persons-in-relations in Aquinas’s and Torrance’s doctrines of God to determine whether substance or person is primary in our knowledge and in the way we come to know God.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Mixed Marriages in Scripture: Patristic Exegesis and the Theology of the ‘Holy Seed’]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0017</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0017</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[This study examines the evolving interpretation of mixed marriages in the Bible, tracing how theological, exegetical, and hermeneutical emphases shifted from the patriarchal narratives to postexilic reforms. While early prohibitions against marrying ‘the daughters of other nations’ are typically justified by fears of idolatry, the article demonstrates that these texts often overstate female influence while downplaying male responsibility, thereby echoing the blameshifting dynamic of Genesis 3. Patristic commentators such as Theodore of Mopsuestia and Theodoret of Cyrus consistently reject this imbalance, locating culpability solely in Israelite men who abandon their covenantal obligations. In contrast, Cyril of Alexandria, Jerome and Bede partially attribute religious corruption to foreign wives, anticipating the later ‘holy seed’ ideology of Ezra and Nehemiah. The article argues that this postexilic theology – grounded in biological purity rather than Abraham’s faith ‘reckoned as righteousness’ – constitutes a radical departure from earlier biblical patterns, which allow for faithful foreign women such as Zipporah, Rahab or Ruth. New Testament voices, especially John the Baptist and Jesus, decisively overturn the eugenic logic of Ezra 9:2 by rejecting genealogical privilege and reaffirming Abrahamic imitation through faith and righteous action. The study concludes that Christian hermeneutics cannot adopt the ‘holy seed’ paradigm without undermining the foundational doctrine of justification by faith, and must instead interpret mixed marriages through the primacy of personal responsibility, covenantal fidelity, and the universal scope of Abraham’s spiritual lineage.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Do Christians and Muslims Worship the Same God? A Philosophical Investigation]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0016</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0016</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[This article examines whether Christianity and Islam worship the same ‘God’ (i.e., the same divine being). While contemporary Roman Catholicism, following Vatican II, maintains that Christians and Muslims ‘adore the one and merciful God’, this position conflicts with the first-millennium Church’s theological witness, which distinguished the Christian God from non-Trinitarian conceptions of divinity. Through philosophical analysis of classical Christian Trinitarian theology (specifically the Conciliar view) and Islamic Tawhid, this article demonstrates that the essential properties attributed to God in each tradition are logically contradictory and mutually exclusive. The Christian conception necessarily includes eternal generation and internal divine relations, while the Islamic conception necessarily excludes such properties as incompatible with Tawhid. Therefore, these traditions refer to, and thus worship, essentially different divine entities, and thus not just that of them assenting to different descriptions of the same being. This conclusion vindicates the position of the early Church and challenges contemporary attempts to harmonise Christian and Islamic theology. Significantly, Eastern Orthodox Christianity emerges as exempt from this philosophical difficulty, providing evidence for Orthodox theological and philosophical superiority over contemporary Roman Catholicism.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[The Exhausted Self and the Grace of God: Augustine, Total Depravity and Christian Anthropology]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0014</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0014</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[The doctrine of total depravity offers an account of human brokenness and the need for divine grace. Scripture, Augustine and the Reformed tradition show sin affecting the whole person and salvation beginning with God’s action. In a culture shaped by questions of identity and meaning, the doctrine points beyond human self-repair to the depth of God’s grace and Christian hope.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Herman Bavinck’s Philosophy of History and its Appropriation in Cornelius Van Til’s Presuppositional Apologetics]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0018</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0018</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[This article investigates the philosophy of history of Herman Bavinck and Cornelius Van Til by offering a comparative analysis of Bavinck’s and Van Til’s philosophies of history. It argues that significant continuities exist between the two thinkers, grounded in their shared Dutch Reformed heritage and in Bavinck’s acknowledged influence on Van Til. This article demonstrates that Van Til’s presuppositional apologetics develops Bavinck’s philosophy of history. On this basis, the study shows that both theologians articulate a comparable philosophy of history, one that reflects a deep integration of ontology and epistemology. Read together, Bavinck and Van Til reveal a complementary account of history that reaches its fullest expression within Van Til’s epistemological framework.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[The Missing Mark of Church Membership: Covenanting, Congregationalism, and the Ethics of Keeping Our Word]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0015</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0015</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[Contemporary Baptist and congregational ecclesiology has engaged the topics of regenerate church membership, congregational authority, and discipline while often neglecting the church covenant that historically joined these practices. This essay argues that the local church covenant was foundational in early Congregational and Baptist polity. From the English Separatists and New England Congregationalists to Particular Baptists and nineteenth-century Baptist manuals, covenanting functioned as the act by which professing believers became an organized visible church and as the pledge that made discipline intelligible. It then examines modern cultural pressures—expressive individualism, consumerism, and fear of durable commitment—that have rendered covenanting strange or merely ornamental. Finally, it contends that contemporary defenses of church covenants become incoherent when members may break them for foolish reasons without church censure. Because Scripture treats promise-keeping as an obligation before God, churches should frame covenants prudently, provide orderly means of transfer or release, and treat unrepentant covenant-breaking as a matter for pastoral correction. Congregationalism that retains its machinery while losing this covenantal bond has lost a constitutive element of its own tradition.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[A Study on the Instruction of Discourse Cohesive Devices in CSL Writing Textbooks]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0011</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0011</guid>
            <pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[This paper selects four current intermediate and advanced Chinese as a Second Language writing textbooks: Developing Chinese, An Intermediate and Advanced Chinese Writing Course for Foreigners, A New Chinese Writing Course, and Jumping High: A Systematic Chinese Course·Writing Textbook. Using the cohesion theory of Halliday &amp; Hasan (1976) and Hu (1994) as a framework, this study examines the teaching content of discourse cohesion and coherence in these textbooks. In comparison, all four textbooks contain relevant content, but some cover only means of conjunction, while others include additional means such as reference and lexical cohesion. Overall, there are phenomena such as incomplete variety and inconsistent quantity in Chinese writing textbooks. This paper also briefly analyzes the reasons for these issues and proposes suggestions.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[A Study on the Errors of Near-Referring and Far-Referring Demonstrative Reference Words Made by Chinese Learners with English as Their First Language]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0012</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0012</guid>
            <pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[This paper first analyzes the errors made by Chinese learners with English as their first language (L1) in acquiring Chinese demonstrative reference words (DRW) through examples of errors in their output. Then, it employs a comparative analysis to explore the differences in the near-referring and far-referring functions of four types of DRWs in Chinese and English. Consequently, it concludes that the errors of these learners stem from interference from their L1. The four types of DRWs analyzed are: (1) DRW referring to Person, objects, and events; (2) DRW referring to qualities and states; (3) DRW referring to manners; (4) DRW referring to degrees. Finally, the paper proposes targeted teaching strategies based on the characteristics of each type of error.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Standing by the Nicene Creed. The Confession of Debrecen New Orthodoxy Movement (1875). Its Emergence, Theological Views and the Encounter with Liberal Theology in Hungary]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0009</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0009</guid>
            <pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[Hungarian Reformed Christians experienced the emergence of liberal theology coming from mainly German, Swiss and Dutch centres of higher learning during the course of the nineteenth century. This new theological trend which repeated most of the non-orthodox teachings, often labelled as heresy during the patristic era, or false teaching in the medieval Catholic church, gained currency owing to the impact of Enlightenment in Europe. The Zeitgeist with its buoyant and dominant ideology named liberalism promoted precious values such as freedom, progress, science and development that married in various robe and forms with different Christian worldviews most notable what came to be called liberal theology ‘liberale theologie’ in Germany, ‘moderne theologie’ in the Netherlands or theology of science of religion (vallástudományi teológia) in Hungary. The challenge posed to the core doctrine of Christian theology by liberal theology had an incredible impact Hungarian Protestantism and the debate led to the emergence of Confession of Debrecen by new-orthodox theologians in 1875. The Confession of a peculiar expression that is somewhat similar to the Nicaean Creed yet it is different in some aspects. This paper uncovers how the debated evolved, the confession came into being and then it explicates the creed itself drawing lines of explanations to core issues of freedom of examination, semper reformanda and the voluntary obligation of accepting a faith upon entering a religious community. In so doing, the paper also throws light on some of the doctrinal differences of both theological camps, and underlines that even liberal theologians created doctrines despite of their desperate and good intentioned endeavour to reformulate the old Christian belief such as incarnation resurrection and alike.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Cursing Properly: The Terminological Conundrum of the Nicene Anathema in Light of the ‘Arian Trick’]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0008</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0008</guid>
            <pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[There is a conveniently common assumption that the Nicene Creed adopted by the ecumenical council held in Nicaea in 325 under the patronage of Emperor Constantine the Great solved the most important debate of the Early Church by confessing the Son to be homoousios, i.e. of the same essence with the Father, thus refusing any Arian interpretation of divine subordination. Whilst this can be accepted as being valid on the level of positive credal intent, on the terminological-linguistic front as well as pertaining to the negative side of doctrinal manifestation (i.e. concerning the text of the Anathema following the Creed) a definitive solution can hardly be argued for. On the contrary: following the acceptance of the Symbolum Nicaenum and of the Anathema (i.e. the curse issued upon those who would uphold Arian formulae) a whole range of terminological-linguistic debates ensued, some of which lasted at least until the council of Constantinople in 381 and as late as the Council of Chalcedon in 451. The die was cast, however, not just by a shrewd reasoning of the heretics, but also by a less apparent ‘Arian trick’.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Episcopal Authority, Hierarchy, and Monasticism in Early Syriac Sources as a Context for Denys the Areopagite’s Ecclesiastical Hierarchy]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0007</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0007</guid>
            <pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[In this paper, I intend to discuss three early Christian Syriac sources in relation to the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy (Περὶ ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱεραρχίας) of Saint Denys the Areopagite (floruit cca 500), with particular regard to the concept and nature of “hierarchy” appearing therein, as well as to the monastic virtues and especially the relationship between monasticism and the institutional Church, more precisely the grace-mediating authority of the bishop. My source texts are the Acts of Judas Thomas (cca 200); a 4th-century Syriac ritual handbook, editorially titled De ordinationibus; and Homily 12 of the anonymous collection known as the Liber graduum, the Syriac Book of Steps (4th century). With this short investigation, then, I would like to reinforce the historical and philological argument for Denys’ Syrian background. (This paper is a revised and substantially upgraded version of a short article I first published in Hungarian, Vassányi 2023).]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Case Studies of Ambiguous Passages in the Chinese Union Version Bible and the King James Version Bible from the Perspective of Cognitive Linguistics]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0010</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0010</guid>
            <pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[In this paper, I examined and analyzed five ambiguous passages while providing examples from the Chinese and the English Bibles, comparing them also to the original Hebrew and Greek versions, to illustrate my points. I employed cognitive linguistic methods to delve into the informational differences between the versions. This article aims to contribute to an important research topic by highlighting specific practical principles for Bible translation.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Concord and Harmony: The Rule of Faith and Parallel Reading in Clement of Alexandria]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0006</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0006</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[The very notion of ‘reading in parallel’ presupposes an interpretive frame of reference which draws texts into relation in the first place. In the early church, second-century writers articulated a set of theological assumptions known as the rule of faith which served this purpose, insisting that the shared divine authorship and subject matter of the writings of the Old and New Testaments demands that they be read in concert. This study focuses on the case of Clement of Alexandria, who describes the interrelationships of the Law, Prophets, and Gospel as one of ‘concord and harmony,’ comparable to the unified voices that make up a divinely-conducted choir. In this study, I first briefly consider the core theological assumptions of the rule of faith that constitute Clement’s frame of reference. Second, I examine his claims about the origins of this frame of reference, in the tradition received from, and modeled by, Jesus and his apostles themselves. Third, I offer a case study of Clement’s own parallel reading, analyzing both his theoretical statements and some actual examples of his interpretation of the Mosaic Law in the Stromateis. Based on his description of the Law’s threefold mode of speaking through symbols, precepts, and prophecies, I observe how Clement’s prior assumptions regarding the concord and harmony of the Scriptures motivate him to read each type of text in parallel with a New Testament referent.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Parallel Reading Strategies and the Search for the Christian Bible: The Relationship Between the Testaments as a Crux Interpretum]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0005</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0005</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[This article examines the interpretive activity of reading biblical texts in parallel, focusing on its role in conceptualizing the relationship between the Old and New Testaments. Because the biblical canon provides no single, explicit articulation of its internal dynamic, this relationship is a crux interpretum that faces every reader of the Christian Bible. The first section surveys distinct biblical-theological frameworks for relating the testaments and notes that each conveys important insights but also has inherent limitations. The second section focuses on a specific example: the varied New Testament utilization of Psalm 110. This case study illustrates how the practice of parallel reading, even at the granular level of exegesis, requires navigating between canonical continuity and tension. Ultimately, this hermeneutical reflection on the canon’s internal complexity will deepen a reader’s understanding of Scripture’s multifaceted witness to Christ.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[A Narrative Analysis of Mark’s Use of the Shema]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0004</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0004</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[This article examines Mark’s use of the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4–5), arguing that the Gospel writer utilized the Shema within his narrative to express an early high Christology. Building on the work of Joel Marcus and John Lee, the study argues that Mark develops six recurring themes (God’s oneness, scribal opposition, accusation of blasphemy, God’s kingdom, love, and Son of Man) across four key passages (Mark 2:1–12; 10:17–30; 12:28–37; 14:61–62) to subtly identify Jesus with the one God of Israel. The analysis argues against Marcus’s ‘quasi-divine agent’ interpretation, contending that Mark’s narrative ambiguity is better understood as a rhetorical strategy for advancing a controversial theological claim rather than deflecting accusations of blasphemy. This view is then tested by following the narrative trajectory in the Gospel of Mark. In Mark 2, the unanswered scribal question about forgiveness raises the possibility of Jesus’ divinity; in Mark 10, Jesus raises the question of his goodness, then places himself in the role of God as the one to whom total covenantal devotion is owed; in Mark 12, the Shema citation in combination with Jesus’ question about the Messiah in Psalm 110 reinforces that such devotion must be directed toward Jesus; and in Mark 14, Jesus’ climactic self-revelation as the Son of Man confirms his divine identity. The study further strengthens its case through comparison with John’s Gospel in interaction with Lori Baron. It is suggested that John read Mark’s implicit Christology and made it explicit throughout his gospel, but particularly in John 10:22–39.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[The Role of Orality in the Development of the Doublet Psalms 14 and 53]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0002</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0002</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[The divergences between the ‘twin’ Psalms 14 and 53 have typically been explained either by appeal to textual corruption in transmission or to editorial redaction associated with the canonical shaping of the Psalter. In this article, however, I argue that both the text-critical and redaction-critical approaches fail to take serious account of the role of orality in the development of biblical, and especially psalmic, literature. Drawing from the work of scholars such as Susan Niditch and David Carr, while also pointing to ancient and modern examples of textual divergence due to oral performance and memory variance, I make the case that the most significant differences between Psalms 14 and 53 are likely due to these psalms’ diverging development in distinct contexts of oral performance and liturgical use. I conclude with several reflections on what this inference might tell us about the development of a Psalter that contains both psalms, each with Davidic superscriptions and each given without harmonization toward the other.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Writing as Reading: Deuteronomy’s Perspective on the Day of the Assembly]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0001</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0001</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[This article studies the Torah’s depictions of God’s descent on Sinai, ‘the Day of the Assembly,’ within Exodus 19–20 and across Deuteronomy to argue that Israel’s failure to go on the mountain in Exodus 19:16 is sin. The Torah’s cumulative depictions of this moment convey the Torah’s theology of how God and man approach each other. After a brief contrast with Kibbe’s recent study, this article examines the plausibility and profitability of interpreting Exodus 19 as a discussion of two covenantal relationships between God and Israel by testing its ideas through summary exegesis of Exodus 19–20 and Deuteronomy 4, 5, 9, 10, 18. The Torah revisits Israel’s fear to transform that one moment into a larger story of how God changes the human heart. Israel’s request for God’s words to become Moses’ words sets Moses’ written mediation as the key to His people living with God. Exodus’s and Deuteronomy 5’s accounts of that day unveil the people’s movement from a bad fear of God, which disobeys Him, to a good fear of God, which heeds His words, with the Ten Words standing between the narratives. Deuteronomy 9–10 characterize the trembling of Exodus 19:16 as sin, and Deuteronomy 18 connects that day’s transformation to the request for the Prophet Like Moses and the promise of His victory over death. While Moses could not overcome death, Moses’ book promises the Prophet Like Moses who will overcome death and bring God’s people into God’s presence in the end.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[The Temple Account of Chronicles Between Kings and Josephus]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0003</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2026-0003</guid>
            <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[Differences between the accounts of the temple construction in 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles have long raised questions between the accounts. Although one could focus exclusively on the biblical material to attempt to describe the relationship between them, the ancient historian Josephus may provide another set of data to help clarify the relationship, especially since Josephus makes explicit claims about his own historical method. As a result, the present article examines some of the significant differences between Josephus’s account and the biblical material. The intention is to determine how Josephus’s stated claims inform arguments regarding the shape of the Vorlage of Chronicles. In the end, the article argues that despite the complicated textual picture that emerges, arguments for reconstructing the Vorlage of Chronicles should take into account not only the presence and sequence of material among the textual witnesses but also historiographical aims reconstructed from the content of each text.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Holy Love in Ezekiel 36:16–32]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2025-0019</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2025-0019</guid>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2025 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[This article demonstrates that intrinsic to the manifestation of Yahweh’s holiness in Ezekiel 36:16–32 is a manifestation of love for his people. The paper first lays groundwork by summarizing Costecalde’s lexical work of שדק (holiness) and briefly surveying OT texts speaking of God’s holiness as his care and deliverance. The heart of the article begins by studying Yahweh’s holiness in Ezekiel 36:16–32: Strong connections to the story and language of Exodus, plus a contrast between Yahweh’s and Marduk’s divine abandonment narratives, indicate that Yahweh’s holiness includes not only his unrivaled power but also his unrivaled commitment to his people. The article then assesses the presence of divine love in the passage. Contra scholars who critique Ezekiel’s alleged lovelessness, the article finds that the lavishness of Yahweh’s promises, the wife and shepherd imagery which link to Ezekiel 36:16–32, and the mention of „mercy” confirm that love is indeed part of the manifestation of Yahweh’s holiness. For Yahweh to vindicate his holy name in the sight of the nations and to show that „I am Yahweh,” the nations must see his love and not merely his power or judgment. The article concludes that in Ezekiel 36:16–32 Yahweh’s holiness is revealed to be a „love-holiness,” or a „holy love.”]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Divine Holiness as Absolute Love: Hans Urs von Balthasar on the Holiness of the Trinitarian Life]]></title>
            <link>https://reference-global.com/article/10.2478/perc-2025-0020</link>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">/article/10.2478/perc-2025-0020</guid>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2025 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
            <description><![CDATA[This essay will consider the holiness of God through the lens of divine love, as is appropriate when following the contours of the theology of Hans Urs von Balthasar. For him, divine love is fundamentally selfless, a self-giving in which the divine persons ‘consider others more important than themselves.’ Holiness, therefore, is not found in a purity or otherness that stands above or apart from creation, but rather in a purity of love that gives of itself entirely for the sake of creation. That is, holiness as divine love is a holiness that purifies for the sake of union, rather than a preceding framework purity that must be attained by creation in order to be united with God. It is a perfectly pure active and seeking desire for the Other. The union that is sought by the holy love of God, however, maintains the distinction between God and creation ultimately because of the emergence of the Spirit from the self-giving love of the Father and Son, a point that has not been appreciated fully in Anglophone Balthasarian scholarship. This essay will develop the connection between divine holiness and love further by looking at the role of the Spirit in von Balthasar’s thinking in the final years before his death.]]></description>
            <category>ARTICLE</category>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>