¹ Tillich, Paul, Systematic Theology (3 vols.; Chicago: University of Chicago, 1951–1963) cited in text as ST.Google Scholar

² Thatcher, Adrian, The Ontology of Paul Tillich (Oxford: Oxford University, 1978) 102.Google Scholar

³ Ibid., 96.

⁴ In his Introduction to his translation of Tillich's The Construction of the History of Religion in Schelling's Positive Philosophy (Lewisburg: Bucknell University, 1974) 18.Google Scholar

⁵ Ibid., 23.

⁶ Tillich, , “The Problem of Theological Method,” JR 27 (1947) 23.Google Scholar

⁷ Tillich, , “Is a Science of Human Values Possible?” New Knowledge in Human Values, ed. Maslow, A. H. (New York: Harper & Bros., 1959) 193.Google Scholar

⁸ Thatcher, Ontology of Paul Tillich, 109.

⁹ This is hardly a new idea, being at least as old as Aristotle. The best contemporary development and defense of the claim that values are based on knowledge of what a man is is Veatch, Henry B., Rational Man (Bloomington: Indiana University, 1966).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Tillich, , My Search for Absolutes (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1967) 73–75. Tillich argues that the essence of the individual, which “shines through the temporal manifestations of a human being,” is the object of “the artists who create essential images of individuals in paint or stone, in drama or novel, in poetry or biography” (p. 75).Google Scholar

¹¹ Tillich, , “Existential Analysis and Religious Symbols,” Contemporary Problems in Religion, ed. Basilius, H. A. (Detroit: Wayne University, 1956) 46.Google Scholar

¹² Tillich, , Perspectives on 19th and 20th Century Protestant Theology (New York: Harper & Row, 1967) 151. Although he is here discussing Schelling, it is clear that Tillich approves of this position.Google Scholar

¹³ Thatcher (Ontology of Paul Tillich, 49–51) argues that Tillich's use of mē on is not the same as Plato's. However, this neither weakens nor makes incomprehensible Tillich's position.

¹⁴ Thatcher, Ontology of Paul Tillich, 116; also Osborne, Kenan B., New Being (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1969) 110, 194.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Track, Joachim, Der theologische Ansatz Paul Tillichs (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975) 399.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Schepers, Gerhard, Schöpfung und allgemeine Sündigkeit: Die Auffassung Paul Tillichs im Kontext der heutigen Diskussion (Essen: Ludgerus, 1974) 117–18.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Niebuhr, Reinhold, “Biblical Thought and Ontological Speculation in Tillich's Theology,” The Theology of Paul Tillich, ed. Kegley, Charles W. and Bretail, Robert W. (New York: Macmillan, 1961) 225.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Smith, Joel R., “Creation, Fall and Theodicy in Paul Tillich's Systematic Theology,” Kairos and Logos, ed. Carey, John J. (Cambridge: The North American Paul Tillich Society, 1978) 163.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Tillich, “Reply to Interpretation and Criticism,” in Kegley and Bretail, Theology of Paul Tillich, 342–43.

²⁰ Ibid., 343.

²¹ Smith, “Creation, Fall and Theodicy,” 165.

²² Ibid., 166.

²³ Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Part XI.

²⁴ The problem is discussed at length by R. Jolivet, “Evil,” NCE 5. 699.

²⁵ David E. Roberts, “Tillich's Doctrine of Man,” Kegley and Bretall, Theology of Paul Tillich, 126.

²⁶ Winter, Gerhard, “Paul Tillichs Frage nach dem Sinn des Lebens und die Kreise des bürgerlichen Geschichtsbewusstseins,” Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophic 16 (1968) 312ff.Google Scholar