[226] world of discourse in the religious arena and its expressions. This is the first and fundamental statement, and it corresponds to the statements we made about history, about sciences, and will make about the doctrine of man generally. But after this has been said and emphasized, the other side also must be seen and was described, namely that there is no pure philosopher and that his existential concern directs what he is asking and what his eyes are able to see, and also what he is not asking and what his eyes are unable to see. In this sense there is no direct interference of religion or ultimate concern in the processes of philosophical discussion, but there is the unity of the human personality THROUGH WHOM elements of ultimate concern direct questions and answers---not from outside but from the inner development of the philosopher himself. On the other hand, the theologian, if he uses the logos, however he tries to avoid philosophical concepts, ^ahe can do even this only by using them. All the attacks by theologians against philosophy are made with the help of philosophical concepts which then are used against philosophy. These inner contradictions show that the theologian, since he uses human language^b and since human language is formed by all kinds of man's self-expression---amongst them by philosophy---he cannot escape philosophy at all. And he shouldn't even want to because, as theologian, he has to do with the logos of that in which theos reveals Himself. This was the general attitude which liberates us from the problem of direct conflicts