Schelling's Argument Analysis

Thus, Christianity is in Schelling’s perspective the only recipient of the divine revelation that once again discloses God’s spiritual oneness to humanity. However, although he decides to prioritize a particular tradition, the result of Schelling’s exploration of monotheism is God as the unfathomable unity of the three potencies. Moreover, we have to keep in mind God’s absolute freedom as regard having or not a relationship to being, or to any form of presentation of himself. Thus, it is fair to say that in Schelling’s view God is free enough to deny himself as Trinity. Hence, on one hand the Trinity is the best presentation possible of God’s essence as it reflects the three principles in their relationship with one another and with God. Nonetheless, …show more content…
In this case, another religious system other than Christianity would express, according to its adherents, the same depth of intuition in the absolute reality, and suceed in giving birth to images of the Absolute in all its spirituality. However, Schelling’s Berlin lectures rest on two presupposition. The first one, as I have just mentioned, is the assumption that Christianity is the most perfect religion. However, the second one is that we can see why Christianity deserves such a status just by looking at the history of other religions in their particularities. Hence, according to this second point Christianity is connected to other religions insofar as it expresses in the best way possible something that is present across all traditions. Because of this, Christianity itsekf can be better explained by looking at the features and dynamics of this lesser religious …show more content…
However, this does not call on him to relinquish his own commitments. On the contrary, only his commitments allow him to see the truth in other religions, as he can compare their teachings using the Christian ones as a criterion of how we should think about God. Hence, even if a similar analysis of religion was built from a non-Christian point of view, it would have to have analogous assumptions in seeing the necessity of understanding themselves in the broader context of human religiosity, and in seeing the non-ultimacy of their own representations just as they expand them in order to increase their explanatory power. Therefore, differing narratives from Schelling’s one might come to see some truth in Christianity, as their proponents would observe the Trinity and the monotheistic dogma as less-than-perfect representations of whatever that tradition holds in God’s place. Hence, different perspectives, each presuming the superiority of a different tradition do not imply necessarily the complete exclusion of or disregard for other traditions. I shall further develop this point in the third chapter, but in this lie the key to my arguments regarding interreligious