The Father in the Son, the Son in the Father in the Gospel of John: Sources and Reception of Dynamic Unity in Middle and Neoplatonism, ‘Pagan’ and Christian
-
Ilaria L.E. Ramelli
Abstract
This article will investigate the context – in terms of both sources (by means of influence, transformation, or contrast) and ancient reception – of the concept of the ‘dynamic unity’ of the Father in the Son and the Son in the Father (expressed in John 10:38, 14:10, and 17:21) in both ‘pagan’ and Christian Middle-Platonic and Neoplatonic thinkers. The Christians include Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Gregory of Nyssa, as well as Evagrius Ponticus and John Scottus Eriugena. The article will outline, in so-called ‘Middle Platonism,’ the hierarchical theology of a first and second God (and sometimes a third), and in Neoplatonism Plotinus’ three hypostases arranged in hierarchical order, which will be contrasted with Origen’s and the Cappadocians’ three divine hypostases that are equal – like those of Augustine. Thus, for Origen not only is the Son in the Father, as in a ‘pagan’ Middle and Neoplatonic scheme, but also the Father is in the Son, in a perfect reciprocity of dynamic unity. Origen subscribes to this reciprocity because, as I argue, he is no real ‘subordinationist’, but the precursor of the Nicene and Constantinopolitan line (the Cappadocians, especially Nyssen, developed and emphasized the notion of equality, bringing the three Hypostases of the Trinity to the level of Plotinus’ One, but the premises were all in Origen’s theology and his concept of the coeternity of the three Hypostases and their common divinity: Nyssen, like Athanasius, even uses Origen’s arguments in his own anti-Arian polemic, as we shall see). Origen interpreted Philo’s theology, also close to so-called Middle Platonism, in a non-subordinationistic sense, attributing to the Hypostasis of Logos/Sophia the various dynameis, such as Logos and Sophia, that Philo used most probably in a non-hypostatic sense.
I shall also demonstrate how Gregory of Nyssa, significantly following Origen, in his work Against Eunomius used John 14:10a to refute the philosophical argument of Eunomius, who had a profoundly subordinationistic view of Christ with respect to the Father. Gregory’s solution is that neither the Father nor the Son are in an absolute sense, but both are in a reciprocal relation or σχέσις, what I shall present as Gregory’s own version of the ‘dynamic unity’ (in turn grounded in Origen). I shall also concentrate on the use that Gregory makes of John 17:21-23 to argue that the unity of the Father and the Son, and of all believers – and eventually all humans – in them, is substantiated by the Holy Spirit, who is seen as a bond of unity.
I shall study how the notion of the Father in the Son and the Son in the Father relates to the parallel statements in John 14:10, that Christ is in the disciples (and all believers) and these are in Christ – what I will call an ‘expansive’ notion of dynamic unity – and John 17:21, that just as the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, so the disciples and all believers too should become ‘one’ in the Father and the Son. Here, as I shall argue, Middle and Neoplatonic henology (or doctrine of the One) comes to the fore as a possible background and interpretive lens at the same time. I shall show how Origen joined it to the unifying force of charity-love (agape), in turn a central theme in John, and how Evagrius, performing his exegesis of these verses, interpreted henosis or unification. A coda will explore the corollary of the Divinity ‘all in all’, which is not only a central tenet of Origen’s theology, but also of that of Proclus. It will be pointed out how this concept relates to the issue of the dynamic unity within the divine.
Funding source: Many thanks to Princeton University, which bestowed on me a Senior Research Fellowship, and to the Humboldt Foundation, for a Forschungspreis, which allowed the preparation and completion of this article. Many thanks to Erfurt University's Max Weber Centre, which supported my participation in the Conference. I am always grateful to our University Libraries, which help my research, in this case especially those of the Sacred Heart University, Durham University, and Princeton University.
References
Barton, C., and D. Boyarin. 2016. Imagine No Religion. How Modern Abstractions Hide Ancient Realities. New York: Fordham University Press.10.5422/fordham/9780823271191.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Beatrice, P. 1992. “Porphyry’s Judgment on Origen.” In Origeniana Quinta, edited by R. Daly, 351–67. Leuven: Peeters. book-chapter.Suche in Google Scholar
Beatrice, P. 2009. “Origen in Nemesius’ Treatise On the Nature of Man.” In Origeniana Nona: Origen and the Religious Practice of His Time, edited by G. Heidl and R. Somos, 505–32. Leuven: Peeters. book-chapter.Suche in Google Scholar
Beatrice, P. F. 2019. “Porphyry at Origen’s School at Caesarea.” In Origeniana Duodecima. Origen’s Legacy in the Holy Land, edited by L. Perrone, B. Bitton-Ashkelony, O. Irshai, A. Kofsky and H. Newman, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium (BETL), Vol. 302, 267–84. Leuven: Peeters. book-chapter.Suche in Google Scholar
Bietenhard, H. 1979. “Logos-Theologie im Rabbinat. Ein Beitrag zur Lehre vom Worte Gottes im rabbinischen Schrifttum.” In Aufstieg und Niedergand der Römischen Welt, edited by W. HaaseII, Vol. 19.2, 580–618. Berlin: de Gruyter. book-chapter.10.1515/9783110839043-010Suche in Google Scholar
Böhm, T. 2002. “Origenes—Theologe und (Neu-)Platoniker?” Adamantius 8: 7–23.Suche in Google Scholar
Boyarin, D. 2004. “By Way of Apology: Dawson, Edwards, Origen.” The Studia Philonica Annual (StPhiloA) 16: 188–217.Suche in Google Scholar
Boyarin, D. 2001. “The Gospel of the Memra: Jewish Binitarianism and the Prologue to John,” Harvard Theological Review 94 (3): 243–84. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3657424.Suche in Google Scholar
Burns, C. P. E. 2016. Christian Understandings of Evil: The Historical Trajectory. Minneapolis: Fortress.10.2307/j.ctt1c84fr6Suche in Google Scholar
Cadiou, R. 1935. La jeunesse d’Origène. Paris: Beauchesne.Suche in Google Scholar
Cameron, M. “Origen and Augustine.” In The Oxford Handbook of Origen, edited by R. Heine and K. J. Torjesen. Oxford: Oxford University Press (forthcoming). book-chapter.Suche in Google Scholar
Centrone, B. 1996. Introduzione ai Pitagorici. Roma-Bari: Laterza.Suche in Google Scholar
Clark, S. “Plotinus, Eriugena and the Uncreated Image.” Lecture, Oxford workshop. Eriugena and His Sources in Patristic and Ancient Philosophy, dir. Ilaria L.E. Ramelli (forthcoming in Studia Patristica).Suche in Google Scholar
Crouzel, H. 1956. “Origène et Plotin élèves d’Ammonios Saccas.” Bulletin de Littérature Ecclésiastique 57: 193–214.Suche in Google Scholar
DePalma Digeser, E. 2010. “Origen on the Limes.” In The Rhetoric of Power in Late Antiquity: Religion and Politics in Byzantium, Europe and the Early Islamic World, edited by E. DePalma Digeser, R. M. Frakes and J. Stephens, 197–218. London: I. B. Tauris.Suche in Google Scholar
DePalma Digeser, E. 2016. “The Usefulness of Borderlands Concepts in Ancient History: The Case of Origen as Monster.” In Globalizing Borderland Studies in Europe and North America, edited by M. North and J. Lee, 15–32. Lincoln: University of Nebraska.10.2307/j.ctt1gr7djw.6Suche in Google Scholar
Dillon, J. 1977. The Middle Platonists. London: Duckworth.Suche in Google Scholar
Dodds, E. R. 1960. “Numenius and Ammonius.” In Les sources de Plotin, 3–61. Vandoeuvres-Genève: Fondation Hardt.Suche in Google Scholar
Drijvers, H. J.W. 2014. Bardaisan of Edessa, intro. Jan Willem Drijvers. Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias.10.31826/9781463235307Suche in Google Scholar
Edwards, M. J. 1998. “Did Origen Apply the Word ὁμοούσιος to the Son?” Journal of Theological Studies 49: 658–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/49.2.658.10.1093/jts/49.2.658Suche in Google Scholar
Edwards, M. J. 2012. “Alexander of Alexandria and the Homoousion.” Vigiliae Christianae 66 (5): 482–502. https://doi.org/10.1163/157007212x613410.10.1163/157007212X613410Suche in Google Scholar
Edwards, M. J. 2016. “Pseudo-Priscillian and the Gospel of Truth.” Vigiliae Christianae 70 (4): 355–72. https://doi.org/10.1163/15700720-12341271.10.1163/15700720-12341271Suche in Google Scholar
Fattal, M. 2013. Platon et Plotin: Relation, Logos, Intuition. Paris: L’Harmattan.Suche in Google Scholar
Fattal, M. 2014. Du Logos de Plotin au Logos de saint Jean, 2nd ed. Paris: Cerf (2016).Suche in Google Scholar
Fattal, M. 2015. Existence et Identité: Logos et Technê chez Plotin. Paris: L’Harmattan.Suche in Google Scholar
Fürst, A. 2017. Origenes: Grieche und Christ in römischer Zeit. Stuttgart: Hiersemann.Suche in Google Scholar
Gerson, L. 1994. Plotinus. London: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar
Ghira, D. 2009. “Review of Ramelli-Konstan.” Terms for Eternity: Maia 61: 732–4.Suche in Google Scholar
Gyurkovics, M. 2016. “The Problem of ‘Place’ in the Prologue to John.” In Clement’s Biblical Exegesis, edited by V. Černuskova, J. Kovacs and J. Platova, 277–91. Leiden: Brill. book-chapter.10.1163/9789004331242_013Suche in Google Scholar
Hägg, H. F. 2006. Clement of Alexandria and the Beginning of Christian Apophaticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press (OUP).10.1093/0199288089.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Hanson, R. P. C. 1954. Origen’s Doctrine of Tradition. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge (SPCK).Suche in Google Scholar
Havrda, M. 2016. The So-Called Eighth Stromateus by Clement of Alexandria: Early Christian Reception of Greek Scientific Methodology. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004325289Suche in Google Scholar
Heide, D. 2015. “’Aποκατάστασις: The Resolution of Good and Evil in Origen and Eriugena.” Dionysius 3: 195–213.Suche in Google Scholar
Howard-Brook 2016. W. Howard-Brook 2016. Empire Baptized: How the Church Embraced What Jesus Rejected 2nd-5th Centuries. Orbis Books.10.1177/0040563917721095Suche in Google Scholar
Johnson, A. 2013. Religion and Identity in Porphyry of Tyre. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (CUP).10.1017/CBO9780511998546Suche in Google Scholar
Karamanolis, G. 2013. The Philosophy of Early Christianity. Durham: Acumen.10.4324/9781315729824Suche in Google Scholar
Kearns, E.. “Religion, Greek.” In Oxford Classical Dictionary, online ed., March 2016. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.013.5537. (accessed November 2017).Suche in Google Scholar
Kettler, F. 1979. “Origenes, Ammonios Sakkas und Porphyrius.” In Kerygma und Logos. FS Carl Andresen, edited by A. M. Ritter, 322–8. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht. book-chapter.Suche in Google Scholar
Markschies, C. 2007. Origenes und sein Erbe. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110927412Suche in Google Scholar
Martens, P. W. 2015. “Embodiment, Heresy, and the Hellenization of Christianity: The Descent of the Soul in Plato and Origen.” Harvard Theological Review 108: 594–620. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0017816015000401.10.1017/S0017816015000401Suche in Google Scholar
Marx-Wolf, H. 2016. Spiritual Taxonomies and Ritual Authority: Platonists, Priests, and Gnostics in the Third Century CE. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.10.9783/9780812292442Suche in Google Scholar
Maspero, G. 2013a. Essere e relazione. L’ontologia trinitaria di Gregorio di Nissa.Rome: Città Nuova.Suche in Google Scholar
Maspero, G. 2013b. “Ontologia e dogma: Il ruolo della schesis nella dottrina trinitaria greca.” Annales Theologici 27: 293–342.Suche in Google Scholar
Morales, X. 2017. “Basile de Césarée est-il l’introducteur du concept de relation en théologie trinitaire?” Revue des Études Augustiniennes (REAug) 67 (1): 141–80. https://doi.org/10.1484/j.rea.4.2017076.10.1484/J.REA.4.2017076Suche in Google Scholar
Moreschini, C. 2016. Origene e Gregorio di Nissa sul Cantico dei Cantici. Milan: Bompiani.Suche in Google Scholar
O’Brien, C. 2010. “Review of Ramelli-Konstan.” Terms for Eternity: The Classical Review 60: 390–91. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009840X10000272.10.1017/S0009840X10000272Suche in Google Scholar
O’Leary, J. 1995. “Le destin du Logos johannique dans la pensée d’Origène.” Revue des Sciences Religieuses (RSR) 83 (2): 283–92.Suche in Google Scholar
Perczel, I. 2015. “St. Maximus on the Lord’s Prayer.” In The Architecture of the Cosmos: St. Maximus the Confessor: New Perspectives, edited by A. Lévy, P. Annala, O. Hallamaa and T. Lankila, 221–78. Helsinki: Agricola Society. book-chapter.Suche in Google Scholar
Pollard, T. E. 2005. Johannine Christology and the Early Church. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Pollmann, K. 2013. “The Broken Perfume-Flask: Origen’s Legacy in Two Case-Studies.” Lecture, at Origeniana Undecima, Aarhus University, August 26-31.Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2009. “Origen, Patristic Philosophy, and Christian Platonism: Re-Thinking the Christianisation of Hellenism.” Vigiliae Christianae 63: 217–63. https://doi.org/10.1163/157007208X377292.10.1163/157007208X377292Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2010. “Aἰώνιος and αἰών in Origen and Gregory of Nyssa.” Studia Patristica 47: 57–62.Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2011a. “The Philosophical Stance of Allegory in Stoicism and its Reception in Platonism, ’Pagan’ and Christian: Origen in Dialogue with the Stoics and Plato.” International Journal of the Classical Tradition 18: 335–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12138-011-0264-1.10.1007/s12138-011-0264-1Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2011b. “Origen’s Anti-Subordinationism and Its Heritage in the Nicene and Cappadocian Line.” Vigiliae Christianae 65: 21–49. https://doi.org/10.1163/157007210X508103.10.1163/157007210X508103Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2011c. “Atticus and Origen on the Soul of God the Creator: From the ‘Pagan’ to the Christian Side of Middle Platonism.” Jahrbuch für Religionsphilosophie 10: 13–35.Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2011d. “Origen the Christian Middle/Neoplatonist.” Journal of Early Christian History 1: 98–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/2222582X.2011.11877233.10.1080/2222582X.2011.11877233Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2011e. “Gregory of Nyssa’s Trinitarian Theology in In Illud: Tunc et ipse Filius: His Polemic against ‘Arian’ Subordinationism and Apokatastasis.” In Gregory of Nyssa: The Minor Treatises on Trinitarian Theology and Apollinarism, edited by V. Drecoll and M. Berghaus, 445–78. Leiden: Brill. book-chapter.10.1163/9789004194144_022Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2011f. “Cristo-Logos in Origene: ascendenze filoniane, passaggi in Bardesane e Clemente, e negazione del subordinazionismo.” In Dal Logos dei Greci e dei Romani al Logos di Dio. Ricordando Marta Sordi, edited by A. Valvo and R. Radice, 295–317. Milan: Vita e Pensiero. book-chapter.Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2012. “Origen, Greek Philosophy, and the Birth of the Trinitarian Meaning of Hypostasis.” Harvard Theological Review 105: 302–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816012000120.10.1017/S0017816012000120Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2013a. The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis: A Critical Assessment from the New Testament to Eriugena. Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 120. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004245709Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2013b. “Harmony between arkhē and telos in Patristic Platonism and the Imagery of Astronomical Harmony Applied to the Apokatastasis Theory.” International Journal of the Platonic Tradition 7: 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1163/18725473-12341249.10.1163/18725473-12341249Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2013c. “Origen in Augustine: A Paradoxical Reception.” Numen 60: 280–307. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685276-12341266.10.1163/15685276-12341266Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2015a. “Revisiting Aphrahat’s Sources: Beyond Scripture?” Parole de l’Orient 41: 367–97.Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2015b. Evagrius’ Kephalaia Gnostika. Leiden-Atlanta: Brill-Society for Biblical Literature (SBL).Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2016. Social Justice and the Legitimacy of Slavery: The Role of Philosophical Asceticism from Ancient Judaism to Late Antiquity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press (OUP).10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198777274.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2017a. “Divine Power in Origen of Alexandria: Sources and Aftermath.” In Divine Powers in Late Antiquity, edited by A. Marmodoro and I. F. Viltanioti, 177–98. Oxford: Oxford University Press (OUP). book-chapter.Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2017b. “Proclus of Constantinople and Apokatastasis.” In Proclus and his Legacy, edited by D. Butorac and D. Layne, 95–122. Berlin: de Gruyter. book-chapter.10.1515/9783110471625-008Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2017c. “Origen and the Platonic Tradition.” In Plato and Christ: Platonism in Early Christian Theology, edited by J. Warren Smith, Religions, Vol. 8:2, 21. book-chapter.10.3390/rel8020021Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2017d. “Gregory Nyssen’s and Evagrius’ Biographical and Theological Relations: Origen’s Heritage and Neoplatonism.” In Evagrius between Origen, the Cappadocians, and Neoplatonism, edited by I. Ramelli, in collaboration with, K. Corrigan, G. Maspero and, M. Tobon, S. Patristica Vol. 84, 165–231. Leuven: Peeters.Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2018. “Apokatastasis and Epektasis in In Cant: The Relation between Two Core Doctrines in Gregory and Roots in Origen.” In Gregory of Nyssa: In Canticum Canticorum. Commentary and Supporting Studies. Proceedings of the 13th International Colloquium on Gregory of Nyssa (Rome, September 17-20, 2014), edited by G. Maspero, M. Brugarolas and I. Vigorelli, Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 150, 312–39. Leiden: Brill.confproc.10.1163/9789004382046_015Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2019. “Institutionalisation of Religious Individualisation: The Case of Asceticism in Antiquity and Late Antiquity and the Rejection of Slavery and Social Injustice.” In Religious Individualization: Types and Cases. Historical and Crosscultural Explorations, 1: Facets of Institutionalization, edited by M. Fuchs, B. Otto, R. Parson and J. Rüpke, 695–718. Berlin: de Gruyter. book-chapter.10.1515/9783110580853-035Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. “The Spirit as Paraclete in 3rd to 5th-Century Debates and the Use of John 14-17 in the Pneumatology of That Time.” In Receptions of the Fourth Gospel in Antiquity, edited by J. Frey and T. Nicklas. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck (forthcoming).Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. “Time and Eternity.” In The Routledge Companion to Early Christian Philosophy. London: Routledge (forthcoming).Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. 2021 “La triade Ousia - Energeia - Dynamis in Gregorio di Nissa,” in La Triade nel Neoplatonismo, eds. Giulio D’Onofrio, Renato De Filippis and Ernesto Mainoldi, Turnhout: Brepols, (forthcoming).Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. “Origen, Evagrios, and Dionysios.”In Oxford Handbook to Dionysius the Areopagite, ch. 5. Oxford: Oxford University Press (OUP), (forthcoming).Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E. “Mystical Eschatology in Gregory and Evagrius.” In Mystical Eschatology in Gregory of Nyssa, edited by G. Maspero. Leuven: Peeters, (forthcoming)e. book-chapter.Suche in Google Scholar
Ramelli, I. L. E., and D. Konstan. 2007. Terms for Eternity: Αἰώνιος and ἀίδιος in Classical and Christian Authors. Piscataway: Gorgias, new ed. (2013).10.31826/9781463234126Suche in Google Scholar
Remes, P. 2008. Neoplatonism. Stocksfield: Acumen Publishing Ltd.10.1017/UPO9781844654079Suche in Google Scholar
Saffrey, H.-D., and L. G. Westerink, eds. (1974). Proclus: Théologie platonicienne, II. Paris: Belles Lettres. book-chapter.Suche in Google Scholar
Scheid, J. March 2016. “Religion, Roman, terms relating to.” In Oxford Classical Dictionary, online ed., https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.013.5549. (accessed November 2017).10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.013.5549Suche in Google Scholar
Segal, A. 2017. The Other Judaisms of Late Antiquity, 2nd ed. Waco, Texas: Baylor University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Tarrant, H. 2017. “Plotinus, Origenes and Ammonius on the King.” In Religio-Philosophical Discourses Within the Greco-Roman, Jewish and Early Christian World, edited by A. Klostergaard Petersen and G. van Kooten, 323–37. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004323131_015Suche in Google Scholar
Turner, J. 2001. Sethian Gnosticism and the Platonic Tradition. Laval: Presses de l’Université de Laval.Suche in Google Scholar
Tzamalikos, P. 2016. Anaxagoras, Origen, and Neoplatonism. The Legacy of Anaxagoras to Classical and Late Antiquity. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110420104Suche in Google Scholar
Waers, S. 2016. “Monarchianism and the Two Powers: Jewish and Christian Monotheism at the Beginning of the Third Century.” Vigiliae Christianae (VigChr) 70(4): 401–29. https://doi.org/10.1163/15700720-12341274.10.1163/15700720-12341274Suche in Google Scholar
Waszink, J. 1966. “Porphyrios und Numenios.” In Porphyry: Entretiens sur l’Antiquité Classique, 33–78. Genève: Fondation Hardt.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Dynamic Unity in the Gospel of John
- The Father, the Son, and John on Location in the Farewell Discourse
- The Father in the Son, the Son in the Father in the Gospel of John: Sources and Reception of Dynamic Unity in Middle and Neoplatonism, ‘Pagan’ and Christian
- From the Middle Ages Back to Antiquity: The Reception of the Idea of Dynamic Unity in the Gospel of John as Entanglement of Intellectual Traditions
- „Idemität“. Zum Konzept Meister Eckharts in seinem selektiven Kommentar zum Johannesevangelium
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Dynamic Unity in the Gospel of John
- The Father, the Son, and John on Location in the Farewell Discourse
- The Father in the Son, the Son in the Father in the Gospel of John: Sources and Reception of Dynamic Unity in Middle and Neoplatonism, ‘Pagan’ and Christian
- From the Middle Ages Back to Antiquity: The Reception of the Idea of Dynamic Unity in the Gospel of John as Entanglement of Intellectual Traditions
- „Idemität“. Zum Konzept Meister Eckharts in seinem selektiven Kommentar zum Johannesevangelium
