The extent to which the 'honour' of the Spirit influenced the theology of Jonathan Edwards is a hitherto underdeveloped theme. Against a backdrop of Patristic thought and in dialogue with the theology of Karl Barth, evaluation is made of pneumatological union in Edwards' Trinitarian theology as this centres on the nature and inter-relatedness of the 'three unions' that characterize his theology: the union of the three Persons of the Trinity, the union of the saints with God, and the union of the divine and human natures of Christ. Edwards' seeks to honour the Spirit as the mutual love of the Father for the Son within his Augustinian, Lockean model of the immanent Trinity, and as 'Person' in the economy. The challenges of doing so within the limits of this psychological model of the Trinity are evaluated in dialogue with the Cappadocian Fathers and Barth. In a manner patterned after union in the Trinity, Edwards gave prominence to the concept of the pneumatological union of the saints with God in Christ, in fulfilment of the self-glorifying purpose of God in creation and redemption. Edwards' experiential theology of conversion, and his elevation of subjective sanctification by the Spirit over objective justification in Christ, for assurance, is contrasted with Barth's greater emphases on the Christological union of God with humanity and objective justification in Christ. Barth's more contemplative approach is contrasted with the overly introspective spirituality of Edwards. Edwards' view of the role of the Spirit in the hypostatic union of God with humanity in Christ, which is reflective of the other unions, is also evaluated in light of Patristic, Reformed-Puritan and Barthian thought on the nature of the humanity Christ assumed, and the doctrine of the vicarious humanity of Christ. A more emphatic incarnational emphasis may have saved Edwards' Spirit- honouring spirituality from an anthropocentricity which is ironical given that the glory of God is his ontic doxological concern.

This study focuses on the relationship between Hooker's doctrine of law and his concept of "participation," which is an important feature of his sacramental doctrine. In The Lawes of Ecclesiasticall Politie (V.50--67), Richard Hooker discusses the saving work of Christ and man's participation in him through faith and the sacraments. How does Hooker understand participation in God? Hooker speaks of the Atonement, Justification and sacraments in the vocabulary of the magisterial Reform, but (perhaps uniquely) understands the same doctrines within the framework of law, the instrument by which God orders his creation. Hooker defines law in terms of Aristotelian causes to describe a process of participation: the causes that inform the natures, operations and ends of creatures accomplish a hierarchical process of emanation of being from God and return to God. Law therefore mediates between God and creation. Creatures participate in God through the natural law, but after the fall, man's participation is restored through the divine law. Hooker's account of the Incarnation and Atonement, justification through faith, and sacramental participation---the main features of the divine law---therefore takes into account the idea of law. Hooker's treatment of participation, then, is based on categories in classical physics, and his doctrine of law influences his treatment of specific theological loci.

No description available.

No description available.

From Preface: This study has a two-fold nature. In one sense the focus of attention is on the Apologists. The chapters on Clement and Athanasius attempt to follow through the basic questions raised by the Apologists. But in the other sense, what I have presented is four independent studies dealing with Justin, the other Apologists, Clement and Athanasius's Contra Gentes. Although much the same questions have been asked in all four sections, there has been no rigid attempt to systematize the answers. This may well be one of the strengths as well as one of the weaknesses of the work.

No description available.

Within the first chapter I highlight the extent Platonism influenced modern eschatology and motives for mission. This dualism led to separating divine and secular history and suited the philosophy of secular historians and theologian's who had no taste for divine reality purveying both everyday history, and individual lives. The second chapter discusses how these views, because of Premillennial-Dispensationalism, created American fundamentalism that changed what motivates foreign and local missions. Oppression and the poor have become nothing more than the evidences of a corrupt world that is destined to be destroyed; hence, all stress is concentrated on saving individual souls from the wrath to come. The third chapter consists in analysing David Bosch's aversion to this very notion and his reasons for avoiding apocalyptic language in many of his writings. I conclude in agreement with Bosch's motivation for mission and a similar view of eschatology which embraces a present realised kingdom and a future consummation thereof. / Christian Spirituality, Church History & Missiology / M. Th. (Missiology)

No abstract available / New Testament / M.Th. (New Testament)

Afrikaans text / Die uitverkiesingsleer is vanaf die vroeë Kerkgeskiedenis aan stryd gekenmerk, wat sedertdien geakkumuleer het. Die vername vrug hiervan is twee teenpole, naamlik Calvinisme teenoor Arminianisme. Hierdie entiteite blyk onversoenbaar te wees en impliseer twee groot vrae wat `n derde vraag (of moontlikheid) antisipeer, naamlik dat daar oor beide gevra moet word: Kies God só? `n Verdere vraag onstaan, naamlik of die Christelike gemeenskap met hierdie toestand tevrede kan wees, veral terwyl blyk dat hierdie stryd intensiveer. In hierdie dogmaties-historiese ondersoek blyk dit dat die antwoord op hierdie vraag negatief is: God kies nie só nie. Die bedoeling is nie om met harde beslistheid `n oordeel te fel nie, maar is dit deel van die soeke na `n beter begrip van hierdie leerstuk wat soveel energie in beslag geneem het en tot verdeeldheid binne die Christendom gelei het. Derhalwe word voorgestel dat daar in hierdie doolhoof `n moontlike middeweg tussen die twee ongenaakbare sienings, óf `n alternatief, weg van die tradisionele is. Die doel hiervan is egter nie om die tradisionele uitverkiesingsleer met `n absolute alternatief te vervang nie, maar eerder bydraend in die soeke na `n oplossing te wees. Derhalwe is die bedoeling hiervan nie om enige tradisionele siening op `n destruktiewe manier te kritiseer, of deur `n eulogie te kanoniseer as eksklusief-waaragtig nie. In hierdie literêre ondersoek word die ganse uitverkiesingsleer nie hanteer nie. Daar word as verteenwoordigende model veral op die probleem binne Protestantse kringe gekonsentreer – spesifiek op die probleem onder fundamentele evangelies-gesindes. Die klem of fokus word vernou om langs die tradisionele hoofmomente van Augustinus/Pelagius en Calvinisme/Arminianisme by die sogenaamde „Evangelicals‟ uit te kom. Hierdie stuk bepaal sigself dus by die evangeliese stroom binne die Protestantisme. Behalwe vir `n historiese oorsig, word kritiek op die tradisionele uitverkiesingsleer gelewer. Daar word ook op die Vyf Punte van Calvinisme gefokus, aangesien dit redelik verteenwoordigend van dié leer is. Besondere probleme, wat steeds heersend is, word uitgewys, waarna alternatiewe in die soeke na `n oplossing hanteer word. Uiteindelik word `n voortgesette, volgehoue en gemeenskaplike soeke na `n antwoord op die vraag: “Hoe kies God?”, voorgestel. / The doctrine of predestination is since the early beginnings of Church History featured by strife which is currently accumulating. A prominent result hereof is the entity of Calvinism, with its antipole, Arminianism. These entities seem to be irreconcilable and imply two major questions with the anticipation of a third, namely that it should be asked of both: Does God choose in this manner? A further question arises, namely if the Christian community is satisfied with this condition, especially when it seems that this strife is intensifying. In this dogmatic-historical enquiry it seems that the answer is negative: God does not choose in this manner. The intention is not to pass decisive judgement, but rather to obtain a better understanding of this doctrine which led to division and discord within Christianity. Consequently a possible middle course is proposed between these two entities, or an alternative, away from the traditional tendentiousness. The purpose hereof is not to replace the traditional doctrine of predestination with an absolute alternative, but rather contributing in search for a solution. Therefore the intention is not to criticize any traditional view in a destructive manner nor, on the other hand, canonize it as exclusively veracious. This literary study will not cover all aspects of the doctrine of predestination. The problem with this doctrine under fundamental, evangelicals will be taken as a model and the focus of this study. The focus will be further narrowed to the traditional momentums of Augustine/Pelagius and Calvinism/Arminianism which culminates in the evangelical movement. This study confines itself basically to Protestantism. Except for the historical review, criticism will be provided on the traditional doctrine of predestination. This will also focus on the Five Points of Calvinism, seeing that it is representative of this doctrine. Particular prevailing problems will be pointed out where after proposals for a solution will be suggested. Finally a continued, sustained and common search for an answer to the question: “In which manner does God choose?”, will be proposed. / Systematic Theology & Theological Ethics / D. Th. (Sistematiese Teologie)

When reading the Bible in an independent way, i.e., not through the lenses of any official Church dogma, one is amazed by the many voices that come through to us. Add to this variety the literary finds from Nag Hammadi, as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls, then the question now confronting many spiritual pilgrims is how it came about that these obviously diverse theologies, represented in the so-called Old and New Testaments, were moulded into only one "orthodox" result. In what way and to what degree were the many Christian groups different and distinctive from one another, as well as from other Jewish groups? Furthermore, what was the influence of other religions, Judaism, the Mysteries, Gnostics and Philosophers on the. development, variety of groups and ultimately on the consolidation of "orthodox" soteriology? / Philosophy Practical and Systematic Theology / Th.M. (Systematic Theology)