The most well-known premises of this thesis are two realities of human relationality. The first is essential to many expressions of theistic religious faith: relationships with gods can become intimate. The second is tragic: intimate relationships (such as between parents and children or between romantic partners) can become psychologically abusive. Naming these realities at once raises the question: can relationships with gods become psychologically abusive? If so, how so? Psychologists of religion increasingly study experiences of psychological harm in relating to gods but have not formulated the empirical question of experiencing psychological abuse by gods. Meanwhile, this question has received serious and thoughtful consideration in the writings of theologians, philosophers of religion, and biblical scholars and appears online as the topic of various opinion pieces and blog posts. Several of these authors have argued by analogy and/or by anecdote that the God of Jewish and/or Christian faith—or some version of this God—is indeed abusive. But without further theorization, neither analogical arguments, however valid, nor anecdotal evidence, however vast, can guide empirical research into possible experiences of psychological abuse in intimate relationships with gods. The central argument of this thesis is for the possibility and prima facie plausibility of supposing that some individuals undergo psychological abuse in their Divine relationships. For this argument, I take insights from psychodynamic theories of intimate Divine relationships and delve into the literature surrounding experiences of psychological abuse. For purposes of clinical interpretation and empirical research, I define and model Divine abuse. / 2020-09-01

This study seeks to examine the precise way it may be said that God takes risks in creating and governing this world. In order to articulate this model of providence various texts of scripture are studied which have either been overlooked or interpreted differently in discussions of divine providence. These texts reveal a deity who enters into genuine give-and-take relations with creatures, a God who is genuinely responsive and who may be said to take risks in that God does not get everything he desires in these relationships. Furthermore, the traditional texts used to defend the no-risk view of providence are examined and shown that they do not, in fact, teach the idea that God is the cause of everything which happens in the world such that the divine will is never thwarted in the leas detail. The biblical teaching of God in reciprocal relations with his creatures is then discussed in theological and philosophical terms. The nature of God is here understood as loving, wise, faithful yet free, almighty, competent and resourceful. These ideas are explicated in light of the more traditional theological/philosophical understanding of God. Finally, some of the implications of this relational model of God are examined to see the ways in which it may be said that God takes risks and whose will may be thwarted. The crucial watershed in this regard is whether or not there is any conditionality in the godhead. The no-risk view denies, while the risk model affirms, that some aspects of God's will, knowledge, and actions are contingent. In order to grasp the differences between the two models the doctrines and practices involved in salvation, the problem of evil, prayer and guidance are examined to see what each model says about them. It is claimed that· .the relational or risk model is superior to the no-risk model both in terms of theoretical coherence and the practice of the Christian life. / Philosophy, Practical & Systematic Theology / Th. D. (Sytematic Theology)

This study seeks to examine the precise way it may be said that God takes risks in creating and governing this world. In order to articulate this model of providence various texts of scripture are studied which have either been overlooked or interpreted differently in discussions of divine providence. These texts reveal a deity who enters into genuine give-and-take relations with creatures, a God who is genuinely responsive and who may be said to take risks in that God does not get everything he desires in these relationships. Furthermore, the traditional texts used to defend the no-risk view of providence are examined and shown that they do not, in fact, teach the idea that God is the cause of everything which happens in the world such that the divine will is never thwarted in the leas detail. The biblical teaching of God in reciprocal relations with his creatures is then discussed in theological and philosophical terms. The nature of God is here understood as loving, wise, faithful yet free, almighty, competent and resourceful. These ideas are explicated in light of the more traditional theological/philosophical understanding of God. Finally, some of the implications of this relational model of God are examined to see the ways in which it may be said that God takes risks and whose will may be thwarted. The crucial watershed in this regard is whether or not there is any conditionality in the godhead. The no-risk view denies, while the risk model affirms, that some aspects of God's will, knowledge, and actions are contingent. In order to grasp the differences between the two models the doctrines and practices involved in salvation, the problem of evil, prayer and guidance are examined to see what each model says about them. It is claimed that· .the relational or risk model is superior to the no-risk model both in terms of theoretical coherence and the practice of the Christian life. / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / Th. D. (Sytematic Theology)

This thesis examines the relationship between Jesus and God in the Gospel of Mark. Against the predominant view since the early 1970’s, it argues that the Markan Jesus is considerably more than a merely human Messiah; he is a divine figure. But he is not placed in a general, Hellenistic category of superhuman or divine beings, nor ascribed only a general transcendent status. Instead, Mark links Jesus directly and closely to YHWH, the one God of Israel. In contrast to many earlier studies of the christology of Mark, which focus on christological titles, this study is primarily concerned with Mark’s narrative and the author’s portrayal of Jesus. Assuming that Mark’s audience were familiar to varying degrees with different traditions of the Hellenistic world, the text is interpreted in its wider Old Testament/Jewish, Greco- Roman, and early Christian context, all the while remaining sensitive to intra-textual links. It appears that the Markan Jesus assumes divine attributes and acts in exclusively divine roles, that he fulfils Old Testament promises about God’s own intervention and coming, and that his relationship to people is analogous to God’s relationship to Israel. It is of particular significance that Jesus in several cases takes on roles which were used to demonstrate someone’s deity or, YHWH’s sovereignty above all other gods. The result is a surprising overlap between Mark’s portrait of Jesus and the presentation of Israel’s God in the biblical and early Jewish traditions and, in some cases, the divine beings of the Greco-Roman world. While early Jewish literature occasionally can ascribe divine roles to a few exalted figures, the Markan description of Jesus is unique in two respects: the majority of the divine prerogatives ascribed to Jesus are without parallel in any of the aforementioned texts, and the number of these is unrivalled. Such a portrait of Jesus may call into question both the true humanity of Jesus (Jesus is not fully human) and the monotheistic faith of Israel (Jesus is a second divine being alongside God), but it is clear that Mark maintains both. The christology of Mark represents a paradox in which Jesus is fully human and, at the same time, in a mysterious way placed on the divine side of the God-creation divide.

<p>In the essay “William Kennedy’s Ironweed: Francis Phelan’s Purgatorial Journey Back Home” I intend to show that William Kennedy has borrowed his narrative structure and symbolic language in the novel Ironweed from The Divine Comedy. I will also try to show how William Kennedy has used these allusions to enhance the imagery of Ironweed and the protagonist Francis Phelan’s wandering through the novel, and his return home. To accomplish this I will present a detailed comparative analysis of William Kennedy’s Ironweed and Dante Alighieri’s The Divine Comedy.</p><p>I will begin by showing that Kennedy establishes the protagonist Francis Phelan as a Dante-like figure and a sinner who needs to go through purgatory to redeem himself. Moreover, Kennedy uses Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy’s landscape to enhance the imagery of a journey back home, and by showing that each chapter represents a different level on Mount Purgatory Kennedy makes Albany a symbol of the mountain itself. Details such as the mentioning of the seven deadly sins are also there to make the reader think of Dante and thereby reinforcing the image of The Divine Comedy’s landscape in Francis Phelan’s New York, Albany.</p><p>I also demonstrate that Kennedy borrows his symbolic structure from Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy. For example, the intricate ending of Ironweed where several parallels can be drawn to Purgatory and Paradise reinforces the impression of Francis Phelan’s happiness, that is, a reader who is familiar with The Divine Comedy will appreciate and understand Francis Phelan’s happiness and the journey he has accomplished even more.</p>

No description available.

Shakespeare's second tetralogy, while in the process of exposing the divine-right and the Machiavellian theories, also shows how the divine-right order breaks down and paves the way for practical Machiavellianism.

Many Black scholars have researched and written about their experiences as Black students at a Predominantly White Institution (PWI). Most of their successes were built on the support they received from their families and friends. More importantly, their personal commitment to being numbered as successful Black students was the impetus for which they were willing to challenge the paradigm that Blacks can indeed succeed in higher education. As a Black Caribbean Diaspora student enrolled at a PWI, I have experienced what it is like to be Black through purposeful living, education, leadership and a divine plan. I have also utilized my Black identity as a vehicle to garner success amidst the challenges I faced being the only Black in academia, readjusting to college life and discovering my own Blackness. It is with this backdrop that I use the Scholarly Personal Narrative (SPN) methodology to write this dissertation and highlight my experience as a Black Caribbean student at a PWI. The research and stories explored during this dissertation were examined through several questions: What is the experience of a Black Caribbean Diaspora student who carries multiple identities at a PWI? What differs, separates, divides, as well as unites, the Black Diaspora students from a racial perspective? How can PWIs communicate confidence in the ability of Black students and engage them in the campus and its academic life regardless of their racial identity? How can Black Diaspora students be retained to successfully achieve a college degree? Additionally, this dissertation focuses on a myriad of experiences and stories from other Black Diaspora students who are from different ethnic backgrounds. This helps to support and answer some of the posed research questions. This SPN methodology includes a literature review on topics of Black Identity Development (Cross, 1978, 1972, 1971), Colorism (Harris, 2009; Reid-Salmon, 2008), and Critical Race Theory (Cole, 2009; Collins, 2007; Roithmayr 1999; West, 1993). Several themes emerged that aligned with my personal narrative and that of my Black Diaspora peers. These included parental involvement, integrative model of parenting (Darling and Steinberg‟s 1993), leadership supported by the African proverb, “it takes a village to raise a child,” and purposeful living where faith for a Black Diaspora student is central to their survival. A number of recommendations for how faculty and staff at PWIs can support Black Diaspora students in their educational attainment emerged: recognizing and acknowledging the differences among Black students; supporting, imparting, accepting and encouraging Black students in their education; and reorienting faculty and administrators in matters of race so as to understand Black Diaspora students. My personal narrative further elucidates and universalizes the notion that Black students can be successful in higher education despite the odds that are sometimes against them.

In the essay “William Kennedy’s Ironweed: Francis Phelan’s Purgatorial Journey Back Home” I intend to show that William Kennedy has borrowed his narrative structure and symbolic language in the novel Ironweed from The Divine Comedy. I will also try to show how William Kennedy has used these allusions to enhance the imagery of Ironweed and the protagonist Francis Phelan’s wandering through the novel, and his return home. To accomplish this I will present a detailed comparative analysis of William Kennedy’s Ironweed and Dante Alighieri’s The Divine Comedy. I will begin by showing that Kennedy establishes the protagonist Francis Phelan as a Dante-like figure and a sinner who needs to go through purgatory to redeem himself. Moreover, Kennedy uses Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy’s landscape to enhance the imagery of a journey back home, and by showing that each chapter represents a different level on Mount Purgatory Kennedy makes Albany a symbol of the mountain itself. Details such as the mentioning of the seven deadly sins are also there to make the reader think of Dante and thereby reinforcing the image of The Divine Comedy’s landscape in Francis Phelan’s New York, Albany. I also demonstrate that Kennedy borrows his symbolic structure from Dante Alighieri’s Divine Comedy. For example, the intricate ending of Ironweed where several parallels can be drawn to Purgatory and Paradise reinforces the impression of Francis Phelan’s happiness, that is, a reader who is familiar with The Divine Comedy will appreciate and understand Francis Phelan’s happiness and the journey he has accomplished even more.

This thesis’ task is to reinterpret Paul Ricoeur’s philosophy of the will, hermeneutics, and study of metaphor from a perspective that speaks to what his early work conceptualized as a poetics of freedom. Poetics, for Ricoeur, becomes a mode of expression capable of representing and illuminating what he considers the essential paradox of our human condition: a will that is both free and bound, “set free as freedom and responsible in its very deliverance.” A poetics of freedom, Ricoeur conceptualized in the beginning of his career, would be a mediation through which we perceive a tensional reconciliation of our conflicted natures, “a linguistic register suitable for speaking of liberated freedom and liberated man in his existential concreteness and totality.” Ricoeur, however, never developed the poetics of freedom beyond its original conceptualization. Through an interpretive analysis of Ricoeur's work, I reorient his later works on metaphor and hermeneutics towards the concerns that dominated the philosophy of the will and the existential philosophy to which it belongs. This study of Ricoeur’s philosophy of being occurs in discourse with a poetic text, Dante’s Commedia. The Commedia, I argue, is a text whose poetry explicitly and implicitly discloses the importance of hermeneutics and poetics in the arrival at self-understanding. The correlations that arise between its aesthetic discourse and Ricoeur’s contemporary perspective illuminate what I consider to be at the core of the philosophy of being: a primordial tension of selfhood conceptualized in terms of the dialectical relations that arise between freedom and nature, between objectivity and subjectivity, and between perspective and meaning; or in Dante’s terms, between my life and la nostra vita (our life).