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 78 毫秒
1.
In this response to Ted Peters, I relate the proposal of deep incarnation to Luther's theology of the real presence of the humanity of Christ in creation. Based on a typology of four distinctive models of kenosis, I furthermore argue that a kenotic view of incarnation and divine creativity does not necessarily imply a divine absence and withdrawal from creation, as presupposed by Professor Peters. Deep incarnation is consistent with a compatibilist view of kenosis, but not with ideas of divine abdication, or metamorphosis. Finally I situate the view of deep incarnation to Scandinavian creation theology and to research programs at the Centre for Naturalism and Christian Semantics, Copenhagen University.  相似文献   

2.
This paper offers a theological critique of the future of 'nature' as suggested by New Biology, including recent developments in genetic engineering. It explores the biblical basis for grounding a theology of creation in the wisdom motif. The relationship between wisdom and creation in the Old Testament is discussed. The link between wisdom, Christ and the Holy Spirit is suggestive of wisdom's involvement in re-creation as well as initial creation. An argument is put forward for a Trinitarian basis for wisdom. The relationship between wisdom and apocalyptic literature gives a clue as to how wisdom might contribute to theological reflection on the future. Wisdom as metaphor is used to construct a new future of science. By reformulating the future of creation in the light of wisdom a future of science comes into view that meets the postmodern requirement for adaptability and diversity, but without forgetting the idea of distinction between humanity and the natural world. The long tradition of wisdom brings both a rootedness in historical perspectives and dynamic flexibility that serves to inform the relationship between God and the natural world. A measure of stability is a requirement in shaping perspectives for the future, particularly if the ambivalence and anxiety associated with new explorations in science are to be met.  相似文献   

3.
Andrew J. Robinson 《Zygon》2004,39(1):111-136
The starting point for this article is the question of the relationship between Darwinism and Christian theology. I suggest that evolutionary theory presents three broad issues of relevance to theology: the phenomena of continuity, naturalism, and contingency. In order to formulate a theological response to these issues I draw on the semiotics (theory of signs) and cosmology of the American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce. Peirce developed a triadic theory of signs, underpinned by a threefold system of metaphysical categories. I propose a semiotic model of the Trinity based on Peirce's semiotics and categories. According to this model the sign‐processes (such as the genetic “code”) that are fundamental to life may be understood as vestiges of the Trinity in creation. I use the semiotic model to develop a theology of nature that addresses the issues raised by evolutionary theory. The semiotic model amounts to a proposal for a new metaphysical framework within which to understand the relationship between God and creation and between theology and science.  相似文献   

4.
Abstract

Mutual respect and understanding between the world's religions has become increasingly necessary in a global society where peace can be tenuous. This article will concentrate on challenges for Christianity in relationship with other world religions. Can interreligious dialogue benefit from what we learn from the dialogue 1 ?1?Ian G. Barbour in his work, Religion in an Age of Science, Gifford lectures, vol. 1 (San Francisco: HarperSanFranscisco, 1990), ch. 1 proposed a fourfold “typology” for relating science and theology, each containing subtypes. One of those types, Barbour called “dialogue”—which is of interest here as the model for shaping the dialogue between world religions. In his revised edition in 1997, he made minor modifications; however, in his When Science Meets Religion, Enemies, Stranger or Partners, (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2000), Barbour uses the typology as the organizing structure for all his book's chapters, which is instructive for those wanting to do more reading and understand dialogue beyond what is given here. between science and theology? Yes. 2 ?2?Email from Ted Peters, Professor at Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary and the Graduate Theological Union (GTU), Program Director of the Science and Religion Course Program of the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences (CTNS); Prof, Peters proposed using a relational statement of this type. The science–theology dialogue is part of the ongoing effort to bridge 3 ?3?Ted Peters and Gaymon Bennett, eds., Bridging Science and Religion (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003), Foreword (Robert John Russell), ix–xii; Introduction (Gaymon Bennett), 14. the intellectual divide between the discoveries of natural science that have made our lives in the material world better, and interpretations and understandings in the various faith traditions that have given meaning and value to our living in the material world.  相似文献   

5.
This article explores whether we can speak of an aggregate Christian cosmology or doctrine of creation constructed by the Cappadocian Fathers, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory Nazianzen and Gregory of Nyssa. While discouraging the possibility of identifying a perfectly contoured ‘system’ of Cappadocian cosmology, I argue that there are certain ‘first principles’ and doctrinal correlates shared by this triumvirate. More helpful is to approach their constructive theology of creation from the standpoint of its basic epistemological protocols of theologia, which lay down the ground rules for Christian language of Creator and creation, and theôria, the church's ‘sanctified intuition’ of the meaning of the world. Theôria, as ‘contemplation’ in the broadest sense, enables the Cappadocians to envision the world, through the lens of sacred history, as a theatre of tragedy and beauty, and as the matrix of the triune Creator's aspiration to bring about an ever‐renewed creation.  相似文献   

6.
The essay introduces Sergei Bulgakov's theology of creation and evil in order to develop a theology of language, conceiving language as the path along which humans receive their own givenness, but also participate in the creation of the world. Poetry's attention to the difficulty of language, its acceptance of artificial disciplines, and its nonrational mode of knowledge uniquely attune it to language's creative—and destructive—potential. Like a monastery for language, poetry enacts a linguistic askesis, schooling its language and its readers in conversion. The essay includes a close reading of Gjertrud Schnackenberg's poem, “Supernatural Love.” A conclusion situates the essay's program for a theology of literature in relation to Henri de Lubac's work on spiritual exegesis and Hans Urs von Balthasar's use of literature in his theology.  相似文献   

7.
Ted Peters 《Zygon》2010,45(4):921-937
The construction of a distinctively Christian “theology of evolution” or “theistic evolution” requires the incorporation of the science of evolutionary biology while building a more comprehensive worldview within which all things are understood in relation to our creating and redeeming God. In the form of theses, this article brings four support pillars to the constructive work: (1) orienting evolutionary history to the God of grace; (2) affirming purpose for nature even if we cannot see purpose in nature; (3) employing the theology of the cross to discern divine compassion in the natural world; and (4) relying on the divine promise of new creation. Among other things, John Haught's blueprint has located the pedestals on which these pillars will stand. For this groundwork, Haught deserves thanks.  相似文献   

8.
Abstract : What is the role of science in theology? What internal dynamics compel theology to take science seriously? Those are the questions—posed in a characteristically cautious academic fashion. There is a back‐story that needs to be told, however, if we are to get at these questions with the vigor they require: Without radical reformation of theology, there is little chance that we can even begin to work on the agenda that science poses to Christian faith and life. Faith is a journey in which we seek to make sense of the world and our lives in it in the light of the gospel we have received. The gospel is about God, God's presence and redemptive work in Jesus Christ and God's continuing presence in the Holy Spirit. But since it is God's presence and work in the world and for us, the gospel is also about the world and about human being—and that is where science comes in, provoking its reformation. Science is now an irreplaceable source of knowledge about the world and ourselves, and in some respects its knowledge is normative. Scientific knowledge has reshaped our view of the world and ourselves in ways that are so commonly known that it is unnecessary to elaborate. To relate our gospel to our actual lives in the empirical world—that is theology's motivation for taking science seriously. But theology must be reformed and reshaped if it is to be capable of taking science seriously. In this essay we focus on this reforming of theology.  相似文献   

9.
The third edition of Peters’ systematic theology provides an opportunity to assess his contextual theology, descended from Tillich's ‘method of correlation’, from the perspective of my own textual theology, descended from Karl Barth's revelation theology, on the common ground of a shared Trinitarianism and positive retrieval of the twentieth‐century's rediscovery of the New Testament eschatology. The article affirms Peters’ sharply focused cognitive claim to truth about God as the world's future, but asks a series of questions about how this claim is actually sustained in Peters’ capacious work. It concludes with the ‘apocalyptic’ judgement that Peters’ ‘progressive’ method is not fully adequate to the challenge of our present spiritual situation.  相似文献   

10.
Abstract. In contrast to Christian theology that has ignored science, this essay suggests that a credible doctrine of God as creator must take into account scientific understandings of the world. The introduction of the principle of inertia into seventeenth-century science and philosophy helped change the traditional idea of God as creator (which included divine conservation and governance) into a deist concept of God. To recapture the idea that God continually creates, it is important to affirm the contingency of the world as a whole and of all events in the world. Reflecting on the interrelationship of contingency and natural law provides a framework for relating scientific theories of a universal field, the concept of emergent evolution, and the theological concept of eternal divine spirit active in all creation.  相似文献   

11.
Before the Second Vatican Council, Edward Schillebeeckx O.P. (1914–2009) had begun to reassess and the role and nature of eschatology as a discipline within Catholic theology. He began to formulate an early theology of hope in the 1950s which he would later develop quite extensively. His reflections during the Council on the famous draft of Gaudium et Spes, and on the finished document reveal the urgency of rethinking the essential relationship between ‘church’ and ‘world’. This article examines the impact of Gaudium et Spes on Schillebeeckx's work in two aspects. First, the way that it helped to orient his eschatological thought towards an emphasis on the ‘future’. The distance between the ‘already’ and the ‘not yet’, coupled with the essential place of creation as the site of God's salvific activity in history, began to push Schillebeeckx towards an eschatological and primarily future‐oriented understanding of Christian praxis and preaching. Second, this article will examine the anthropology that Schillebeeckx reads from Gaudium et Spes and the way in which a ‘new image’ of humanity, in light of a future‐oriented eschatology, contributed to his attempts to rethink the tension between ‘church’ and ‘world’.  相似文献   

12.
Charley D. Hardwick 《Zygon》2005,40(3):667-682
Abstract. This essay is an appreciative engagement with Karl Peters's Dancing with the Sacred (2002). Peters achieves a naturalistic theology of great power. Two themes are covered here. The first is how Peters gives ontological footing for a naturalistic conception of God conceived as the process of creativity in nature. Peters achieves this by conceiving creativity in terms of Darwinian random variation and natural selection combined with the notion of nonequilibrium thermodynamics. He gives ontological reference for a conception of God similar to Henry Nelson Wieman's idea of creative transformation. The second theme is how Peters succeeds in translating this nonpersonal conception of God into a powerful view of naturalistic religion that can shape a religious form of life. The key is that Peters's God can be understood as present in experience. Peters provides naturalistic interpretations of grace and the cruciform structure of creativity; the latter addresses the problem of evil in a nuanced fashion. I conclude with three critical comments about Peters's environmental ethics, his use of the notion of mystery, and his failure to have a robust conception of human fault or sin.  相似文献   

13.
14.
Abstract. Karl Peters's book Dancing with the Sacred brings together his insights from evolutionary biology and ecology, world religions, and process thought into an integrated autobiographical reflection on his thoughts, teaching, and life. The book simultaneously engages readers in their own reflections about religion and science and reminds them that their reflections are freighted with moral responsibility. For Peters, self‐understanding correlates with understanding the world. The celebration of diversity coincides with the universal concerns that all face living together on this planet. Our future depends on how we live in the present tense.  相似文献   

15.
The main purpose of this study is to explore the Christian response to the current ecological crisis by examining three statements using a method of theological reflection: Evangelii Gaudium (EG), Together towards Life (TTL), and The Cape Town Commitment (CTC). The three statements request Christians’ care for creation, which is now threatened. In contemplating the ecological crisis, the three statements call attention to the widespread abuse and destruction of the Earth due to an economic system that accelerates consumerism and human greed. To overcome this ecological crisis, Pope Francis recalls the joy of the gospel overflowing from the Trinity; TTL and CTC echo this, drawing their faith tradition from the Trinity with widening understanding of God who is creator, redeemer, and sustainer. The three statements also identify the rest of creation as the new poor in order to recall that the suffering of the poor and the suffering of the earth are one, inseparable from the suffering of Jesus. Finally, this study examines the three statements in relation to the spirituality of ecological themes. In particular, EG and TTL discern a false spirituality that is a form of individualism and a theology of prosperity, but suggest a spirituality that is referred to as either transformative spirituality or mystical fraternity. The study concludes that it is time to turn to the cosmological dimension of spirituality and theology for fraternity with God's creation and the future of the earth community.  相似文献   

16.
Panpsychism, whereby mentality is considered fundamental within the natural world, does not appear prima facie to be a friend to with either natural science or Christian theology. This article challenges this first impression. Within the science and theology dialogue, panpsychism has been a central component of Process theologians’ efforts to integrate these disciplines into a larger metaphysical framework; but, this is not the method adopted in this paper. Instead, it is argued that panpsychism gives scholars the potential for greater progress in two field defining discussions: quantum accounts of special divine action and theistic evolution. It is shown that panpsychism currently finds sufficient consonance with the relevant scientific disciplines and has substantial benefits for theologians engaged in these areas. Panpsychism holds great promise as the philosophy of mind for future generations of science-and-religion scholars.  相似文献   

17.
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   

18.
Robert John Russell 《Dialog》2007,46(3):199-207
Abstract : This article explores the creative mutual interaction between Christian theology and the natural sciences through five key issues: (1) the relation between creation ex nihilo and Big Bang cosmology; (2) biological evolution and continuous creation; (3) the search for non‐interventionist objective divine action in light of physics and biology; (4) the problem of suffering in nature and with it the turn to redemption theology via the bodily Resurrection of Jesus; and (5) the challenge raised for its eschatological implications by scientific predictions for the future of the universe. The article concludes with a brief suggestion for the ways Christian theology, reformulated in light of these sciences, might offer creative suggestions for future scientific research, and, in doing so, complete the loop promised by the phrase “mutual creative interaction.”  相似文献   

19.
Wolfhart Pannenberg 《Zygon》2006,41(1):105-112
Abstract. It is misleading to speak of warfare between science and Christian theology, as Andrew White did in 1896. White also was mistaken in exaggerating the conflict between the church and Galileo and Copernicus. The more important issue between science and theology has to do with the mechanistic interpretation of nature. When he introduced the principle of inertia in his natural philosophy, René Descartes insisted that God's immutability renders it impossible for God to intervene in the creation. He reduced the idea of God to a deistic notion by speaking of motion exclusively as a property of bodies. Even though Isaac Newton offered a different view, the Cartesian view dominated subsequent thinking. This made dialogue with theology difficult. Michael Faraday, followed by Albert Einstein, introduced the idea of field; bodily phenomena were subordinated as manifestations of fields. The precursor of the idea of field is the Stoic idea of spirit, which is close to the biblical concept of spirit. Thomas Torrance and I have taken this concept of field as an occasion to reopen dialogue. Mechanistic thinking accounts for the tension between Darwinian thought and theology. In principle the tension can be resolved, because the Bible itself asserts that all living things were brought from the earth—that is, organic life emerged from inorganic matter. Thus, emergence, contingency, and novelty are consistent with Darwinian evolutionary thinking. Contingency can be related conceptually to the activity of God in creation.  相似文献   

20.
Abstract: Interpreting Luther's Trinitarian theology of creation, it is shown how Luther's doctrine of creation is modelled on his soteriology. In his writing Against Latomus(1521) Luther established his famous distinction between the external grace of God (favor dei) and the divine gift (donom): the living Christ. A similar distinction can be re‐constructed from Luther's theology of creation as presented in his catechisms, sermons, tracts, and exegetical writings. Just as Luther makes a distinction between the Christ who takes side for us within God, and the Christ who is dwelling in the heart of the believer, Luther makes a the distinction between the fatherly love toward humankind (benevolentia), and the Father, Son and Spirit, who are at work from within the life of the creatures in God's blessing (benedictio). There is an implicit notion of a pater pro nobis and a pater in nobis, which reflects, in the order of creation, the classic distinction between Christus pro nobis and Christus in nobis. According to Luther's theology of the Eucharist and divine blessing, there exists a union between God and creature, which has a similar structure as the union between Christ and believer. There are distinctions to be drawn as well as correlations to be seen between the order of creation and the order of salvation.  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