This doctoral thesis comprises a critical comparison of the theme of concursus, the way in which God and humanity interact, in the Pentecostal-Charismatic and Process-Relational traditions. The comparison is literature-based / similarities and differences in the theological literature of each tradition are compared in order to determine the extent of compatibilities and incompatibilities. The hypothesis is that similarities in the literature sufficiently leverage differences. The first chapter includes a statement of the problem, namely that the global expansion of the Pentecostal-Charismatic movements necessitates interaction with more academically and philosophically oriented theological traditions such as Process- Relational theology. The second chapter comprises an historical survey of the Pentecostal-Charismatic movements, including key dogmas and practices. Chapter three comprises an historical survey of Process-Relational theology, including its philosophical, metaphysical, and scientific orientations. Seminal Process- Relational theists such as Whitehead, Hartshorne, and Cobb are surveyed. Chapter four consists of a broad historical survey of the theological theme of concursus, including the notions of causation, free will, and determinism in both philosophy and theology. Further, the fourth chapter includes a broad historical survey of pneumatology, which is framed as the basis for a comparison of concursus. Chapters five and six comprise surveys of concursus in the Pentecostal- Charismatic and Process-Relational traditions respectively. Chapter seven entails an extensive analysis of differences and synthesis of similarities between the Pentecostal-Charismatic and Process-Relational notions of concursus. Four differences and four similarities are identified. Differences and similarities are ranked and compared for compatibility...

Univ., Diss--Frankfurt (Main), 2006.

This doctoral thesis comprises a critical comparison of the theme of concursus, the way in which God and humanity interact, in the Pentecostal-Charismatic and Process-Relational traditions. The comparison is literature-based / similarities and differences in the theological literature of each tradition are compared in order to determine the extent of compatibilities and incompatibilities. The hypothesis is that similarities in the literature sufficiently leverage differences. The first chapter includes a statement of the problem, namely that the global expansion of the Pentecostal-Charismatic movements necessitates interaction with more academically and philosophically oriented theological traditions such as Process- Relational theology. The second chapter comprises an historical survey of the Pentecostal-Charismatic movements, including key dogmas and practices. Chapter three comprises an historical survey of Process-Relational theology, including its philosophical, metaphysical, and scientific orientations. Seminal Process- Relational theists such as Whitehead, Hartshorne, and Cobb are surveyed. Chapter four consists of a broad historical survey of the theological theme of concursus, including the notions of causation, free will, and determinism in both philosophy and theology. Further, the fourth chapter includes a broad historical survey of pneumatology, which is framed as the basis for a comparison of concursus. Chapters five and six comprise surveys of concursus in the Pentecostal- Charismatic and Process-Relational traditions respectively. Chapter seven entails an extensive analysis of differences and synthesis of similarities between the Pentecostal-Charismatic and Process-Relational notions of concursus. Four differences and four similarities are identified. Differences and similarities are ranked and compared for compatibility...

Published edition of Thesis (doctoral)--Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität, Münster, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 270-285).

Thesis (doctoral)--Frankfurt am Main, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 214-235).

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / This doctoral thesis comprises a critical comparison of the theme of concursus, the way in which God and humanity interact, in the Pentecostal-Charismatic and Process-Relational traditions. The comparison is literature-based; similarities and differences in the theological literature of each tradition are compared in order to determine the extent of compatibilities and incompatibilities. The hypothesis is that similarities in the literature sufficiently leverage differences. The first chapter includes a statement of the problem, namely that the global expansion of the Pentecostal-Charismatic movements necessitates interaction with more academically and philosophically oriented theological traditions such as Process- Relational theology. The second chapter comprises an historical survey of the Pentecostal-Charismatic movements, including key dogmas and practices. Chapter three comprises an historical survey of Process-Relational theology, including its philosophical, metaphysical, and scientific orientations. Seminal Process- Relational theists such as Whitehead, Hartshorne, and Cobb are surveyed. Chapter four consists of a broad historical survey of the theological theme of concursus, including the notions of causation, free will, and determinism in both philosophy and theology. Further, the fourth chapter includes a broad historical survey of pneumatology, which is framed as the basis for a comparison of concursus. Chapters five and six comprise surveys of concursus in the Pentecostal- Charismatic and Process-Relational traditions respectively. Chapter seven entails an extensive analysis of differences and synthesis of similarities between the Pentecostal-Charismatic and Process-Relational notions of concursus. Four differences and four similarities are identified. Differences and similarities are ranked and compared for compatibility. Ultimately, the research question is answered affirmatively and conditionally: yes, according to the literature of both traditions, similarities sufficiently leverage differences, but socio-linguistic barriers may obstruct meaningful mutual transformation. Chapter eight concludes with a brief exploration of ecclesial and social implications. / South Africa

The central aim of this thesis is to analyse the influence of Kierkegaard on Bonhoeffer. This relationship has been almost universally recognized. And yet this area has received no comprehensive study, limited within the secondary literature to footnotes, digressions, and the occasional paper. Furthermore, what little literature there is has been plagued by several stereotypes. First, discussion is often limited to Discipleship. Second, Kierkegaard has been identified as an individualist and acosmist who rejected the church, leading many to consider Bonhoeffer the ecumenist and ecclesiologist as selectively agreeing with Kierkegaard, but ultimately rejecting his overall stance. This thesis will argue that neither stereotype is true, and suggest (a), that Kierkegaard’s influence can be found throughout Bonhoeffer’s work, and (b) that although a more stereotypical perspective may be present in SC, by the end of his life Bonhoeffer had gained a far deeper understanding across the breadth of Kierkegaard’s work. The importance of this thesis is not simply to ‘plug the gap’ of scholarship in this area, but also to suggest the importance of analysing Kierkegaard and Bonhoeffer together. This will focus on three specific areas. First, alongside the influence of Kierkegaard on Bonhoeffer, it will argue for the importance of using Bonhoeffer as an interpretive tool for understanding Kierkegaard. This thesis will show how Bonhoeffer adopted and adapted Kierkegaard’s work to his own situation, forcing Kierkegaard to answer questions that were not present during his own life. In this way, we are led to compare Kierkegaard and Bonhoeffer as individuals, and not simply their static declarations. Secondly, against the tendency to consider Kierkegaard and Bonhoeffer’s final attacks on Christendom as unfortunate endings to otherwise profound careers, it will be suggested that these attacks stand as the fulfilment of their earlier thought. It will be argued that despite their different contexts, both Kierkegaard and Bonhoeffer were led to the same conclusions concerning Christendom. Thirdly, given Kierkegaard’s submission to indirect communication and his somewhat 'prophetic' proclamations concerning one who will come after him and reform, this thesis will ask whether Bonhoeffer stands as something of a fulfilment to Kierkegaard’s thought in the guise of a Kierkegaardian ‘reformer’.

Doctorat en philosophie et lettres / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

No description available.

Systematic Theology, like all other disciplines, are subject to basic assumptions about its first principles, which is determinant for the way the discipline understands itself and does its work. The consequential perception the discipline has of knowledge acquisition and method of research in turn determines its interpretation of the knowledge acquired. The three areas of understanding (metaphysical assumptions, epistemological theories and ethical praxis) together form a cycle that builds the basis of a paradigm. Paradigms are continually present and are by nature developmental. The development from the macro-, to the messo-, and micro-levels in the structure of a paradigm is described through the three areas of understanding, providing a method for analysing paradigms. Using a developmental method of observation (affective awareness), analysis (ontological way of understanding), theorising (a different way of thinking) and application (ethical responsible living) suggests a fundamental reconsideration of the task of all disciplines, including systematic theology. / Systematic Theology & Theological Ethics / M. Th.(Systematic Theology)