Sentences with phrase «classical theology»

If God is conceived as all - powerful, as in classical theology, and this attribute is taken to mean that all decisions are God's — that in truth God is the only agent — then the theist must surely deny either the existence of God or the existence of evil.

Ironically, many of the formal points made by women against the male - dominated tradition had already been made by process theologians against classical theology.

Linguistically the word evangelical is rooted in the Greek word evangelion and refers to those who preach and practice the good news; historically the word refers to those renewing groups in the church which from time to time have called the church back to the evangel; theologically it refers to a commitment to classical theology as expressed in the Apostles» Creed; and sociologically the word is used of various contemporary groupings of culturally conditioned evangelicals (i.e., fundamentalist evangelicals, Reformed evangelicals, Anabaptist evangelicals, conservative evangelicals).

Theologically this means that Israel's God is subject not to the norms of classical theology but to the rules of the drama itself.

And liberation theologians, breaking from the classical theology practiced in Europe, would collaborate actively in this praxis.

And yet the same idea has been defended by traditionalists, appealing to Aristotle, Aquinas and classical theology, as a metaphysical necessity.

In this application «Chance» often takes the same place that «God» takes in classical theology.

In classical theology a distinction is made in the kinds of veneration or reverence which may be given by man to others.

Process theology is thus a thoroughgoing incarnational theology standing in strong contrast to the triumphalist, dualistic, monarchical and patriarchal God of much classical theology.

In his schematism of the «natural history of Satanism,» Bakan speaks of this self - defeating anxiety syndrome as «denial»; in classical theology it is better known as «bondage of the will.

Classical theology has ascribed the power to determine all things to God.

The difficulty with this position is that consistency demanded that you must also say that God determined evil — a position classical theology denied.

In «Deity, Monarchy and Metaphysics» Williams explains Whitehead's moral and metaphysical objections to the coercive God of classical theology.102 In its place Whitehead proposes an idea of God consistent with the biblical insight that «the highest goods are realized only through persuasion.»

Dr. Kinast summarizes the interpretations which he has presented in this book and compares the relational theology of death with the more classical theology of death, assessing the strengths and limitations of each.

Both Stokes and Cousins hold that the tradition of a dynamic deity is much stronger in classical theology than is generally supposed.

Cooke is correct in chastizing much classical theology for making God too remote.

One very important change needed in the way theology is understood is recovery of the great breadth of topics treated in classical theology.

Classical theology has typically responded to this difficulty by alleging that, since all things other than God depend on God for their existence, their relations to the divine knower are constitutive of them rather than of God.

I shall start with creation ex nihilo, since this is a fundamentally important element in classical theology, one I take to have deep roots in religious experience and practice.

I would say that in exposing the internal contradictions of classical theology Hartshorne has done it a great service and rendered its doctrine of creation much more defensible.

Nor is there any danger that, thus conceived, God will be absent from the world, as in classical theology.

Insofar as classical theology aids and abets the structures of oppression, James Cone would describe it as the theology of the Antichrist.

Needless to say, the mainstream of process thought has insisted instead that it is the «block universe» of classical theology which is irreconcilable with human freedom.

In reading Elizabeth M. Kraus's The Metaphysics of Experience, A Companion to Whitehead's Process and Reality, I was particularly disappointed by her concluding chapter on «God and the World,» for there it becomes apparent that she has been reading Whitehead's remarks on theological topics through the jaundiced eyes of Boethius, St. Thomas Aquinas, and classical theology.

It is here in its account of the love revealed in Jesus that the discrepancy in the classical theology lies.

A community shaped by the biblical narrative and steeped in classical theology can easily become a gentle anachronism, rather like the clubs that get together to hold costumed jousting tournaments.

Among studies in this field made by Catholics, let me cite those of Father Peuchmaurd, who considers himself as in the lineage of classical theology.

If, therefore, experience is essentially temporal in structure and order, a timeless unchanging being of the sort proposed by classical theology could not experience, could not know or love, and indeed could not exist concretely.

This account is fundamentally incompatible with the account of God characteristic of classical theology.

For the God of classical theology is timeless, unchanging, simple, unaffected by events in the world, and absolutely independent of other, nondivine realities.

As we seek to adopt life - centered perspectives, we are often disappointed when we turn to classical theologies for help.

Even though biblical religion has always understood God as the source of novelty («Behold, I make all things new»), classical theologies have predominantly associated God with cosmic order and have failed to consider in any depth the connection between God and novelty.

And that explains much of the conflict and misunderstanding between the classical theologies of the First World and theologies of the Third World.

The image of the «crucified God» is central to Christian teaching, though perhaps it has not often been taken seriously.2 Instead «God» has been ensconced, in classical theologies, as omnipotently immune to suffering and tragedy.

The Jewish - Christian tradition has never really been content with an «unmoved mover» as the final principle of explanation, however often the notion has been found in classical theologies.

Not exact matches

One could perhaps do a lot with certain elements in these knotted classical discussions, but one will have to work hard at it, and in ways that engage theology and history subtly.

Thus it is no surprise that pluralists readily desert their pluralism in their vehement opposition to certain kinds of classical and conservative theology.

There is, as I see it, a paradigm shift taking place in contemporary Roman Catholic theology away from the classical worldview of Thomas Aquinas and other scholastic thinkers in which the philosophy of Aristotle plays such an important role to a more interpersonal approach to the God - world relationship in which God is thought to be constantly interacting with creatures in the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth.

Kant's influence on theology, and its pernicious effect, stems from the fact that he shares so much with classical Christianity.

In fact, I learned alot about Classical mechanics and newtons third law which was the beginning of my adaptation of theology into my religon.

In this it differs from classical Reformation theology, and we have already hinted that the difference may be seen in the different attitude that is taken in the Wesleyan tradition toward reason.

The classical deity of Western theology has been depicted as a patriarchal ruler.

In other words, Griffin's argument is that process theology presents a much more plausible explanation for natural evil than can classical theism.

In Reformation theology justification is not a mere negation of human works but is itself utterly dependent on the classical dogmas of the Trinity and the incarnation - for it is per Christum.

After all, this isn't the Protestantism that many of us grew up in, a Protestantism which answered to many of the harsh criticisms contained in Leithart's essay last fall, «The End of Protestantism»: either militantly convinced that Rome is nothing but a synagogue of Satan, or complacently ignoring her very existence, and also ignoring much of the robust theology of classical Protestantism.

If this is done, Mascall believes, the traditional Christian natural theology that is given classical expression by Thomas Aquinas can be shown to be true.

Others, led by theologian Thomas Oden, call for a return to «classical» theology, the great systems in which the thinkers of the early church took all of reality, including their own salvation, into a comprehensive understanding of God's activity.

Rather the concern is that the Church is ignoring the power of the ever more startling evidence of the workings of the natural order, as only the scientific methodology can reveal them, to inspire more persuasive arguments — not only to reinforce and defend classical philosophy and Church theology — but to prompt careful re-examination of them.

These three characteristics of our culture — interior restlessness, excessive curiosity and instability of purpose — are described in classical moral theology as the offspring of acedia.

Classical Christian theology knew a tension between time and Eternity, a tension created by the chasm between the creation and the Creator.