No description available.

John Rick's work is important in its own right and as exemplary of a dominant empiricist tendency in academic religious thought. This dissertation seeks to display that tendency by exploring the possibility of reading Rick's work as Christian theology. To this end it examines Rick's reflections on six themes: religion, theology, theodicy, eschatology, Christology and theology of religions. It seeks to expose the faults and fissures, disruptions and distortions in Rick's texts. This explains the form of each chapter: a lengthy exposition and criticism of how Hick handles a particular theme, followed by a short sketch of how the theme may be otherwise handled. In each case the sketch draws on insights discerned in the criticism. The central themes of the whole study are Rick's emphasis on experience and the place of interpretation: the dominance of naive realism and the need for hermeneutic as mediation.

This thesis is a critical re-appropriation of Hendrik Kraemer's theology of religions. Part I introduces theology of religions through the now familiar threefold typology: Kari Earth represents 'exclusivism,' Kari Rahner, 'inclusivism,' and John Hick, 'pluralism' (Chapter 1). It then argues that the typology implicitly represents non-pluralist approaches as theologically deficient and ethically insensitive while masking problems in pluralist positions (Chapter 2). It thus releases Kraemer from the typology and from the more emotive charges directed against 'exclusivism.' Part II chronologically and thematically surveys Kraemer's theology of religions, describing his missiological and theological contexts (Chapter 3) and summarising his major works (Chapter 4). The crux of the argument comes in Part III. First, a survey of the contemporary philosophical climate is offered through a summary and critique of Jean-Frangois Lyotard's interpretation of the postmodern condition Subsequently, three theological responses are assessed with Mark C. Taylor's a/theology and John Milbank's theology presented as avoidable extremes while the work of Hans Frei and George Lindbeck is offered as a mediating position which is dubbed 'postmodern orthodoxy' (Chapter 5). Second, after reviewing key themes in Kraemer's position, theological and phenomenological criticisms are outlined and evaluated. Though they do not seriously threaten the position, these criticisms prohibit extreme interpretations of, and lead to slight modifications in, Kraemer's work (Chapter 6). Finally, when re-read through the lenses of postmodern orthodoxy, Kraemer's thought is shown to offer to contemporary theology of religions avenues of theological creativity which are nevertheless faithful to the Christian tradition (Chapter 7). The thesis concludes that Hendrik Kraemer's theology of religions is worthy of critical re- appropriation.

Modern societies are for the most part pluralistic in their compositions and world views. As such, we are given a variety of possibilities to embrace in our everyday lives and social interactions. The plethora of religious choice is a prime example of societal pluralism. John Hick is an eminent proponent of religious pluralism. His adoption of the religious pluralist stance arises from his experience and observations of various religions and their practices wherein he has noted similarities in the development of moral individuals in spite of vastly different and exclusive truth claims made by their religious systems. Hick, in a huge leap of faith, believes these similarities among such great differences must indicate a unitary source of revelation from a Transcendent Ultimate Reality to humankind sometime during the great Axial Age of human development more than two thousand years ago.<p> Religious pluralism, in its Hickean formulation, is a call for individuals to not only abandon their religions claims to exclusive truth about the Transcendent Ultimate Reality but also to reduce religious dogmas to their essential elements and modify them in order to preclude contradictory assertions that would exclude other religious systems. The benefits would be to reduce or eliminate religious intolerance and claims to superiority; incidents of religious violence should also be expected to decrease.<p> This thesis critically examines Hicks thesis and finds that religion has a greater role to play in individual lives than Hick acknowledges. For those with weakly held religious beliefs, the call to religious pluralism may find appeal. However, for those with strongly held religious views, operating within religious structures that serve their needs and eschatological hopes, the adoption of religious pluralism of the Hickean variety may cause them to abandon something that is working well for them without replacing it with something of equal benefit. In the final analysis, I find Hicks call to embrace religious pluralism to be unpersuasive since it is not in itself a religious system; it is, rather, a philosophical system which attempts to address the epistemological challenges associated with the myriad systems of faith and belief found within the great world religions.

Modern societies are for the most part pluralistic in their compositions and world views. As such, we are given a variety of possibilities to embrace in our everyday lives and social interactions. The plethora of religious choice is a prime example of societal pluralism. John Hick is an eminent proponent of religious pluralism. His adoption of the religious pluralist stance arises from his experience and observations of various religions and their practices wherein he has noted similarities in the development of moral individuals in spite of vastly different and exclusive truth claims made by their religious systems. Hick, in a huge leap of faith, believes these similarities among such great differences must indicate a unitary source of revelation from a Transcendent Ultimate Reality to humankind sometime during the great Axial Age of human development more than two thousand years ago.<p> Religious pluralism, in its Hickean formulation, is a call for individuals to not only abandon their religions claims to exclusive truth about the Transcendent Ultimate Reality but also to reduce religious dogmas to their essential elements and modify them in order to preclude contradictory assertions that would exclude other religious systems. The benefits would be to reduce or eliminate religious intolerance and claims to superiority; incidents of religious violence should also be expected to decrease.<p> This thesis critically examines Hicks thesis and finds that religion has a greater role to play in individual lives than Hick acknowledges. For those with weakly held religious beliefs, the call to religious pluralism may find appeal. However, for those with strongly held religious views, operating within religious structures that serve their needs and eschatological hopes, the adoption of religious pluralism of the Hickean variety may cause them to abandon something that is working well for them without replacing it with something of equal benefit. In the final analysis, I find Hicks call to embrace religious pluralism to be unpersuasive since it is not in itself a religious system; it is, rather, a philosophical system which attempts to address the epistemological challenges associated with the myriad systems of faith and belief found within the great world religions.

Abstract   The amount of evil that we can see in our world might make the thought of a kind and caring God as its creator paradoxical. This is what is generally called the problem of evil and the topic of this study. This is a litterary study which is based on qualitative analysis and hermeneutics as our method. We have chosen to research this problem with the emphasis on two different theodices. One of these theodices is written by John Hick and the other by C.S Lewis. We have researched both the theodices, and the background to the problem itself. In this study we have expanded on important concepts regarding the problem of evil and we will show you two different explanations as to why God and evil coexists.  We have reviewed both theodices and analysed them. We have reviewed similarities and differences as we tried to reach the core of each theodicy. Both theodices have been evaluated according to a model for what constitutes a successful theodicy and from that we have drawn the conclusion that both of these theodices are credible, despite our original thoughts.

The word "faith" is probably one of the most ambiguous words in the English language. It is used in different ways by different people at any given time to mean any number of feelings, actions or emotions. For some, faith is synonymous with religion, for others it represents belief and yet others use it to mean loyalty. Faith must have a meaning that is distinctly its own. Yet what is that meaning? Is there a way of defining faith that is understandable to all people? This paper strives to provide such a definition. In order to achieve this goal, the conceptions of faith as they are explained separately by Paul Tillich, John Hick and Robert Solomon are analyzed and combined with one another in order to formulate a universally applicable working definition of "faith". This paper seeks to provide readers with an understanding of what faith is, what it is not and how it functions in their lives and the lives of their fellow man. This is done in the hope of bringing about a recognition that faith is an active process employed by -all--people regardless of what their faith is directed toward. With this definition of "faith'', perhaps new and clearer lines of communication between the secular and spiritual communities can be opened.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-03-15T19:48:51Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Kleber de Oliveira Machado.pdf: 621007 bytes, checksum: 76a73a4baa22b12bbe95f429ceaed24e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-02-09 / Fundo Mackenzie de Pesquisa / This essay analyses the most important thesis of the pluralist theologian John Hick. It gives special attention to the ground books: The metaphor of God incarnate, An interpretation of religion, Death and eternal life. In the first book, he reformulates the incarnation doctrine to turn the pluralist hypothesis possible. In the second, he introduces his pluralist hypothesis that all religions are valid responses to the Real or Ultimate Reality. And in the third, which is his global theological work, he searches to build up what would be a pareschatology embracing the pluralist hypothesis. Finally, the essay seeks to demonstrate the inconsistency of Hick&#8223;s Kantian epistemological grounds. It also presents the strong consequences that the revisionist project and the global theology have to Christian theology. It shows that the revisionist task, which has been proposed by Hick, empties the meaning of Christian theology. Therefore, it does not consider it as an authentic response to the Real, what invalids Hick's pluralist hypothesis. / Esta dissertação analisa as principais teses do teólogo pluralista John Hick. Dá-se especial atenção aos livros que as fundamentam: A Metáfora do Deus Encarnado, An Interpretation of Religion e Death and Eternal Life. No primeiro livro, ele reformula a doutrina da encarnação para tornar a hipótese pluralista possível. No segundo, ele apresenta sua hipótese pluralista de que todas as religiões são respostas válidas ao Real ou Realidade Última. E no terceiro, o qual é seu trabalho de teologia global, ele busca construir o que seria uma parescatologia que mantenha a hipótese pluralista. Finalmente, a dissertação procura demonstrar a inconsistência da base epistemológica kantiana de Hick. Demonstra também as profundas conseqüências que o projeto revisionista e a teologia global têm sobre a teologia cristã. Apresenta que a tarefa revisionista que tem sido proposta por Hick, esvazia o significado da teologia cristã. Por conseguinte, não a considera como uma resposta autêntica ao Real, o que invalida a hipótese pluralista de Hick.

Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2016-01-25T10:09:29Z No. of bitstreams: 1 suelyribeirobarra.pdf: 2001060 bytes, checksum: 59c074b121f0c32254269f7f3e9f006d (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Adriana Oliveira (adriana.oliveira@ufjf.edu.br) on 2016-01-25T18:57:32Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 suelyribeirobarra.pdf: 2001060 bytes, checksum: 59c074b121f0c32254269f7f3e9f006d (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-01-25T18:57:32Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 suelyribeirobarra.pdf: 2001060 bytes, checksum: 59c074b121f0c32254269f7f3e9f006d (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-09-18 / O presente estudo procura descrever a trajetória teológica de John H. Hick, filósofo e teólogo inglês que se notabilizou por defender, ao que se refere ao diálogo inter-religioso, uma posição pluralista de acolhimento igualitário a todas as religiões. Escritor prolixo publicou inúmeros livros e artigos defendendo a sua hipótese pluralista em confronto com posições tradicionais do Cristianismo. Neste trabalho seus principais textos são apresentados e discutidos comparando-os com as demais posições nas diversas tradições religiosas com respeito à soteriologia humana tendo em vista o entendimento entre elas. / The present research try to describes the theological trajectory of John H. Hick, English philosopher and theologian who become well-know distinguished himself by defending, a pluralistic position regarding an equal treatment for all religions in religious dialogue. Wordy writer has published numerous books and articles advocating its pluralistic hypothesis in comparison with traditional positions of Christianity. In this work its main texts are presented and discussed by comparing them to other positions in the various religious traditions with respect to human soteriology in view of the understanding between them.

La présente dissertation se propose d'étudier la problématique de l'unicité et de l'universalité de Jésus-Christ dans la christologie contemporaine. Le choix de ce thème a été motivé par le fait que pendant ces dernières années la confrontation avec le pluralisme culturel et religieux a conduit la théologie chrétienne à réfléchir de manière nouvelle sur cette question. Elle porte sur le christianisme en tant qu'il a pour spécificité de rendre témoignage à un homme confessé comme le Fils unique de Dieu et le Sauveur de tous les hommes. Dans ce sens, la finalité de notre recherche est de montrer la signification et la portée de l'affirmation de Jésus-Christ comme unique Médiateur de notre salut, et ce dans le cadre de la théologie fondamentale et en particulier de la christologie. Bien que cette doctrine ait été toujours et soit encore une pierre d'achoppement pour ceux qui ne partagent pas notre foi, elle représente pour la tradition chrétienne plus qu'une croyance centrale, elle est vue comme le fondement même de la foi. Pour montrer la pertinence du sujet traité, ainsi que les chemins à suivre afin de proposer de nouvelles perspectives pour la réflexion théologique, notre point de départ est l'analyse du phénomène de la multiplication des modèles interprétatifs concernant le rapport entre le christianisme et les autres religions. Les recherches menées par Peter Schineller, Joseph Gelot, Paul Knitter, Camil Ménard et Jacques Dupuis dans ce domaine, nous ont permis de nous familiariser avec le vocabulaire utilisé dans la discussion (exclusivisme, inclusivisme, pluralisme, etc.) et de percevoir les possibles relations entre les modèles proposés. Du point de vue de notre travail, ces analyses montrent d'une part que la question christologique se trouve au cœur du débat, et d'autre part que l'enjeu de celui-ci se situe dans la manière dont les théologiens cités comme représentants de chaque modèle, chacun à partir de ses propres présupposés, traitent la question de l'unicité et de l'universalité du Christ. C'est cette double constatation qui nous a amené à choisir d'étudier la pensée de cinq théologiens contemporains: Karl Barth, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Edward Schillebeeckx, Karl Rahner et John Hick. La partie conclusive de la thèse expose les perspectives christologiques qui se dégagent de la recherche. Elle offre une esquisse élaborée avec la conviction que la christologie ne se limite pas à offrir un répertoire d'opinions sur le Christ, mais qu'elle est une réflexion dynamique et attentive aux défis qui lui sont adressés. Notre étude conduit, d'une part, à une prise de distance critique vis-à-vis des modèles ou catégories qui sont proposés aujourd'hui pour expliquer la pluralité d'opinions concernant l'unicité et l'universalité de Jésus-Christ. Ils ont certainement une pertinence pédagogique, ensemble ils constituent une sorte de carte géographique qui offre des points de repères dans un terrain devenu assez complexe. Néanmoins cette «nouvelle vulgate», selon l'expression de G. Comeau, qui a fortement marqué les esprits, perd de sa pertinence lorsqu'elle est considérée comme l'exposé d'une «évolution naturelle» dans le débat. D'autre part, l'examen de la théologie des auteurs permet d'identifier les présupposés christologiques qui doivent être pris en compte pour traiter la question de l'unicité et de l'universalité du Christ. Premièrement, l'universel concret, parce que la christologie est appelée à réfléchir sur les polarités dialectiques qui caractérisent le mystère: l'Absolu et le fini, l'Universel et le concret, l'humanité et la divinité; deuxièmement le christocentrisme, qui permet une révalorisation de l'histoire du salut comme horizon théologique propre de la place du Christ dans le projet de Dieu; enfin la relation entre personne et mission de Jésus-Christ, qui témoigne du tournant sotériologique opéré dans la christologie contemporaine et qui met en évidence la manière dont l'homme participe à la vie divine. Nous avons identifié aussi deux éléments qui caractérisent le Christ comme unique et universel: l'affirmation de Jésus-Christ comme Médiateur de la volonté salvifique universel de Dieu, et l'incarnation par laquelle s'exprime l'identité personnelle de Jésus.