首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
This article questions whether the model of stewardship is helpful in considering Christian responsibility towards non‐human nature and proposes a different way of treating the issue of care of the environment. In an extended engagement with the theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the article argues that human relations to non‐human nature are best understood by seeing humanity as historical, political and natural. In theological formulation, humanity must be understood asimago dei, imago civitatis andimago mundi. Therefore the place of humanity cannot properly be understood without reference to both God and nature. Humanity, nature and God thereby constitute a ‘common realm’. A new test of Christian responsibility towards non‐human nature is introduced: of primary interest is how historical, political and natural humanity acts in ways which either reveal or obscure the ‘common realm of God, nature and humanity’. At this point, theological self‐understanding moves beyond the model of stewardship.  相似文献   

2.
This article explores the idea that the relationship between a parent and developing child may serve as an archetype for understanding the changing relationship between God and humanity in Genesis. With Adam, Abraham, Jacob, and Joseph representing successive stages of human development, the narrative structure of Genesis is said to portray the relationship between God and humanity as changing in a way that parallels a parent's changing relationship with his or her children across their growth toward psychological integration. This changing relationship with God, which starts out with a symbiotic union with the divine, progresses through separation and individuation, and culminates in reintegration with God, may offer a Biblical approach to psychological growth and healing, as well as a theoretical conceptualization for both the parental and mutable nature of God.  相似文献   

3.
Abstract: A recent disagreement between Bruce McCormack and Paul Molnar highlights some of the issues involved in discussing the relationship between God's triunity and determination to be God‐with‐us. Can we say that God's determination to be with us is the basis of God's triunity? Must we identify the Son's being as eternally toward‐incarnation? How does God's freedom relate to God's eternal decision to be God‐with‐humanity? In this article I argue (contra McCormack) that God's triunity logically precedes God's determination to be with us, but (contra Molnar) that this logical precedence entails neither that the pre‐incarnate Son is utterly unknown to us nor that God retains some freedom to be God‐without‐humanity.  相似文献   

4.
Abstract: This article analyses and evaluates Jonathan Edwards’ mature thought on (1) the role of the Spirit in the hypostatic union of God with humanity in the incarnation of Christ, and (2) the nature of that humanity (fallen or unfallen?). The influence of the notion of correspondence between this and the other two pneumatological unions that characterize Edwards’ trinitarian theology (the Trinity and theosis) is noted. Evaluation of Edwards’ thought is made in light of patristic, Reformed‐Puritan (principally Calvin, Owen, Barth) perspectives on the nature and importance of the incarnation, and with reference to contemporary Edwardsean scholarship and that concerning the fallen–unfallen humanity issue.  相似文献   

5.
This article constructs an ecological theology following Emmanuel Levinas’ philosophy of religion. I suggest that the Son and Spirit express divinity through corporeal and temporal realities best described through Levinas’ ideas concerning the an‐archy and awakening of time. Following Levinas, and theologians such as Mark I Wallace, I construct a materialist theology that blurs the line between God and corporeal bodies, positing that such an understanding of the Son and Spirit re‐sacralizes nature in a way that assists Christianity in overcoming the tenuous relationship between humanity and Earth.  相似文献   

6.
In defining the theological problem of participation as the question of how created beings, namely human beings, can participate (μ?θεξι?) in the transcendent Uncreated God towards deification (θ?ωσι?) without a pantheistic blurring of essences, this article examines the Christologically intuitive way in which Maximus the Confessor (580–662) would have responded. Specifically, Maximus’ Cyrilline Chalcednonianism, featuring an unconfused perichoretic union between Christ's two natures in his hypostatic union, serves directly as an apologetic and hermeneutic for humanity's and creation's participation in God. In addition, taking into account the scholarly debate over Maximus’ understanding of the relationship between the Logos and the logoi, it is argued that this indirectly provides a second Christological way forward to resolve the problem at hand, particularly when the two types of logoi (that ‘of being’ and that ‘of virtue’) are correctly distinguished. Insofar as the Logos and the logoi, not to mention the notions of participation and deification, were viewed by Maximus through his Cyrilline Chalcedonian lens, his Cyrilline Chalcednonian Christology was ultimately his answer to the theological problem of participation.  相似文献   

7.
8.
Recent scholarship argues that, for Kierkegaard, God's absolute alterity is a consequence of sin that is overcome by the redemptive activity of Jesus Christ. On such a reading, the work of Christ delivers individuals to lives of faith that are not infinitely qualitatively different from God. This fails to recognize that the absolute otherness of God is overcome not simply by the redemptive work of Christ but in and through the person of Christ. The failure to grasp this has tied Kierkegaard to an anthropocentric theology that prioritizes Christ's contribution to existential human development. This article challenges this perception by establishing Kierkegaard's emphasis that God would remain infinitely removed from humanity were it not for the continuing mediation of Jesus Christ.  相似文献   

9.

This article investigates difficulties in defining the concept of God by focusing on the question of what it means to understand God as a ‘person.’ This question is explored with respect to the work of Søren Kierkegaard, in dialogue with Franz Rosenzweig, Martin Buber, and Emmanuel Levinas. Thereby, the following three questions regarding divine ‘personhood’ come into view: First, how can God be a partner of dialogue if he at the same time remains unknown and unthinkable, a limit-concept of understanding? Second, if God is love in person and at the same time a spiritual reality ‘between’ human agents, in what ways are his personal and trans-personal traits related to each other? Third, what exactly is revealed through God’s ‘name’? By way of an inconclusive conclusion, divine personhood is discussed in regard to prayer, where the problems of predication that arise in third-personal speech about God are linked with the second-personal encounter with God.

  相似文献   

10.
Gloria L. Schaab 《Zygon》2007,42(2):487-498
In Creation and the World of Science (1979) scientist‐theologian Arthur Peacocke asks what the role of humanity might be in relation to creation if conceived within the scientific perspective that favors the theological paradigm of the panentheistic God‐world relationship. Deeming roles such as dominion and steward as liable to distortion toward a hierarchical understanding of humanity's relation to the rest of creation, Peacocke proposes seven other roles to express the proper relationship of humanity to the cosmos in panentheistic relation to its Creator. Although each of these models has merit within a panentheistic paradigm, Peacocke and the paradigm itself suggest that the panentheistic model of God in relation to an evolving cosmos may be most effectively imaged through a model of female procreativity. In keeping with this proposal, I develop the understanding of humanity's ecologically ethical role in relation to the evolving cosmos in terms of the midwife to the process of procreation. I evaluate the efficacy of the midwife as a paradigm for ecological ethics by means of several criteria, including the propositions of the Earth Charter, “a declaration of fundamental principles for building a just, sustainable, and peaceful global society in the 21st century” (Earth Initiative 2000).  相似文献   

11.
Much of the contemporary discussion of religion seems to do away with the very possibility of revelation. In this article, I use Lacoste’s phenomenology of la parole to rethink a theology of revelation in terms of God’s personal self-giving in experience. After examining Lacoste’s views of the relationship between philosophy and theology, his liturgical reduction and what this means for an understanding of experience and knowledge, and his thought of la parole more broadly, I give critical consideration to how he thinks the possibility of God’s address to humanity. Lacoste maintains that God’s presence in experience may be known through affection, and, indeed, that the word may so move us that we are able to recognise that presence. He uses the notion of self-evidence rather than the usual phenomenological category of evidence to evince the reasonableness of this response. I argue that while Lacoste accords due deference to a traditional understanding of revelation as the repetition or unfolding of a word addressed to us in the past, his thought also allows us to think revelation as a contemporary event, the hermeneutics of which allow us to know God in ways that are new.  相似文献   

12.
This article suggests that the dynamic elements of gift‐giving and reciprocity, which are incisively re‐evaluated in John Barclay's study Paul and the Gift, might fruitfully be combined with the classical incarnational understanding of the union of natures to better our understanding of Paul's soteriology. Setting Paul's account of salvation within the framework of the wider New Testament, the article highlights the presence of key elements that might best be articulated in terms of the dual kinship of Jesus with both God and humanity and that require some discussion of the ontology of the one who saves. When Paul speaks of the solidarity that exists within the Christian community, he does so in a way that links it to the presence of the Spirit, by whom we participate in the oneness of God through the one mediator; his development of this emphasis draws heavily upon the Shema, which Jewish traditions associate with the distinctive ‘being’ of God.  相似文献   

13.
We are accustomed to hearing that modern secularized humanity rejects the sovereignty of God in favour of inferior, purely human powers and realities. Yet this new idolatory (shirk) is typically unintentional. It is not identical in character to the intentional idolatry of a Faust who consciously repudiates God for the sake of a purely natural or human ideal. There are minimal conditions for (successfully) committing the sin of idolatry; and the central one is potentially conscious belief in the true divinity. Can one meaningfully accuse the modern rejector of idolatry, given that he rejects the very outlook presupposed by the accusation?  相似文献   

14.
Noreen Herzfeld 《Zygon》2002,37(2):303-316
There is remarkable convergence between twentieth-century interpretations of the image of God ( imago Dei ), what it means for human beings to be created in God's image, and approaches toward creating in our own image in the field of artificial intelligence (AI). Both fields have viewed the intersection between God and humanity or humanity and computers in terms of either (1) a property or set of properties such as intelligence, (2) the functions we engage in or are capable of, or (3) the relationships we establish and maintain. Each of these three approaches reflects a different understanding of what stands at the core of our humanity. Functional and relational approaches were common in the late twentieth century, with a functional understanding the one most accepted by society at large. A relational view, however, gives new insights into human dignity in a computer age as well as new approaches to AI research.  相似文献   

15.
Abstract

Today's transhumanists ask good questions about the human future. What about their answers? Is their version of transhumanism useful or acceptable to Christian theology today? No, at least not in its usual form. Transhumanism and Christianity divide on how we think about the cause of the changes that lie ahead for humanity. For transhumanists, the cause or the agent of human transcendence is technology. For Christians, it is grace, the underserved goodness of God who gives life and wholeness to the creation. Our core question is whether it is proper for Christian theology to see technology as contributing in any way to the future that a gracious God has in store for the creation. Does God work through technology? Yes. We may contribute through technology to what God is doing; but it is always God's doing.  相似文献   

16.
If the imago Dei is not a taxonomic definition but rather something that is performed in context, what are the implications for questions of human enhancement and the development of artificial intelligence (AI)? The author considers Alistair McFadyen’s performative vision of the imago Dei, one that actively seeks humanity in concrete situations, in the context of human enhancement and AI, asking the questions, ‘Does becoming cyborg through human enhancement make us less bearers of the divine image?’ And, ‘Can AI ever be considered to be in the image of God?’ Briefly tracing the shift in perspectives on the imago Dei, before considering what a performance of the image might look like, the author proposes three performances that have significant implications for questions about what it means to be human. To be an image-bearer is not dependent upon human DNA or species membership, but on an optative performance of the imago Dei.  相似文献   

17.
Jesus is important for both Muslims and Christians, and this has led some in both groups to search for common ground concerning him. Nevertheless, two important points of disagreement concern the Christian claims that Jesus is the Son of God, and that Jesus was put to death on the cross. The present article focuses on the last point, noting four key qur'anic passages (Q 3.55; 4.157–8; 5.117; and 19.33). Muslim commentators have mostly denied the historical aspect of Jesus' crucifixion, advocating some version of a substitutionist theory whereby the Jews crucified someone other than Jesus, while Jesus himself was taken alive by God into heaven. Muslim–Christian dialogue on this issue remains problematic. The present article encourages mutual exploration of a theological dimension of the end of Jesus' mission, that of the honor of God. Both Muslims and Christians affirm that God maintained his honor by thwarting the Jews' attempt to get rid of Jesus. The usual Muslim belief is that God rescued him alive to heaven before the crucifixion, while the Christian understanding is that God vindicated Jesus through the resurrection and ascension. Similar views of God's honor through his intervention regarding Jesus can contribute to positive Muslim–Christian dialogue.1 An abbreviated form of this paper was delivered at the International Symposium on Qur'an and Contemporary Issues at the University of Nairobi, 5 June 2011.   相似文献   

18.
Abstract

Bonaventure describes the natural world as carmen Dei (song of God) that humanity should be able to detect through philosophical wisdom. Many contemporary evolutionary biologists, however, present the natural world as an argument against God's existence. Evolution is deemed incompatible with Providence and natural causes competitively exclusive of divine ones. These arguments against God are not proper to science, but to scientism. This purported conflict between evolution and faith is overcome by respecting the epistemological boundaries among science, philosophy, and theology, understanding creation as ontological dependence, and having a non-contrastive divine transcendence, in which God's transcendence does not oppose God's immanence.  相似文献   

19.
S?ren Kierkegaard was a very rigorous critic of traditional philosophical thinking and speculative systems. According to his theory it is possible that there is a logic system, but not a system of life. If such a system exists, it can be known only to God. Man can attain the meaning of life only by his own relationship to God. However, this relationship cannot be explained by philosophy because it has to do with a transcendent ‘double movement of infinity’ which takes place between God and the individual. Like philosophy, mysticism cannot explain one's relationship to God. The difference is that philosophy neglects God as the absolute starting point, while mysticism forgets that an individualafter he has experienced divinitymay return to the real world. The self need not disappear in divinity. The dialectic of the relationship between God and man implies that both poles (God and man) are present, thus ‘the infinite difference between God and man’ does not disappear. Since Sūfism is a type of Islamic mysticism, it may be said that a Sūfi cannot witness God's truth if he remains in his union with God. It is therefore relevant to draw some parallels between Kierkegaard's view and a comparable Sūfi view about the human relationship to God.  相似文献   

20.
‘Ecology: religious or secular?’ addresses the issue of the relation between ecology and the idea of God. ‘Social’ interpretations of ecology seem to fit with traditional Christian models, such as stewardship, for grasping the relation between humanity and nature. ‘Deep’ interpretations of ecology, in which nature is understood to encompass humanity, appear, by contrast, less amenable to assimilation by Christianity. The choice – for so it is often presented – between ‘deep’ and ‘social’ forms of ecology is thus a test case for Christianity. Does the Christian theologian opt for ‘social’ ecology because it best addresses the issue of human embeddedness in nature or because it fits better with prior metaphysical commitments? This article argues that the only way such a dilemma can be addressed theologically is by thinking through at a fundamental level the character of God’s relation to the world. An enquiry in philosophical theology, through the consideration of the concept of divine simplicity, it is argued, suggests that Christianity is not condemned to ‘religious’ readings of ecology. That is, Christianity is not obliged to select evidence based on criteria derived from prior theological commitments (e.g. to the model of stewardship). Instead, beginning in the concept of God enables a truly ‘secular’ enquiry which acknowledges a wide range of evidence of our materiality. Indeed, such a ‘secular’ enquiry can only be established by reference to the idea of God.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号