On Biotechnology,Theology, and the Human Sciences

There may be very good Christian theological reasons to oppose human biotechnological enhancement. It is, however, difficult to discern what they are. Much of the specifically Christian response to transhumanist biotechnological enhancement has revolved around the metaphysics of human persons; this is hardly surprising, given that similar themes appear in other bioethical themes, such as over in vitro fertilization, abortion, and euthanasia. The main aim of this paper is to clarify the theological requirements for such responses, particularly those that are mistakenly delegated to scientists. In particular, the paper will focus on the need for a Christian theological account of human nature that does not unduly rely on biological accounts of the same.     

Pragmatic Theology and the Natural Sciences at the Intersection of Human Interests

This paper elicits a twentieth-century American story that is deeply rooted in the legacy of American philosophical pragmatism, its impact on a particular school, and its reconstruction of American theology. The paper focuses on three generations of American theologians, and it centers on how these theologians reconstruct theology in light of the science of their day and how they maintain a true plurality of insights about human life in the world. The pragmatic theologian regards the creative exchange between theology and natural science as an opportunity for renewing our understanding of religious life and appreciating the various commitments of scientists and theologians as they meet at the juncture of human interests. The first voice is that of the early Chicago School of Theology represented by Shailer Mathews, Gerald Birney Smith, and George Burman Foster. The second voice is that of Henry Nelson Wieman, a second-generation theologian at Chicago. The final theologian discussed is James M. Gustafson, former Professor of Theological Ethics at Chicago.     

Religion in the Context of Culture, Theology, and Global Ethics

The theme of this symposium is distinctive and challenging, because it incorporates the dimensions of interreligious reflection, theology, science, and ethics. This article presents a palette of issues that are both challenge and resource for approaching the theme. Three sets of issues are considered: (1) the role of religion in culture, (2) theological interpretation of nature, disease, and evil, and (3) the fashioning of a global ethic.     

从新约的历史逻辑审视汉语神学与圣经神学

本文从新约的历史逻辑审视汉语神学,指出新约的历史逻辑研究,虽然和圣经神学在研究内容上(信仰观方面)有某种程度的关联,但它在研究形式上由于还致力于新约的语言观、时间观、正义观的阐明,所以,它远远超出了一般以讨论圣经文本的信仰教义为使命的圣经神学,应当属于人文-社会学的新约学范畴.其人文性表现在新约文本的语言观、时间观的阐释中;其社会学的特征体现在新约文本的正义观的论说中.在研究方法上,新约的历史逻辑在根本上区别于圣经神学.汉语神学的描述性的定义为:以圣经基督论为启示的中心、以汉语为母语的基督徒的信仰为经验的根据、以汉语思想文化传统为阐释的背景、以历代教会及其神学思想(希腊化、拉丁化、欧美)的学典为言说的参照、以汉语学者的基督经验的宗教学研究为基础的神学.其次,从新约的历史逻辑审视圣经神学,其结果至少应当包括关于耶稣基督事件本身的言说、关于耶稣基督事件的人言的言说(初期教会如何看待耶稣基督事件留下的人言)、关于耶稣基督事件的历史事实的清理.如何具体地把这三者揭示出来,构成新约的历史逻辑为方法论的汉语圣经神学的内容.     

Without Negative Theology: Deconstruction and the Politics of Negative Theology

This article explores Derrida's reading of negative theology and, in particular, his dramatic claim that there would be no politics 'without' negative theology. It begins by summarising the general thrust of Derrida's critique of negative theology. It then focuses upon the complex history of the term 'without' in Derrida's texts on Pseudo-Dionysius, Angelus Silesius and others. Finally, the article places this reading of negative theology in the context of the so-called 'political turn' in Derrida's texts in recent years. The concept of the 'without', it argues, belongs with, and helps to clarify, comparatively more famous Derridaean political themes like the decision, the impossible and religion without religion. In conclusion, the article argues that a better understanding of Derrida's claim that there would be no politics 'without' negative theology might also lead to a better understanding of the politics of deconstruction.