首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
文章检索
  按 检索   检索词:      
出版年份:   被引次数:   他引次数: 提示:输入*表示无穷大
  收费全文   694篇
  免费   86篇
  780篇
  2024年   1篇
  2023年   20篇
  2021年   6篇
  2020年   38篇
  2019年   54篇
  2018年   35篇
  2017年   44篇
  2016年   39篇
  2015年   34篇
  2014年   29篇
  2013年   113篇
  2012年   11篇
  2011年   9篇
  2010年   20篇
  2009年   29篇
  2008年   35篇
  2007年   34篇
  2006年   22篇
  2005年   27篇
  2004年   15篇
  2003年   13篇
  2002年   18篇
  2001年   23篇
  2000年   22篇
  1999年   6篇
  1998年   11篇
  1997年   7篇
  1996年   10篇
  1995年   11篇
  1994年   7篇
  1993年   4篇
  1992年   4篇
  1991年   7篇
  1990年   6篇
  1989年   6篇
  1988年   6篇
  1987年   4篇
排序方式: 共有780条查询结果,搜索用时 15 毫秒
81.
This article considers the current state of the science–religion debate in the United Kingdom. It discusses the societies, groups, and individual scholars that shape that debate, including the dialogue between theology and physics, biology, and psychology. Attention is also given to theology's engagement with ecological issues. The article also reflects on the loss of influence of denominational Christianity within British society, and the impact both on the character of the debate and the role of the churches. Finally, some promising trajectories of development for the future are outlined.  相似文献   
82.
Joanna Leidenhag 《Zygon》2016,51(4):867-882
This article is an analysis and critique of emergent theologies, focusing on areas of Christology and pneumatology. An increasing number of Christian theologians are integrating (strong) emergence theory into their work. I argue that, despite the range of theological commitments and methodological approaches represented by these scholars, each faces similar problematic tendencies when their Christian doctrines are combined with (strong) emergence theory. It is concluded that the basic logic of emergence theory, whereby matter is seen to precede mind, makes it difficult for emergent theologies to offer an account of salvation, avoid significant issues regarding God's involvement with evil, and maintain divine transcendence. It is concluded, therefore, that Christian theology should look elsewhere for a complementary metaphysical framework with which to bridge scientific and theological discourse.  相似文献   
83.
Kaspar von Greyerz 《Zygon》2016,51(3):698-717
The following essay is divided in three parts. First, while sharing in principle Harrison's hypothesis of an affinity between the sixteenth‐century Reformation and early modern science, it questions the connection between the latter and the Weberian “disenchantment of the world.” Second, it suggests a broader group of possible actors than that envisaged by Harrison in referring to virtuoso collectors and their cabinets of curiosities who are rather marginalized in Harrison's narrative. And third, it highlights (in agreement with Harrison) the physico‐theology of the second half of the seventeenth and the first half of the eighteenth century and beyond as an important temporary fusion of religion/theology and science at a time when the new science was still striving for social and religious respectability.  相似文献   
84.
This article addresses the situation of contemporary theological thinking in relation to postmodernism, or contemporary Continental philosophy. Using a criterion of health from Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalysis, it argues that theology should avoid either simpleminded assimilation of postmodernism or closeminded rejection. After critically surveying some current theological movements and figures, such as Radical Orthodoxy, I turn away from a paradigm of theology based on Barth to one based on Paul Tillich. Finally, an alternative notion of health is elaborated which leads to a deep and transformative encounter between postmodernism and theology.  相似文献   
85.
Edwin C. Laurenson 《Zygon》2000,35(4):907-918
This article responds to Stanley J. Grenz's Templeton Lecture, “Why Do Theologians Need to Be Scientists?” published in the June 2000 issue of Zygon (Grenz 2000). In the first part I outline my reasons for finding the kind of theological reflections in which Grenz engages worthy of attention by noting my disagreement with the view that a sufficient response to theological issues can be formulated on the basis of an examination of our biological nature. I assert, in that connection, the autonomy of reason as a way of investigating and understanding the world. In the second part I respond directly to Grenz by explaining my disagreement with the postmodern critique of science upon which he relies and his adherence to Christian eschatology as an answer to the conundrums into which, he posits, we are drawn as a result of that critique. I note that I agree with Grenz, however, that the activity of valuing is necessarily a forward‐looking Godlike endeavor that is not derivable from science. In the third part I suggest that we must be open to the investigation of the possible existence of an objective realm of value and that, in any case, rejection of the postmodern critique of science in many cases pro‐vides a sound basis for the disciplined resolution of factual questions that frequently lie at the base of disagreements about values.  相似文献   
86.
Robert W. Bertram 《Zygon》2000,35(4):919-925
The Critical Process unleashed by the Enlightenment and endlessly resharpening itself to this day has mortally wounded the God of Deism, maybe also of theism, even of Christianity. A temptation of Christian theology is to retreat in denial into an updated version of Deism, seemingly granting full license to modern science but only so long as it does not impugn God's love. The alternative here proposed is to ride out The Critical Process, in fact to encourage it, all the way into modernity's crux: How can a design that is not benign still be divine? The Christian reply is: through a real death of God and of ourselves as well, and through resurrections beginning now, thus freeing The Critical Process from the illusion of insuring our survival and, instead, for the honest Enlightenment task of merely telling the truth.  相似文献   
87.
Paul S. Chung 《Dialog》2007,46(4):335-343
Abstract : When Lutheran theology engages the world religions, it can offer valuable insights into God's word in action which could come from outside the church. In light of God's Word in action which is an indispensable part of Martin Luther's theology, the author draws special attention to Lutheran irregular theology in connection with a universal dimension of God's grace, theologia crucis, and God's reconciliation with the world. Thus, Lutheran theology is of pro‐Old Testament orientation in relationship with Israel, and also of dialogical and public character in dealing with the issue of religious pluralism.  相似文献   
88.
Wanda Deifelt 《Dialog》2010,49(2):108-114
Abstract : Martin Luther never developed a political theory, but his theology does inform the way Christians live in society, making it both public and political. Luther's “two kingdom theory” often has been misinterpreted to justify passivity and obedience toward civil authorities. Under closer examination, however, his theology applies to the everyday practices of politics, economics, and religious affairs. In the context of nation‐building, a Lutheran theology fosters citizenship not only as individual rights and responsibilities, but as active participation in civil society.  相似文献   
89.
John Polkinghorne 《Zygon》2000,35(4):985-988
The important role of hope in the author's thinking is acknowledged. While natural theology is important in its proper place, Christian theology centers on the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Its discourse will need to avail itself of the power of symbol.  相似文献   
90.
K. Helmut Reich 《Zygon》1995,30(3):383-405
Abstract. A strategy for deeding systematically with such complex relationships as those between science and theology is presented after a brief overview of the historical record and illustrated in terms of the concept of divinity. The application of that strategy to the title relationships yields a multilogical/multilevel solution which presents certain analogies to or isomorphisms with the doctrine of the Trinity. These concern mainly the multilogical/multilevel character of both conceptualizations and the relational and contextual reasoning required to conceive them. Furthermore, certain characteristics of the doctrine facilitate the dialogue between theologians and scientists on account of their similarity with such scientific concepts as diversity in unity, multiplicity of relationships, nonseparability, and nonclassical logic.  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