Former underlying Dutch Reformed theological currents that laid the foundations for Beyers Naude’s critique of apartheid South African neo-Calvinism, from which apartheid theology developed, was not the only theological current in the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC) since the establishment of the Church’s Theological Seminary at Stellenbosch (1858). The Utrecht theological current and Scottish Evangelical Pietism also remained dominant in the Seminary until the 1930s and it represented a critical-realistic hermeneutic different from South African neo-Calvinism. With a mission consciousness characterized by a respect for both spiritual and physically needs of people, Scottish Evangelical Pietism (which merged with the Utrecht current), was known for its premise that all people, despite their outward appearances, are equal. Despite pressure from the neo-Calvinists, this other current survived as a minority group (sometimes limited to a few individuals). Beyers Naude was part of a younger group of supporters of the Utrecht theological current and Scottish Evangelical Pietism in the DRC, gaining insights that enabled him to transcend a worldly narrow-mindedness and exclusionary thought patterns to include all people regardless of colour or ‘race’ in his social analysis. These insights were strengthened by his father and the DRC and the Afrikaner community in general’s role establishing moral values of reconciliation, compassion benevolence and justice in him. According to this study, Utrecht and Scottish Evangelical Pietism, as well as the above mentioned moral values, would together play a decisive role in shaping the life and work of Beyers Naude and would enable him to criticise apartheid later in life.
{"title":"Eertydse Nederduitse Gereformeerde teologiese denkstrome ten grondslag van Beyers Naudé se kritiek op apartheid","authors":"Murray Coetzee","doi":"10.5952/54-3-4-372","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5952/54-3-4-372","url":null,"abstract":"Former underlying Dutch Reformed theological currents that laid the foundations for Beyers Naude’s critique of apartheid South African neo-Calvinism, from which apartheid theology developed, was not the only theological current in the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC) since the establishment of the Church’s Theological Seminary at Stellenbosch (1858). The Utrecht theological current and Scottish Evangelical Pietism also remained dominant in the Seminary until the 1930s and it represented a critical-realistic hermeneutic different from South African neo-Calvinism. With a mission consciousness characterized by a respect for both spiritual and physically needs of people, Scottish Evangelical Pietism (which merged with the Utrecht current), was known for its premise that all people, despite their outward appearances, are equal. Despite pressure from the neo-Calvinists, this other current survived as a minority group (sometimes limited to a few individuals). Beyers Naude was part of a younger group of supporters of the Utrecht theological current and Scottish Evangelical Pietism in the DRC, gaining insights that enabled him to transcend a worldly narrow-mindedness and exclusionary thought patterns to include all people regardless of colour or ‘race’ in his social analysis. These insights were strengthened by his father and the DRC and the Afrikaner community in general’s role establishing moral values of reconciliation, compassion benevolence and justice in him. According to this study, Utrecht and Scottish Evangelical Pietism, as well as the above mentioned moral values, would together play a decisive role in shaping the life and work of Beyers Naude and would enable him to criticise apartheid later in life.","PeriodicalId":18902,"journal":{"name":"Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74408360","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article is an attempt by an Old Testament scholar to engage with a debate taking place in practical theology. This debate is about the influence of religion and ritual on the formation of social capital. The author attempts to shed light on this debate by looking at the two halves of the book of Leviticus, the first half of which is dominated by ritual and the second half is characterised by a broader communal perspective.
{"title":"Rituals and social capital in the book of Leviticus? An attempt at an interdisciplinary discussion","authors":"Esias Meyer","doi":"10.5952/54-3-4-381","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5952/54-3-4-381","url":null,"abstract":"The article is an attempt by an Old Testament scholar to engage\u0000 with a debate taking place in practical theology. This debate is about the influence\u0000 of religion and ritual on the formation of social capital. The author attempts to\u0000 shed light on this debate by looking at the two halves of the book of Leviticus, the\u0000 first half of which is dominated by ritual and the second half is characterised by a\u0000 broader communal perspective.","PeriodicalId":18902,"journal":{"name":"Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75981390","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The so called emancipation of the victim of crime in the last decades - socially, in criminal proceedings, and also our theoretical reflection raises the question whether, morally speaking, our views on criminality have changed. Is this perhaps indicative of a broader cultural shift in perspectives, a reframing of the position of the victim and the perpetrator? The approach of the Dutch victimologist Jan van Dijk seems to mirror a social and political trend towards a post-Christian way of dealing with criminality. But his approach is perhaps somewhat too contemporary, as I will argue, for he fails to take into account the shadow sides of a culture which affords the victim such a central place.
在过去的几十年里，所谓的犯罪受害者的解放-在社会上，在刑事诉讼中，以及我们的理论反思提出了一个问题，即从道德上讲，我们对犯罪的看法是否已经改变。这是否预示着一种更广泛的文化视角的转变，重新定义了受害者和加害者的立场?荷兰受害者学家Jan van Dijk的方法似乎反映了一种后基督教处理犯罪的社会和政治趋势。但正如我将要论证的那样，他的方法可能有些过于现代，因为他没有考虑到一种文化的阴暗面，而这种文化为受害者提供了如此重要的地位。
{"title":"Criminality, judgement and eschatology","authors":"T. D. Wit","doi":"10.5952/54-3-4-376","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5952/54-3-4-376","url":null,"abstract":"The so called emancipation of the victim of crime in the last\u0000 decades - socially, in criminal proceedings, and also our theoretical reflection\u0000 raises the question whether, morally speaking, our views on criminality have\u0000 changed. Is this perhaps indicative of a broader cultural shift in perspectives, a\u0000 reframing of the position of the victim and the perpetrator? The approach of the\u0000 Dutch victimologist Jan van Dijk seems to mirror a social and political trend\u0000 towards a post-Christian way of dealing with criminality. But his approach is\u0000 perhaps somewhat too contemporary, as I will argue, for he fails to take into\u0000 account the shadow sides of a culture which affords the victim such a central\u0000 place.","PeriodicalId":18902,"journal":{"name":"Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86093651","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The discourse on human dignity is most of the times determined by ethics and dogmatic issues. It is often the case that the paradigm of democratisation dictates processes of conceptualisation. The article operates from the hypothesis that aesthetics is more fundamental than ethics. Human dignity is a relational category determined by habitus and the eschatological status of our being qualities. In a pastoral theological approach one should shift from the democratic paradigm to the pneumatological paradigm. In this regard the theology of A. A. Van ruler becomes most appropriate. Theopoiesis points to a kind of theological aesthetics within the realm of anthropology. The basic assumption of the article is that more fundamental than the moral question whether man is good or bad is the aesthetic question: the value and purpose of our being human; i.e. the human being as beauty (the dignity of human beings) or human beings as beast (the ugliness of human beings)? Human dignity is fundamentally an aesthetic category.
{"title":"Theopoiesis and the aesthetics of human dignity: towards a pneumatological approach","authors":"D. Louw","doi":"10.5952/54-3-4-378","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5952/54-3-4-378","url":null,"abstract":"The discourse on human dignity is most of the times determined\u0000 by ethics and dogmatic issues. It is often the case that the paradigm of\u0000 democratisation dictates processes of conceptualisation. The article operates from\u0000 the hypothesis that aesthetics is more fundamental than ethics. Human dignity is a\u0000 relational category determined by habitus and the eschatological status of our being\u0000 qualities. In a pastoral theological approach one should shift from the democratic\u0000 paradigm to the pneumatological paradigm. In this regard the theology of A. A. Van\u0000 ruler becomes most appropriate. Theopoiesis points to a kind of theological\u0000 aesthetics within the realm of anthropology. The basic assumption of the article is\u0000 that more fundamental than the moral question whether man is good or bad is the\u0000 aesthetic question: the value and purpose of our being human; i.e. the human being\u0000 as beauty (the dignity of human beings) or human beings as beast (the ugliness of\u0000 human beings)? Human dignity is fundamentally an aesthetic category.","PeriodicalId":18902,"journal":{"name":"Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79798269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper takes a brief look at the history of the Huguenots in South Africa as an example of the social impact of religious communities. Arnold van Gennep and Victor turner’s theory of liminality is utilised to structure the paper as a discussion of three phases of history, namely separation, liminality, and aggregation. The paper concludes with some remarks concerning the relationship between power and religion.
{"title":"The social impact of religious communities : the case of the Huguenots in South Africa","authors":"J. Cilliers","doi":"10.5952/54-3-4-371","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5952/54-3-4-371","url":null,"abstract":"This paper takes a brief look at the history of the Huguenots\u0000 in South Africa as an example of the social impact of religious communities. Arnold\u0000 van Gennep and Victor turner’s theory of liminality is utilised to structure the\u0000 paper as a discussion of three phases of history, namely separation, liminality, and\u0000 aggregation. The paper concludes with some remarks concerning the relationship\u0000 between power and religion.","PeriodicalId":18902,"journal":{"name":"Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81301072","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this article, a short typology of Dirk Smit’s theology is set out in terms of the words “contextual”, “reformed”, “ecumenical” and “public”. This is followed by a homily on the narrative of Cain and Abel as recorded in Gen. 4 in an attempt to illustrate the features of Smit’s theology. The Genesis narrative is analysed under the theme of (de)-humanisation in Africa. At first the strategies of de-humanisation are outlined, followed by the devastating consequences of these strategies. A trinitarian approach is then used to argue for the restoration of humanity on the African continent.
{"title":"“Am I my brother’s keeper? An African reflection on humanisation","authors":"P. Naudé","doi":"10.5952/54-0-360","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5952/54-0-360","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, a short typology of Dirk Smit’s theology is set out in terms of the words “contextual”, “reformed”, “ecumenical” and “public”. This is followed by a homily on the narrative of Cain and Abel as recorded in Gen. 4 in an attempt to illustrate the features of Smit’s theology. The Genesis narrative is analysed under the theme of (de)-humanisation in Africa. At first the strategies of de-humanisation are outlined, followed by the devastating consequences of these strategies. A trinitarian approach is then used to argue for the restoration of humanity on the African continent.","PeriodicalId":18902,"journal":{"name":"Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76526455","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
From 1981 to 2002 the author, together with Dirkie Smit and Coenie Burger were responsible for the publication of 22 volumes of Sermon Helps, which embodied a specific theological and homiletical approach to the preaching event. The author finds it remarkable that after 30 years these homiletical premisses are still adhered to in what he describes as his homiletical credo regarding the preaching event (event here as translation of what leading German homileticians describe as a “Wortgeschehen”. He concentrates on this event as an encounter between listening to the living voice of God in the text and its modern context. This is in essence a hermeneutical encounter, striving to incarnate the Living Word in the language of the day, taking the text “into the night” of hard exegetical labour – and all consuming prayer. Thereby the preaching event issues in joyous celebration of the glory of God.
{"title":"A homiletic credo - A firm belief in the preaching event","authors":"B. A. Muller","doi":"10.5952/54-0-359","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5952/54-0-359","url":null,"abstract":"From 1981 to 2002 the author, together with Dirkie Smit and\u0000 Coenie Burger were responsible for the publication of 22 volumes of Sermon Helps,\u0000 which embodied a specific theological and homiletical approach to the preaching\u0000 event. The author finds it remarkable that after 30 years these homiletical premisses\u0000 are still adhered to in what he describes as his homiletical credo regarding the\u0000 preaching event (event here as translation of what leading German homileticians\u0000 describe as a “Wortgeschehen”. He concentrates on this event as an encounter between\u0000 listening to the living voice of God in the text and its modern context. This is in\u0000 essence a hermeneutical encounter, striving to incarnate the Living Word in the\u0000 language of the day, taking the text “into the night” of hard exegetical labour –\u0000 and all consuming prayer. Thereby the preaching event issues in joyous celebration\u0000 of the glory of God.","PeriodicalId":18902,"journal":{"name":"Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89461329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Confessional theology, while insisting on the centrality of the Word of God in theological reflection, admits that the socio-economic, cultural and political context in which such reflection takes place is vital. In paying homage to the theological contribution of Dirkie Smit in South Africa, this article argues that this is the most opportune time to consider how marginal issues of Africa still are in theological reflection today. Taking the baton from Smit, it is argued that confessional theology, if it is to remain relevant, must deal with issues of Africanness in theological reflections today.
{"title":"Confessional theology a belligerently public theology – How confessional theology relates to notions of Africanness and Reformedness","authors":"R. Tshaka","doi":"10.5952/54-0-362","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5952/54-0-362","url":null,"abstract":"Confessional theology, while insisting on the centrality of the Word of God in theological reflection, admits that the socio-economic, cultural and political context in which such reflection takes place is vital. In paying homage to the theological contribution of Dirkie Smit in South Africa, this article argues that this is the most opportune time to consider how marginal issues of Africa still are in theological reflection today. Taking the baton from Smit, it is argued that confessional theology, if it is to remain relevant, must deal with issues of Africanness in theological reflections today.","PeriodicalId":18902,"journal":{"name":"Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90236839","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
While a student at the University of Stellenbosch in the 1970s, I struggled through Herman Ridderbos’ 600 page Paulus - Ontwerp van zijn Theologie (Paul – Design of his Theology). Halfway through the book a classmate, Dirkie Smit, came to my rescue by allowing me to have a look at some of his handwritten notes. These notes – and his verbal explanation, delivered in one late-night session – gave me the key to understand Ridderbos’ concerns. Suddenly I understood why Ridderbos used his first chapter to explain (and debunk most of) the different nineteenth- and twentieth-century schools of Pauline interpretation. I understood why the second chapter was one on Grondstructuren (foundations) and why the third chapter – in which Ridderbos really started to deal with the material from Paul’s epistles – was about “In leven in de zonde” (In living in sin). Ridderbos’ book introduced me to Paul and prompted me to reflect on the apostle in a way that eventually led me to do my postgraduate work in New Testament studies. For this and for much more I am grateful to Dirkie and delighted to offer these reflections on Paul as part of this volume in Dirkie’s honour. I have always thought Ridderbos’ interpretation of Paul (and why he interpreted him in the way he did) was the one which I understood reasonably well. This is not to say that I, in later years, did not on occasion wonder whether and to what degree the Ridderbos interpretation of Paul that I knew was the pure Paul of Ridderbos and not the Smit reading of the Paul of Ridderbos. This did not lessen my appreciation of Smit’s contribution to my thinking about these matters. It was his thoughts on the process of reading and interpretation – for example in his 2006 work Neem, lees! (Take, Read!) – that prompted me to reflect on Smit’s influence on my reading of Ridderbos’ Paul. This brings me to the subject of this essay: the influence of reading strategies on the interpretation of texts. In recent Pauline studies the so-called Lutheran reading of Paul has been fiercely disputed. In my opinion, it would be fair to say that, despite staunch defenders, the tide is turning against the Lutheran reading. The question I turn to in this article is whether this tendency is justified, in other words: Was Luther’s interpretation a valid one?
20世纪70年代，当我还是斯泰伦博斯大学(University of Stellenbosch)的一名学生时，我读了赫尔曼·里德博斯(Herman Ridderbos)的600页《保罗的神学设计》(Paulus - Ontwerp van zijn Theologie)。书读到一半的时候，我的同学德基·史密特(Dirkie Smit)来救了我，让我看了看他的一些手写笔记。这些笔记——以及他在一次深夜会议上的口头解释——给了我理解里德博斯担忧的关键。突然间，我明白了为什么Ridderbos用他的第一章来解释(并揭穿)19世纪和20世纪不同的保罗诠释学派。我明白了为什么第二章是关于Grondstructuren(基础)的，为什么第三章——Ridderbos真正开始处理保罗书信中的材料——是关于“in leven in de zonde”(活在罪中)的。Ridderbos的书让我认识了保罗，并促使我反思这位使徒，最终促使我在研究生阶段研究新约。为了这一点以及更多的原因，我很感激德基，并且很高兴将这些对保罗的反思作为这本书的一部分，以纪念德基。我一直认为，里德博斯对保罗的诠释(以及他为什么这样解读保罗)是我相当理解的。这并不是说，在后来的岁月里，我没有偶尔想过，我所知道的里德博斯对保罗的解释，是否以及在多大程度上，是纯粹的里德博斯的保罗，而不是对里德博斯的保罗的Smit解读。这并没有减少我对Smit对我思考这些问题的贡献的感激。这是他对阅读和解读过程的思考——例如在他2006年的作品《Neem, lees!》(Take, Read!)——这促使我反思Smit对我阅读Ridderbos的《保罗》的影响。这就引出了本文的主题:阅读策略对文本解读的影响。在最近的保罗研究中，所谓的路德派对保罗的解读受到了激烈的争议。在我看来，公平地说，尽管有坚定的捍卫者，潮流正在转向反对路德教的阅读。我在这篇文章中要讨论的问题是，这种倾向是否合理，换句话说:路德的解释是否有效?
{"title":"Did Luther get it altogether wrong? Luther's interpretation of the function of the Mosaic law in Galatians","authors":"Francois J. L. Wessels","doi":"10.5952/54-0-367","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5952/54-0-367","url":null,"abstract":"While a student at the University of Stellenbosch in the 1970s,\u0000 I struggled through Herman Ridderbos’ 600 page Paulus - Ontwerp van zijn\u0000 Theologie (Paul – Design of his Theology). Halfway through the book a\u0000 classmate, Dirkie Smit, came to my rescue by allowing me to have a look at some of\u0000 his handwritten notes. These notes – and his verbal explanation, delivered in one\u0000 late-night session – gave me the key to understand Ridderbos’ concerns. Suddenly I\u0000 understood why Ridderbos used his first chapter to explain (and debunk most of) the\u0000 different nineteenth- and twentieth-century schools of Pauline interpretation. I\u0000 understood why the second chapter was one on Grondstructuren (foundations) and why the third chapter – in which Ridderbos really started to deal\u0000 with the material from Paul’s epistles – was about “In leven in de zonde” (In living\u0000 in sin). Ridderbos’ book introduced me to Paul and prompted me to reflect on the\u0000 apostle in a way that eventually led me to do my postgraduate work in New Testament\u0000 studies. For this and for much more I am grateful to Dirkie and delighted\u0000 to offer these reflections on Paul as part of this volume in Dirkie’s honour. I have\u0000 always thought Ridderbos’ interpretation of Paul (and why he interpreted him in the\u0000 way he did) was the one which I understood reasonably well. This is not to say that\u0000 I, in later years, did not on occasion wonder whether and to what degree the\u0000 Ridderbos interpretation of Paul that I knew was the pure Paul of Ridderbos and not\u0000 the Smit reading of the Paul of Ridderbos. This did not lessen my appreciation of\u0000 Smit’s contribution to my thinking about these matters. It was his thoughts on the\u0000 process of reading and interpretation – for example in his 2006 work Neem,\u0000 lees! (Take, Read!) – that prompted me to reflect on Smit’s influence on my\u0000 reading of Ridderbos’ Paul. This brings me to the subject of this essay:\u0000 the influence of reading strategies on the interpretation of texts. In recent Pauline\u0000 studies the so-called Lutheran reading of Paul has been fiercely disputed. In my\u0000 opinion, it would be fair to say that, despite staunch defenders, the tide is\u0000 turning against the Lutheran reading. The question I turn to in this article is\u0000 whether this tendency is justified, in other words: Was Luther’s interpretation a\u0000 valid one?","PeriodicalId":18902,"journal":{"name":"Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89392562","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this essay I attempt to bridge the gap between evolutionary and theological meta-narratives by making a proposal for a bottom-up, contextual form of evolutionary ethics, and then specifically ask how this might apply to the evolution of morality, to ethical judgments, and the status of ethical judgments and moral codes in theology. Most importantly, this will imply a christian ethics, and a notion of morality that proceed not from a consideration of rules, duties, rights, moral judgments, moral status, but proceeds rather, from the examination of the fundamental evolutionary realities of human nature. This argument is developed against the background of an analysis of Maxine Sheets-Johnstone’s engagement with the work of Hannah Arendt on the notion of evil. Finally I argue that the work of evolutionary ethicists are of great importance for theologians because of their direct interest in how the evolutionary origins of human behaviour is to be explained, and in which way our behaviour has been constrained, but not determined, by biological factors. Evolution by natural selection can explain our tendency to think in normative terms, i.e., our innate sense of moral awareness. However, evolutionary explanations of this moral awareness cannot explain our moral judgments, nor justify the truth claims of any of our moral judgments. Why and how we make moral judgments can only be explained on the level of cultural evolution, and by taking into account the historical embeddedness of our moral codes in religious and political conventions. For Christian Theology the choice will not be between a moral vision that is inherent in revelation and is, therefore, ‘received’ and not invented or constructed. Instead, on a post-Foundational view our moral codes and ethical convictions of what is ‘received’ is itself an interpretative enterprise, shaped experientially through our embeddedness in communities and cultures.
{"title":"Should theology take evolutionary ethics seriously? A conversation with Hannah Arendt and Maxine Sheets-Johnstone","authors":"Wentzel van Huyssteen","doi":"10.5952/54-0-365","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5952/54-0-365","url":null,"abstract":"In this essay I attempt to bridge the gap between evolutionary and theological meta-narratives by making a proposal for a bottom-up, contextual form of evolutionary ethics, and then specifically ask how this might apply to the evolution of morality, to ethical judgments, and the status of ethical judgments and moral codes in theology. Most importantly, this will imply a christian ethics, and a notion of morality that proceed not from a consideration of rules, duties, rights, moral judgments, moral status, but proceeds rather, from the examination of the fundamental evolutionary realities of human nature. This argument is developed against the background of an analysis of Maxine Sheets-Johnstone’s engagement with the work of Hannah Arendt on the notion of evil. Finally I argue that the work of evolutionary ethicists are of great importance for theologians because of their direct interest in how the evolutionary origins of human behaviour is to be explained, and in which way our behaviour has been constrained, but not determined, by biological factors. Evolution by natural selection can explain our tendency to think in normative terms, i.e., our innate sense of moral awareness. However, evolutionary explanations of this moral awareness cannot explain our moral judgments, nor justify the truth claims of any of our moral judgments. Why and how we make moral judgments can only be explained on the level of cultural evolution, and by taking into account the historical embeddedness of our moral codes in religious and political conventions. For Christian Theology the choice will not be between a moral vision that is inherent in revelation and is, therefore, ‘received’ and not invented or constructed. Instead, on a post-Foundational view our moral codes and ethical convictions of what is ‘received’ is itself an interpretative enterprise, shaped experientially through our embeddedness in communities and cultures.","PeriodicalId":18902,"journal":{"name":"Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77865782","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：