No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 March 2013
The advent of science has dislocated God from the ontological heart of the world. God no longer anchors, nor defines our shared horizons. As a result, the question of God's literal existence is no longer primary. Nonetheless, the question of God is no more avoidable than it has ever been. God continues to ceaselessly intervene in our lives in the form of the question: what do you love? To address the question of God in our world is to address the question of love and love's object. In particular, it is to address the question of love's mode of reference. Love's mode of reference, when properly understood, is metaphor, and to understand how it is possible for metaphor to refer is to have our understanding of existence and literality transformed.
1 Caputo, John D., On Religion (New York: Routledge, 2001), 6Google Scholar; italics mine.
2 Žižek, Slavoj, The Puppet and the Dwarf (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2003), 3.Google Scholar
3 Žižek, Slavoj, The Ticklish Subject (New York: Verso, 1999), 142Google Scholar; italics mine.
4 Crossan, John Dominic, “Our Own Faces in Deep Wells: A Future for Historical Jesus Research,” in God, the Gift and Postmodernism, ed. Caputo, John D. and Scanlon, Michael J. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999), 290.Google Scholar
5 Ibid., 292.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
8 Ricoeur, Paul, The Rule of Metaphor: Multi-disciplinary Studies of the Creation of Meaning in Language, trans. Czerny, Robert, McLaughlin, Kathleen and Costello, John (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1977), 221.Google Scholar
9 Ricoeur, Paul, Freud and Philosophy: An Essay on Interpretation, trans. Savage, Denis (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970), 30.Google Scholar
10 Ricoeur, , Rule of Metaphor, 229.Google Scholar
11 Ricoeur, Paul, The Symbolism of Evil, trans. Buchanan, Emerson (Boston: Beacon, 1969), 5.Google Scholar
12 Ricoeur, , Rule of Metaphor, 221.Google Scholar
13 Žižek, , Puppet and the Dwarf, 3.Google Scholar
14 Ricoeur, , Freud and Philosophy, 19.Google Scholar
15 Ricoeur, , Symbolism of Evil, 351.Google Scholar
16 Ibid., 351.
17 Ricoeur, , Rule of Metaphor, 240.Google Scholar
18 Ibid., 249.
19 Ibid., 291.
20 Ibid., 255.