A student argues that because the Enlightenment demonstrated that all authority must be questioned, the Christian Church should simply abandon any claim to scriptural authority in order to remain intellectually credible. Based on the notes, the most theologically adequate response is that:

A student asks what practical implications the doctrine of perichoresis carries for how Christians understand human personhood and identity. Based on the notes, the correct answer is that:

A student argues that a fully Christocentric reading of Scripture is entirely self-sufficient — there is no theological need to attend to God as Creator or to the ongoing work of the Holy Spirit. The notes identify this reductive error as:

A student argues that the literary diversity of Scripture — its mix of poetry, narrative, prophecy, wisdom, hymn, lament, and apocalyptic — is a sign of editorial confusion that ultimately weakens its theological authority. Paul Ricoeur’s position, as presented in the notes, would respond that:

A student asks where the Bible’s metanarrative begins and ends. Based on the notes, the correct answer is:

A literature professor teaches a university course on the Bible as a great work of Western literature, comparing Jesus to Hamlet as a complex and puzzling literary character. Based on the notes, the central theological problem with this approach is that it:

A new Christian asks which books of the NT narrate the story of Jesus’ life, teachings, death, and resurrection. Based on the notes, the correct answer is:

A theology student encounters a text claiming that the Son is the highest and most exalted of all creatures — divine in a derivative sense, but not truly and fully God in the same sense as the Father. Based on the notes, this is the heresy of:

A student argues that the Fall only damaged the relationship between humanity and God, while human relationships with each other and with creation remained intact. Based on the notes, this is incorrect because the Fall:

A theologian argues that the only reliable way to know what Jesus actually meant is to reconstruct the historical events and original context that lie behind the Gospel texts. Hans Frei’s critique, as presented in the notes, would identify the fundamental problem with this approach as: