scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers in "Theology in 1985"



Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jan 1985-Theology

9 citations




Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jul 1985-Theology
TL;DR: In this paper, it is argued that there are different ways of'reading' the same reality, and that our traditions are employing one or the other of these standpoints, and if so, where does this incompatibility lie? Can different standpoints in some way complement each other? And does it imply that all our categories and standpoints are limited and partial and that the reality we are reading ultimately transcends them all?
Abstract: way in which he has been traditionally understood by most Christians. It is an approach which claims to place little importance on dogma and doctrine and, therefore, dismisses the significance of differences in this sphere. In reality, however, such differences must be acknowledged. Dismissing them in sweeping generalizations does not contribute much to the process of mutual understanding. At the other end, however, we can intensify the emphasis on our differences and overlook or explain away all coincidences. To many who are acquainted with both traditions, the identities which are argued for here may appear to be insignificantly obvious. But a sharing between two traditions about the cardinal values which constitute the spiritual life, and which should light up our conduct in the world, can never be without significance. These are not the peripheral concerns of any religion, but may be said to lie at the very heart of their meaning. There remains the challenging and compelling fact that on the basis of very different 'readings', 'interpretations' or 'responses' to ultimate reality and the human predicament, there is a certain vital coincidence about the values of authentic spirituality. This cannot but hold some meaning, and the suggestions and implications of this meaning will have to be considered by our traditions individually and jointly. Here I can only think of a few of the innumerable questions. Does it mean that there are different ways of 'reading' the same reality, and that our traditions are employing one or the other of these standpoints? Are these standpoints incompatible and, if so, where does this incompatibility lie? Can different standpoints in some way complement each other? And does it imply that all our categories and standpoints are in some way limited and partial, and that the reality we are 'reading' ultimately transcends them all?

5 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jan 1985-Theology

3 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
01 Sep 1985-Theology

3 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
01 May 1985-Theology

3 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
01 Mar 1985-Theology

3 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jul 1985-Theology


Journal ArticleDOI
01 Nov 1985-Theology
TL;DR: A community in which we may say that persecution in other lands is our own persecution, the hunger in Ethiopia is our hunger, the despair of people in South Africa and Russia is our despair as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: a community in which we may say that persecution in other lands is our own persecution, the hunger in Ethiopia is our hunger, the despair of people in South Africa and Russia is our despair. Christian community begins under the cross with the brotherly and sisterly sharing of suffering. The nearer we come to the cross, the nearer we come to one another. The crucified Christ is present here, he invites us to his table. Let us come and let us experience how we come to one another in his nearness and in his presence. Amen.



Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jul 1985-Theology

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Sep 1985-Theology


Journal ArticleDOI
01 Mar 1985-Theology
TL;DR: Eaton as discussed by the authors explored the richness of such metaphorical language, and in the process help in the discussion of where metaphor begins and myth (or reality) ends in Hebrew poetry.
Abstract: architecture has another kind of interest, though again the evidence is rather sketchy. It could perhaps be seen better as part of another area of study-for which many points in this book provide material-namely the consideration of metaphor in Hebrew poetry. Perhaps the author will take his readers further by devoting another book to exploring the richness of such metaphorical language, and in the process help in the discussion of where metaphor begins and myth (or reality) ends. Eaton has produced a helpful, careful and imaginative work. Rather surprisingly, there is no reference to Othmar Keel's book The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms (English translation 1979), which provides a rich source in both pictures and comments, relevant in fact to much more than the psalms.


Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jul 1985-Theology
TL;DR: Schlechta as discussed by the authors defined a myth as a story which is held to throw light on some essential feature of the human condition on which verifiable information is not available, and defined the notion of a "myth".
Abstract: 3 Schlechta (ed.), Werke, vol. 3 (195 6), p. 143 8. 4 The Joyful Knowledge, 125. References to Nietzsche's writings are, so far as possible, to the numbered sections. 5 Thusspoke Zarathustra preface, 2. 6 The Joyful Knowledge, 374. See also the essay by P. Gisel (to whom I am indebted for this reference) in Concilium, 145. Key passages in which he sets out his views are TheJoyful Knowledge, 371-83, Zarathusta III, second half, and Beyond Good and Evil, part IX. 8 J.P. Stern, A Study of Nietzsche (1979), p. 118. 9 I define a myth as a story which is held to throw light on some essential feature of the human condition on which verifiable information is not available. (See my article 'Myth and Truth' in Theology, july 1980). loIn the four fragmentary letters which he wrote at the onset of his madness, he signs himself twice as 'Dionysus' and twice as 'The Crucified One'. 11 The most substantial evidence is contained in the second and third essays of TheGenealogy ofMorals and, of course, in The Antichrist.


Journal ArticleDOI
01 Mar 1985-Theology

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Nov 1985-Theology
TL;DR: For a model of Jesus' own eschatology broadly in line with this view, see E. Sanders,jesus andjudaism (London 1985), chapters 1-3, and Rowland, Ope cit., pp. 133-54 as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: 14 This reference is not in MacKinnon's articles. IS p. 104· Compare 'Ethics and Tragedy', in D. MacKinnon, Explorations in Theology (London 1979), p. 194· 16 So, for example, I Cor. IS.20. See Rowland, Ope cit., pp. 187-93. 17 A constant theme of Old Testament prophecy and apocalyptic, taken up programmatically (for example) in Luke I.S2f and 4.18. For a model of Jesus' own eschatology broadly in line with this view, see E. Sanders,jesus andjudaism (London 1985), chapters 1-3, and Rowland, Ope cit., pp. 133-54. 18 Compare Marx's famous XIth thesis on Feuerbach: 'The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.' See Karl Marx, Early Writings (Harmondsworth 1975), p. 423. 19 On the reasons for Jesus' execution, see Sanders, Ope cit., chapters I I and 12, and Rowland, Ope cit., pp. 164-74.