Pub Date : 2023-07-11DOI: 10.1163/27726606-20230016
Xihou Ji
From an individual’s perspective, relational fields in the philosophy of art serve as departure points in thinking about art, as well as one’s own life. This paper looks at historical texts by Zha Changping, Lü Peng, and Lu Hong as catalysts for thinking on the history of contemporary art, discovering relational fields and occurrences of truth that bring art into being, considering art relations and arising field occurrences, while also reflecting on issues concerning how art relational fields may be reterritorialized. These relational thoughts ultimately direct to a kind of humanist criticism reconstructed by professor Zha Changping. It is based on the ontology of humanist criticism, the methodology of perceptual cultural criticism, the foundational theory of world relational aesthetics, and the revealed theology of relation.
{"title":"Reconstruction of Humanist Criticism Based on the Revealed Theology of Relation","authors":"Xihou Ji","doi":"10.1163/27726606-20230016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27726606-20230016","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000From an individual’s perspective, relational fields in the philosophy of art serve as departure points in thinking about art, as well as one’s own life. This paper looks at historical texts by Zha Changping, Lü Peng, and Lu Hong as catalysts for thinking on the history of contemporary art, discovering relational fields and occurrences of truth that bring art into being, considering art relations and arising field occurrences, while also reflecting on issues concerning how art relational fields may be reterritorialized. These relational thoughts ultimately direct to a kind of humanist criticism reconstructed by professor Zha Changping. It is based on the ontology of humanist criticism, the methodology of perceptual cultural criticism, the foundational theory of world relational aesthetics, and the revealed theology of relation.","PeriodicalId":41940,"journal":{"name":"Logos & Pneuma-Chinese Journal of Theology","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88547374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-11DOI: 10.1163/27726606-20230014
Ruixiang Li, P. Huang
Scholars have long acknowledged the substantial influence of the Renaissance movement on Luther’s Reformation. However, due to the absence of comprehensive studies on Luther’s contexts, a thorough and detailed analysis of this influence in Luther’s thought and writings has been hindered. The aforementioned circumstance has resulted in the overall disregard of this contribution in the history of Western philosophy. This paper aims to analyze the distinct impact of Renaissance ideology on the evolution of Luther’s concept of liberty. The first section will discuss the background of Luther’s reform movement and the fundamental place of the humanist concept of liberty in its impact on the destruction of the religious power of the Catholic Church. The second section will examine the significant role played by humanists, such as Erasmus, in shaping Luther’s liberal ideas during his early years. The third section will examine how Luther’s understanding of liberty was developed through his polemical exchanges with Erasmus and other thinkers. This process ultimately resulted in Luther’s distinctive and paradoxical conception of freedom, which highlights Luther’s and humanists’ historical influence on the independence, emancipation, and autonomy of the individual personality in their age. The fourth section will examine the influence of Luther’s paradoxical ontological theory on the development of Western intellectual history. Additionally, it will address the misinterpretation of this intellectual history lineage by the mainstream of Western intellectual history that occurred concurrently. Finally, in the twentieth century, the revival of Luther’s thought, which was gradually revitalized by Heidegger, Karl Barth, and other contemporary scholars, also highlights the significant influence of Renaissance thought on Luther’s theory and the whole history of Western thought.
{"title":"The Influence of Renaissance Thought on Martin Luther’s View of Liberty","authors":"Ruixiang Li, P. Huang","doi":"10.1163/27726606-20230014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27726606-20230014","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Scholars have long acknowledged the substantial influence of the Renaissance movement on Luther’s Reformation. However, due to the absence of comprehensive studies on Luther’s contexts, a thorough and detailed analysis of this influence in Luther’s thought and writings has been hindered. The aforementioned circumstance has resulted in the overall disregard of this contribution in the history of Western philosophy. This paper aims to analyze the distinct impact of Renaissance ideology on the evolution of Luther’s concept of liberty. The first section will discuss the background of Luther’s reform movement and the fundamental place of the humanist concept of liberty in its impact on the destruction of the religious power of the Catholic Church. The second section will examine the significant role played by humanists, such as Erasmus, in shaping Luther’s liberal ideas during his early years. The third section will examine how Luther’s understanding of liberty was developed through his polemical exchanges with Erasmus and other thinkers. This process ultimately resulted in Luther’s distinctive and paradoxical conception of freedom, which highlights Luther’s and humanists’ historical influence on the independence, emancipation, and autonomy of the individual personality in their age. The fourth section will examine the influence of Luther’s paradoxical ontological theory on the development of Western intellectual history. Additionally, it will address the misinterpretation of this intellectual history lineage by the mainstream of Western intellectual history that occurred concurrently. Finally, in the twentieth century, the revival of Luther’s thought, which was gradually revitalized by Heidegger, Karl Barth, and other contemporary scholars, also highlights the significant influence of Renaissance thought on Luther’s theory and the whole history of Western thought.","PeriodicalId":41940,"journal":{"name":"Logos & Pneuma-Chinese Journal of Theology","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88022594","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-11DOI: 10.1163/27726606-20230017
S. Tseng
This article consists of a comparative-theological appraisal of George Hunsinger’s Philippians in the Brazos Theological Commentary series. My aim is to bring the author’s constructive proposal of the doctrine of “merciful substitution” into dialogue with the evangelical notion of penal substitution. I will show that Hunsinger is largely in agreement with at least the wing of evangelicalism represented by followers of Geerhardus Vos like Richard Gaffin and G. K. Beale. I will present the case of John Owen and resort to the Canons of Dort to show that in this strain of evangelical theology, penal substitution describes only one aspect of the exchange of righteousness and guilt through participation. What evangelicals can learn from Hunsinger’s commentary, I will argue, is his relentless effort to formulate the doctrine of substitutionary atonement within an explicitly Nicene-Chalcedonian framework.
本文对《布拉索神学评论》系列丛书中乔治·亨辛格的《腓立比书》进行比较神学评价。我的目的是将作者关于“仁慈替代”教义的建设性建议与福音派关于刑罚替代的概念进行对话。我将表明，亨辛格至少在很大程度上与格尔哈德斯·沃斯(Geerhardus Vos)的追随者，如理查德·加芬(Richard Gaffin)和g·k·比尔(G. K. Beale)所代表的福音派是一致的。我将以约翰·欧文为例，并借助《波特正典》来说明，在福音派神学的这个流派中，刑罚替代只描述了通过参与来交换正义和罪恶的一个方面。我认为，福音派可以从亨辛格的注释中学到的是，他在明确的尼西亚-迦克墩框架内，不懈地努力制定替代赎罪的教义。
{"title":"“Merciful Substitution”: A Comparative-Theological Appraisal of George Hunsinger’s Philippians from an Evangelical Reformed Perspective","authors":"S. Tseng","doi":"10.1163/27726606-20230017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27726606-20230017","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article consists of a comparative-theological appraisal of George Hunsinger’s Philippians in the Brazos Theological Commentary series. My aim is to bring the author’s constructive proposal of the doctrine of “merciful substitution” into dialogue with the evangelical notion of penal substitution. I will show that Hunsinger is largely in agreement with at least the wing of evangelicalism represented by followers of Geerhardus Vos like Richard Gaffin and G. K. Beale. I will present the case of John Owen and resort to the Canons of Dort to show that in this strain of evangelical theology, penal substitution describes only one aspect of the exchange of righteousness and guilt through participation. What evangelicals can learn from Hunsinger’s commentary, I will argue, is his relentless effort to formulate the doctrine of substitutionary atonement within an explicitly Nicene-Chalcedonian framework.","PeriodicalId":41940,"journal":{"name":"Logos & Pneuma-Chinese Journal of Theology","volume":"547 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86798395","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-11DOI: 10.1163/27726606-20230015
Changping Zha
This paper focuses on the discussion of the concepts of “mixed modern,” “humanist criticism” and “world relational aesthetics” proposed by the author, which are academic outputs of research and critical engagements in the field of contemporary art and culture. It points out that the concept of “mixed modern” constitutes a kind of cultural logic to understand the reality in China; the theory of humanist criticism belongs to a paradigm for criticism in contemporary art, where the individual person is in the focus; the idea of “world relational aesthetics” emphasizes the internal logic and coherence of the theory itself in the process of interpretation. From a broader perspective, as part of the author’s philosophy of art, they are only the “artistic” and “experimental” results of the world-picture logic philosophy, which is finally based on a revealed theology of relation.
{"title":"Experiment of the World-Picture Logic Philosophy: Towards a Relational Theology","authors":"Changping Zha","doi":"10.1163/27726606-20230015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27726606-20230015","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This paper focuses on the discussion of the concepts of “mixed modern,” “humanist criticism” and “world relational aesthetics” proposed by the author, which are academic outputs of research and critical engagements in the field of contemporary art and culture. It points out that the concept of “mixed modern” constitutes a kind of cultural logic to understand the reality in China; the theory of humanist criticism belongs to a paradigm for criticism in contemporary art, where the individual person is in the focus; the idea of “world relational aesthetics” emphasizes the internal logic and coherence of the theory itself in the process of interpretation. From a broader perspective, as part of the author’s philosophy of art, they are only the “artistic” and “experimental” results of the world-picture logic philosophy, which is finally based on a revealed theology of relation.","PeriodicalId":41940,"journal":{"name":"Logos & Pneuma-Chinese Journal of Theology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89299648","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-11DOI: 10.1163/27726606-20230018
Jacob Chengwei Feng
The underlying framework of Chinese theology began to take shape in the Republican Era (1911–1949). After surveying three crucial contemporary works on Chinese theology, I highlight an urgent need to develop a meticulous theological method that recognizes theology’s contextual nature, conquers the liberal-conservative and elitist-grassroots dichotomous divide, and adapts to the “post-world” in the third millennium. Then I analyze the methodologies adopted by Wang Mingdao and Watchman Nee (Ni Tuosheng) by studying the starting point, orienting questions and sources for their theology. By avoiding a reductionist approach, I designate Wang’s method as ecclesial apologetics and pragmatic ethics, and Nee’s as doctrinal recovery and prophetic fulfillment. The comparison of their method yields some hitherto unnoticed insights which might prove valuable to formulating a contemporary Chinese theology in the third millennium.
{"title":"Theological Method of Chinese Theology in the Republican Era (1911–1949)","authors":"Jacob Chengwei Feng","doi":"10.1163/27726606-20230018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27726606-20230018","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The underlying framework of Chinese theology began to take shape in the Republican Era (1911–1949). After surveying three crucial contemporary works on Chinese theology, I highlight an urgent need to develop a meticulous theological method that recognizes theology’s contextual nature, conquers the liberal-conservative and elitist-grassroots dichotomous divide, and adapts to the “post-world” in the third millennium. Then I analyze the methodologies adopted by Wang Mingdao and Watchman Nee (Ni Tuosheng) by studying the starting point, orienting questions and sources for their theology. By avoiding a reductionist approach, I designate Wang’s method as ecclesial apologetics and pragmatic ethics, and Nee’s as doctrinal recovery and prophetic fulfillment. The comparison of their method yields some hitherto unnoticed insights which might prove valuable to formulating a contemporary Chinese theology in the third millennium.","PeriodicalId":41940,"journal":{"name":"Logos & Pneuma-Chinese Journal of Theology","volume":"170 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74988037","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-28DOI: 10.1163/27726606-20220013
Leonard Sidharta (戴永富)
Theology and philosophy are strange bedfellows: although they share many similar interests and constantly influence each other, their relationship is fraught with suspicion or even enmity. This problem is especially acute for those who want to harmonize their commitment to sola Scriptura with the use of philosophy in their theology. Drawing insights from Herman Bavinck’s Neo-Calvinist worldview, I argue that this apparent competition is mainly caused by the failure to recognize the organic unity between both disciplines. Without theology, all disciplines would be meaningless, but without philosophy, all disciplines would be unintelligible. Portraying the harmony between theology and philosophy depends on the success of locating the difference and relationship between the universality of theology and that of philosophy. Further, the organicity that suffuses all things and affirms the primacy of special revelation reflects the Neo-Calvinist belief in both sola Scriptura and the sacredness of all vocations.
{"title":"“How to Make Athens Closer to Jerusalem”","authors":"Leonard Sidharta (戴永富)","doi":"10.1163/27726606-20220013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27726606-20220013","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Theology and philosophy are strange bedfellows: although they share many similar interests and constantly influence each other, their relationship is fraught with suspicion or even enmity. This problem is especially acute for those who want to harmonize their commitment to sola Scriptura with the use of philosophy in their theology. Drawing insights from Herman Bavinck’s Neo-Calvinist worldview, I argue that this apparent competition is mainly caused by the failure to recognize the organic unity between both disciplines. Without theology, all disciplines would be meaningless, but without philosophy, all disciplines would be unintelligible. Portraying the harmony between theology and philosophy depends on the success of locating the difference and relationship between the universality of theology and that of philosophy. Further, the organicity that suffuses all things and affirms the primacy of special revelation reflects the Neo-Calvinist belief in both sola Scriptura and the sacredness of all vocations.","PeriodicalId":41940,"journal":{"name":"Logos & Pneuma-Chinese Journal of Theology","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89000284","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-28DOI: 10.1163/27726606-20220012
Ryan C. McIlhenny
This essay offers a comparative analysis of aspects of classical Chinese philosophy with those of Reformational (Neo-Calvinist) philosophy. Such aspects form a shared root in prioritizing temporal experience (over abstract reasoning) and conceptualizing the entirety of reality as contingent and relationally dependent. At the same time, however, what marks the divergence between the two philosophies is the underlying assumptions as to what this integral reality points toward – a directionality that is critical to meaning and being. For classical Chinese philosophy, the source and meaning of reality is found within reality itself, not beyond it, construing such reality not as independent and self-contained but necessary and sufficient. This conflicts with the notion of reality as contingent and dependent. From a Reformational perspective, on the other hand, reality (i.e., all of creation) is constituted as it stands in relation to an independent and necessary Creator. The crux of Reformational philosophy is that the origin and meaning of all reality must point outside of itself to its origin in God.
{"title":"Contact and Conflict: Integral Experience in Classical Chinese and Reformational Philosophies","authors":"Ryan C. McIlhenny","doi":"10.1163/27726606-20220012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27726606-20220012","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This essay offers a comparative analysis of aspects of classical Chinese philosophy with those of Reformational (Neo-Calvinist) philosophy. Such aspects form a shared root in prioritizing temporal experience (over abstract reasoning) and conceptualizing the entirety of reality as contingent and relationally dependent. At the same time, however, what marks the divergence between the two philosophies is the underlying assumptions as to what this integral reality points toward – a directionality that is critical to meaning and being. For classical Chinese philosophy, the source and meaning of reality is found within reality itself, not beyond it, construing such reality not as independent and self-contained but necessary and sufficient. This conflicts with the notion of reality as contingent and dependent. From a Reformational perspective, on the other hand, reality (i.e., all of creation) is constituted as it stands in relation to an independent and necessary Creator. The crux of Reformational philosophy is that the origin and meaning of all reality must point outside of itself to its origin in God.","PeriodicalId":41940,"journal":{"name":"Logos & Pneuma-Chinese Journal of Theology","volume":"113 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76209957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-28DOI: 10.1163/27726606-20220011
Jin Li (李晋)
This article brings Bavinck and Pannenberg into dialogue and comparison on the theme of history. Despite the differences in their theological and social context, Bavinck and Pannenberg both seek to integrate history with theology while striving to overcome the dualism that has dichotomized history and faith since the Enlightenment. They share a common debt to the varieties of modern thought. Bavinck and Pannenberg provide modern theology with a valuable perspective on how theology might become more open and scientific in response to the difficulties posed by historical studies.
{"title":"Meaning, Objectivity and Universality: Bavinck and Pannenberg on History and Revelation","authors":"Jin Li (李晋)","doi":"10.1163/27726606-20220011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27726606-20220011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article brings Bavinck and Pannenberg into dialogue and comparison on the theme of history. Despite the differences in their theological and social context, Bavinck and Pannenberg both seek to integrate history with theology while striving to overcome the dualism that has dichotomized history and faith since the Enlightenment. They share a common debt to the varieties of modern thought. Bavinck and Pannenberg provide modern theology with a valuable perspective on how theology might become more open and scientific in response to the difficulties posed by historical studies.","PeriodicalId":41940,"journal":{"name":"Logos & Pneuma-Chinese Journal of Theology","volume":"75 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85648964","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-28DOI: 10.1163/27726606-20220010
Ximian Xu
This article aims to retrieve Abraham Kuyper’s theology to develop Reformed theology in mainland China. It shall argue that Kuyper’s concern about the varying contexts where theology is practiced shows an underdeveloped proto-Reformed contextual theology. Nonetheless, his idea of common grace serves as a conceptual apparatus through which his proto-Reformed contextual theology can underpin the construction of Sino-Reformed theology, a Reformed theology that is organically united with the history of Christianity while taking root in Chinese culture and interacting closely with the Chinese context. Such a contextualised Reformed theology can make Reformed faith an indigenous plant in the garden of Chinese Christianity on the one hand and prove conducive to the development of an organic Reformed community and theology on the other.
{"title":"How to Make Sino-Reformed Theology Possible?","authors":"Ximian Xu","doi":"10.1163/27726606-20220010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27726606-20220010","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article aims to retrieve Abraham Kuyper’s theology to develop Reformed theology in mainland China. It shall argue that Kuyper’s concern about the varying contexts where theology is practiced shows an underdeveloped proto-Reformed contextual theology. Nonetheless, his idea of common grace serves as a conceptual apparatus through which his proto-Reformed contextual theology can underpin the construction of Sino-Reformed theology, a Reformed theology that is organically united with the history of Christianity while taking root in Chinese culture and interacting closely with the Chinese context. Such a contextualised Reformed theology can make Reformed faith an indigenous plant in the garden of Chinese Christianity on the one hand and prove conducive to the development of an organic Reformed community and theology on the other.","PeriodicalId":41940,"journal":{"name":"Logos & Pneuma-Chinese Journal of Theology","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78892483","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-28DOI: 10.1163/27726606-20220009
S. Tseng
Theology and philosophy are strange bedfellows: although they share many similar interests and constantly influence each other, their relationship is fraught with suspicion or even enmity. This problem is especially acute for those who want to harmonize their commitment to sola Scriptura with the use of philosophy in their theology. Drawing insights from Herman Bavinck’s Neo-Calvinist worldview, I argue that this apparent competition is mainly caused by the failure to recognize the organic unity between both disciplines. Without theology, all disciplines would be meaningless, but without philosophy, all disciplines would be unintelligible. Portraying the harmony between theology and philosophy depends on the success of locating the difference and relationship between the universality of theology and that of philosophy. Further, the organicity that suffuses all things and affirms the primacy of special revelation reflects the Neo-Calvinist belief in both sola scriptura and the sacredness of all vocations.
{"title":"Emerging Neo-Calvinistic Barth Interpretation in Sinophone Scholarship: Its Significance for Sino-Christian Theology","authors":"S. Tseng","doi":"10.1163/27726606-20220009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/27726606-20220009","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Theology and philosophy are strange bedfellows: although they share many similar interests and constantly influence each other, their relationship is fraught with suspicion or even enmity. This problem is especially acute for those who want to harmonize their commitment to sola Scriptura with the use of philosophy in their theology. Drawing insights from Herman Bavinck’s Neo-Calvinist worldview, I argue that this apparent competition is mainly caused by the failure to recognize the organic unity between both disciplines. Without theology, all disciplines would be meaningless, but without philosophy, all disciplines would be unintelligible. Portraying the harmony between theology and philosophy depends on the success of locating the difference and relationship between the universality of theology and that of philosophy. Further, the organicity that suffuses all things and affirms the primacy of special revelation reflects the Neo-Calvinist belief in both sola scriptura and the sacredness of all vocations.","PeriodicalId":41940,"journal":{"name":"Logos & Pneuma-Chinese Journal of Theology","volume":"72 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85870646","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","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：