This paper develops the meaning of a doctor in the wing of the Christian tradition, by starting the thesis from the best and first known physician in the New Testament: St. Luke. Then the premise he was even in a doctor is questioned. However, the whole paper continues to follow the symbolism St. Luke indubitably has not only as one of the Evangelists, but parallelly as a physician, so it then questions what such an expertise would mean when one of the establishing figures is attached to a particular profession. Medical effort is then connected to the notion of Christus medicus as a primary healer. From that point on, a question of the miraculous healing and its effect on human approach to God emerges. This problem occurs when freedom as a central to the acceptance of God’s deeds is installed. In this case, I discuss it on the grounds of a passage from The Grand Inquisitior. Finally, the problem of freedom in the multifaceted context of healing is to be circled in the discussion about the problematic positions both doctors and patients encounter, and ultimately medicine itself.

The paper deals with the Amb. 21 of St Maximus the Confessor in which he attempts to resolve the ambiguity posed by St Gregory the Theologian calling John the Evangelist ‘the forerunner of the Word’. Maximus’ solution is analysed in detail as it provides significant insights into not only his understanding of the iconic nature of the Gospel as it relates to the world to come, but also into the way he develops his theological reasoning, as well as his understanding of the authority of the patristic authors.

With the advent of classical logic we are continuing to observe an adherence to the laws of logic. Moreover, the system of classical logic exhibits a prominent role within analytic philosophy. Given that the laws of logic have persistently endured in actively defining classical logic and its preceding system of logic, it begs the question as to whether it actually proves to be consistent with Islam. To consider this inquiry in a broader manner; it would be an investigation into the consistency between Islam and the logic which has been the predominant driving force of analytic philosophy. Despite the well documented engagement and novel contributions made in the field of logic by Arab and Islamic theologians/logicians, I think this question deserves examination not just in terms of classical logic but also from perspectives which go beyond classical logic, namely, non-classical logic. Doing so, would I believe, retain this inquiry within the purview of analytic philosophy despite the reference to non-classical logic. To be more specific, this question would be directed toward the Islamic theologian who espouses the system of classical logic in attempting to make sense of an absolute ineffable God of Islam. The inquiry would seek to determine if classical logic is consistent (amenable) in making sense of an absolute ineffable God of Islam. This would principally involve an analysis which determines whether the metaphysical assumptions of the laws of logic (more specifically the law of non-contradiction) are consistent in making sense of an absolute ineffable God of Islam. I shall argue that it is inconsistent. I shall establish my position on this matter by demonstrating why classical logic is inconsistent (not amenable) with an absolute ineffable God of Islam. Although, I am principally concerned with classical logic, my argument is as applicable to all earlier systems of logic as much as it is to classical logic. This is on the basis that both systems of logic, namely, all preceding systems and classical logic, consider the laws of logic as defining features.

Cārvāka Darśana is prevalently considered to be the materialistic school of Indian philosophy that sans all ethics and morals and has out rightly been discarded and criticized by many. The allegations that have been put on Cārvāka Darśana are known to one and all. The current article gives a background of the Cārvāka philosophy as commonly understood and then presents an argument that may assist the contemporary scholars and philosophers to reinterpret this age old philosophy for the benefit of all lives. The current article has been written with an unbiased point of view and endeavors that the age old philosophy of Cārvāka will be seen in a new light that will be beneficial in attaining environmental harmony.

This essay explores the humanistic dimensions of the unparalleled world-wide pandemic caused by Covid-19. Using both western and eastern sources, it seeks to draw wisdom from this tragedy – but also apply wisdom to it. Reflecting on the historical moment ensconcing this pandemic, and the fundamental metaphysical implications of Covid-19, this essay has three parts: (1) Precipice of History-Nature: This Historical Moment surrounding Covid-19; (2) Implications of a Pandemic for the nature of Nature and God; (3) Implications of a Pandemic for Death, Predestination, Higher Faith – and likely Results. Viewing this moment as portentous in its anticipation of a new age, this essay uses the notion of a temporized precipice, to situate this pandemic historically. Drawing from western (Heidegger, Russell, Augustine, Catherine of Sienna, Epictetus, Plato, and Plotinus), and Indian (Gandhi, Vivekananda, and the Bhagavadgītā) sources, this essay offers both idealistic and realistic views of the likely results of Covid-19.

This text analyses the document „Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World” in terms of possible new perspectives of the ecumenical dialogue? The analysis of the document and its reception so far, show that alongside a general willingness of the Orthodox Church to participate in the ecumenical dialogue, the document also contains certain methodological and practical suggestions for the continuation of the dialogue. Nevertheless, the document is obviously influenced by the fact it is adopted in the time of so called „the ecumenical winter”.