Try reading the first three paragraphs in particular.
That is not the solution. That is the problem.
I cannot, repeat CANNOT just read the first 3 paragraphs and come back here with a yes-or-no response to your question.
You are looking for a 3-paragraph summary of what he wrote. Even that single article has to be put into context that it is part 2.
Read what he wrote in the opening line
If you haven’t yet read Flynn and Kemp, you should do so before reading anything else on this subject.
This is what I’m trying to say.
You are looking for a “summary of the summary of the cliff notes version” of a very complicated topic.
It would take me DAYS to read the blog article in a way that does it justice. I would have to first read part 1. I would have to read Flynn and Kemp (as the author clearly stated). I would have to read (at least briefly) every other article he cites in the blog.
A subject like this cannot be approached from the perspective of saying “I demand a yes or no answer.”
What he is writing is very complicated and very dense philosophy (and I’ll note that he identifies himself as a philosopher of religion, not a theologian, and also as a Catholic).
@Hope1960 please understand that you’re looking for an easy answer to a very complicated question. It cannot be just summarized in one or two sentences—not matter how many times you keep asking for one.
