Revelation between Cognitive Science of Religion and Dialectical Theology

Abstract

The article critically discusses the contemporary relevance and challenges of Rudolf Bultmann's theology of revelation in relation to the basic claims of cognitive science of religion. Underlying the analysis is the assumption that his theology still has some relevance when confronted with the claims from this scientific approach to religion. There are nevertheless also good reasons for arguing that his notion of revelation needs a wider and more experiential focus. The argument for such an experiential-based notion of revelation is provided by an analysis of what features qualified revelatory experience may consist in.     

The Turning of the Tide: Theology,Religion, and Economics1

Abstract : Although capitalist free market economics is in crisis, its assumptions continue to shape not only how we do business or politics but also how we think and feel, and even what we believe. For theologians and scholars of religion this means that we can no longer do our work without taking into consideration what is happening in the economy and how it affects us; before religion can become part of the solution we need to understand how it has become part of the problem. This article investigates how economics has shaped religion and theology and develops alternative perspectives.     

Risk and Religion: Toward a Theology of Risk Taking

Historically the concept of risk is rooted in Renaissance lifestyles, in which autonomous agents such as sailors, warriors, and tradesmen ventured upon dangerous enterprises. Thus, the concept of risk inseparably combines objective reality (nature) and social construction (culture): Risk = Danger + Venture. Mathematical probability theory was constructed in this social climate in order to provide a quantitative risk assessment in the face of indeterminate futures. Thus we have the famous formula: Risk = Probability (of events) × the Size (of future harms). Because the concept of harm is always observer relative, however, risk assessment cannot be purely quantitative. This leads to the question, What are the general conditions under which risks can be accepted? There is, after all, a difference between incurring a risk and bearing the costs of risks selected for by other agencies. Against this background, contours of a theology of risk emerge. If God creates a self‐organizing world of relatively autonomous agents, and if self‐organization is favored by cooperative networks of autopoietic processes, then the theological hypothesis of a risk‐taking God is at least initially plausible. Moreover, according to the Christian idea of incarnation, God is not only taking a risk but is also bearing the risks implied by the openness of creation. I thus argue for a twofold divine kenosis—in creation as well as in redemption. I discuss some objections to this view, including the serious counterargument that risk taking on behalf of others remains, even for God, a morally dubious task. What are the conditions under which the notion of a risk‐taking God can be affirmed without leaving us with the picture of God as an arbitrary, cosmic tyrant? And what are the practical implications for the ways in which human agents of faith, hope, and love can learn to cope with the risks of everyday life and of political decisions?     

Recent Books on ≡ Theology, Science and Religion

Books reviewed in this article:
Keith Ward, God, Faith & the New Millennium: Christian Belief in an Age of Science.
Fraser Watts ed, Science Meets Faith: Theology and Science in Conversation.
Ian G. Barbour, Religion and Science: Historical and Contemporary Issues.
Philip Clayton, God and Contemporary Science.     

Teaching Introductory Upper‐Level Religion and Theology Classes

The undergraduate study of religion is predominantly undertaken by non‐majors who are meeting a general education requirement. This means that, while curricular discussions make important distinctions between the work of lower‐ and upper‐division courses, many religion and theology faculty are teaching hybrid courses that we call “introductory upper‐level courses.” These play an introductory role in general education while also serving the study of religion in a more advanced way. Attention to how these courses fit into multiple curricular goals will be important for the scholarship of teaching and learning in religious studies and theology. This essay draws on scholarship about introductory teaching and a survey of faculty about introductory upper‐level courses to argue that the content of such courses should be understood as serving the study of religion at an advanced level, the context should be understood as introducing general education goals, and the goals for intellectual growth must strike a challenging balance between the two.     

Teaching and Learning Theology and Religion at the University of Botswana

This essay is part of a collection of short essays solicited from authors around the globe who teach religion courses at the college level (not for professional religious training). They are published together with an introduction in Teaching Theology and Religion 18:3 (July 2015). The authors were asked to provide a brief overview of the curriculum, student learning goals, and pedagogical techniques employed in their courses.     

Review Essay: The Divided Church and its Theology

Book reviewed in this article:
Ephraim Radner, The end of the Church: A Pneumatology of Christian Division in the West     

Religion,Theology and Science: A Reformational Dooyeweerdian Approach

The most discussed (and applied) approaches to the relationship between religion and science seem to be basically four: opposition, independence, dialogue and integration. Only a few authors take into account the reformational approach that finds its roots in the work of Abraham Kuyper, Herman Dooyeweerd and others. This model may be described by the formula “inner reformation.” A historical and systematic introduction to this approach is hereby provided by sketching its understanding of the nature of (and relationships among) science, theology and religion. In the process, the originality and value of this approach to the relationship between religion and science are highlighted.     

Radical Traditions and the Return to Scripture in Religion and Theology

Books reviewed in this article:
David Weiss Halivni, Revelation Restored: Divine Writ and Critical Responses
Peter Ochs and Nancy Levene, Textual Reasonings: Jewish Philosophy and Text Study at the End of the Twentieth Century
P. Travis Kroeker and Bruce Ward, Remembering the End: Dostoevsky as Prophet to Modernity
Stanley Hauerwas, Wilderness Wanderings: Probing Twentieth Century Theology and Philosophy
David Toole, Waiting for Godot in Sarajevo: Theological Reflections on Nihilism, Tragedy, and Apocalypse
George Lindbeck (ed.) and James J. Buckley, The Church in a Postliberal Age     

The Scholarship of Teaching in Theology and Religion: A Wabash Center Advisory Committee Conversation

The article is a reflection on what I perceive to be a confusion about the relation between theoretical judgments and judgments of pedagogical efficacy. My interest in the issue originated with my own confusion over persistent student resistance to certain assigned texts that I had initially felt confident would prove valuable in the classroom. The essay unfolds in three segments. In the first, I recount how this concern about the relation between theoretical judgments and judgments of pedagogical efficacy evolved out of my own teaching. I next list three tentative conclusions about the correlation or lack of correlation between theoretical judgments and judgments of pedagogical efficacy. In the concluding segment, I call for concerted resistance to the tendency of pure rationality to colonize the aesthetic and dramatic components of experience so essential to transformative teaching and learning.     

How One Unitarian Universalist Integrates Evolution into his Theology and Religion

Evolution can be a "weasel word" unless circumscribed to mean only a morphological change over time. When this is done, the fact of what can be distinguished from the faith of how . I believe that evolution is purely a natural process, but recognizing that everyone creates his or her own God, I feel justified in giving the name God to that mysterious presence in every interaction that causes transformation, since this is what gives the universe its dynamism. I relate how this God concept informs my religious and ethical life and gives my life meaning and purpose.