Mauro Belcastro
Born in Italy in 1977, I received my education in Philosophy at the University of Turin, studying (Biblical) Hermeneutics (Heidegger, Bultmann, Gadamer, Derrida…) and History of Christian Thought. I got my bachelor in 2006 (my dissertation was about the problem of the undeserved grace of God in “De Spiritu et Littera” of Augustine), and my graduate in 2009 (with a dissertation titled La predestinazione nel Commento alla Lettera ai Romani di Origene. Trasformazione e normalizzazione di un paradosso [The Predestination in Origen’s Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Transformation and Normalization of a Paradox]).
I continued my studies as Ph.D. student affiliated with the Department of Historical Studies of the University of Turin in co-tutoring with the University of Geneva’s Faculty of Divinity. During my Ph.D., in Geneva, I was Ph.D. student assistant in New Testament Studies and, after my dissertation, post-doc assistant in the same field.
I received my Ph.D. in 2015 discussing a thesis focused on Paul and the problem of the predestining action of God titled «Quelli che Dio ha predestinati». Il προορίζειν divino in Paolo: esegesi ed indagine di un problema nel suo contesto storico [«Those Whom God Predestined». The divine προορίζειν in Paul: Exegesis and Inquiry of a Problem in Its Historical Context].
During the Academic Year 2016/2017, I was visiting fellow at the Yale Divinity School working on a project financed by Switzerland National Foundation titled Between God and Humanity. Fate and Determinism in the Apocalyptic Judaism: 1 Enoch and the Second Temple Jewish Literature in the Their Historical (Comparative) Context (my advisor for this project is Professor John J. Collins).
Currently, I am a high school professor in History and Philosophy.
Supervisors: Enrico Norelli, Claudio Gianotto, John J. Collins, and Valérie Nicolet
I continued my studies as Ph.D. student affiliated with the Department of Historical Studies of the University of Turin in co-tutoring with the University of Geneva’s Faculty of Divinity. During my Ph.D., in Geneva, I was Ph.D. student assistant in New Testament Studies and, after my dissertation, post-doc assistant in the same field.
I received my Ph.D. in 2015 discussing a thesis focused on Paul and the problem of the predestining action of God titled «Quelli che Dio ha predestinati». Il προορίζειν divino in Paolo: esegesi ed indagine di un problema nel suo contesto storico [«Those Whom God Predestined». The divine προορίζειν in Paul: Exegesis and Inquiry of a Problem in Its Historical Context].
During the Academic Year 2016/2017, I was visiting fellow at the Yale Divinity School working on a project financed by Switzerland National Foundation titled Between God and Humanity. Fate and Determinism in the Apocalyptic Judaism: 1 Enoch and the Second Temple Jewish Literature in the Their Historical (Comparative) Context (my advisor for this project is Professor John J. Collins).
Currently, I am a high school professor in History and Philosophy.
Supervisors: Enrico Norelli, Claudio Gianotto, John J. Collins, and Valérie Nicolet
less
InterestsView All (99)
Uploads
Papers by Mauro Belcastro
also to the Greek fragments) reconstructing the normalization process of the subversive idea of the absolute sovereignty of God. This concept was weakened by Origen in comparison to its Pauline matrix, and paradoxically
reconnected to a foreknowledge of God that leaves intact the man’s free will. The background of Origen’s position is the polemic against the Marcionites and Gnostics: according to Origen, they would have perverted the genuine Pauline sense of divine predestination towards mankind and the world.
The common historical-theological themes are essentially those of sin and death, reference to the Fathers, the role of the Law, the event of the Messiah and deeds attributed to him. The central point of this comparison shows the profound difference in the conclusion of the two texts. Nevertheless, and perhaps because of it, the argument is an attempt to refute the author of the Apocalypse in favour of Paul on these issues.
The aim is to reveal the likelihood of a comparision/clash between a particular version of Judaism of the Ist century that perceives the other (Christian-Pauline) as unacceptable highly subversive and blasphemous.
The final conclusion of the argument intends to be a contribution to the clarification of the relationship between the Jewish communities and those of the Ist century Pauline (even if only from the point of view of the ideas expressed by them), to a different understanding of the objectives of the Apocalypse text and a re-underlining of Pauline specificity in a reinterpretation of the Israel’s history.
Augustine a clarification about Origenian theological and scriptural interpretation on freedom and grace.
The principal hypothesis is that Simplicianus was waiting for a response from Augustine in support of
Milan’s ‘Origenism’: the Ambrosian purpose was in fact the creation of a local strong church, both
politically and theologically, supported by ‘exportable’ rational principles (Milan, capital of a new,
‘enlightened’, and universal Christianity).
This contribution focuses on the “political” use of Origenism in the ‘neo-platonic circle’ of Milan, relevant
in showing its religious identity in the struggle for supremacy of the imperial city and church. This essay
also draw on a reflection about the re-foundation of the Catholic church against Arianism and about the
Hellenization of Latin Christianity (Marius Victorinus, Simplicianus, Ambrose and the first Augustine).
Book Reviews by Mauro Belcastro
Books by Mauro Belcastro
Conference Presentations by Mauro Belcastro
also to the Greek fragments) reconstructing the normalization process of the subversive idea of the absolute sovereignty of God. This concept was weakened by Origen in comparison to its Pauline matrix, and paradoxically
reconnected to a foreknowledge of God that leaves intact the man’s free will. The background of Origen’s position is the polemic against the Marcionites and Gnostics: according to Origen, they would have perverted the genuine Pauline sense of divine predestination towards mankind and the world.
The common historical-theological themes are essentially those of sin and death, reference to the Fathers, the role of the Law, the event of the Messiah and deeds attributed to him. The central point of this comparison shows the profound difference in the conclusion of the two texts. Nevertheless, and perhaps because of it, the argument is an attempt to refute the author of the Apocalypse in favour of Paul on these issues.
The aim is to reveal the likelihood of a comparision/clash between a particular version of Judaism of the Ist century that perceives the other (Christian-Pauline) as unacceptable highly subversive and blasphemous.
The final conclusion of the argument intends to be a contribution to the clarification of the relationship between the Jewish communities and those of the Ist century Pauline (even if only from the point of view of the ideas expressed by them), to a different understanding of the objectives of the Apocalypse text and a re-underlining of Pauline specificity in a reinterpretation of the Israel’s history.
Augustine a clarification about Origenian theological and scriptural interpretation on freedom and grace.
The principal hypothesis is that Simplicianus was waiting for a response from Augustine in support of
Milan’s ‘Origenism’: the Ambrosian purpose was in fact the creation of a local strong church, both
politically and theologically, supported by ‘exportable’ rational principles (Milan, capital of a new,
‘enlightened’, and universal Christianity).
This contribution focuses on the “political” use of Origenism in the ‘neo-platonic circle’ of Milan, relevant
in showing its religious identity in the struggle for supremacy of the imperial city and church. This essay
also draw on a reflection about the re-foundation of the Catholic church against Arianism and about the
Hellenization of Latin Christianity (Marius Victorinus, Simplicianus, Ambrose and the first Augustine).