No description available.

No description available.

The thesis of this study is that influential evangelicals have adopted views regarding the relation of faith, obedience, and justification (or, in other words, justification sola fide ) that are in conflict with the historic, Reformation doctrine of justification sola fide . Having departed from the historic, Reformation doctrine, their professions of holding justification sola fide are misleading and meaningless for the purpose of certifying their evangelical identity. To establish the unity of the Protestant tradition with regard to the meaning of sola fide , the views of Martin Luther, John Calvin, and the major Protestant creeds and confessions are examined. The thesis that unity existed among Protestants with regard to sola fide requires the examination of the development of the doctrine in Luther found in chapter 2. It shows that Luther's views gradually developed in his spiritual experience and that the major features of his mature understanding of sola fide are consistent with Calvin's systematic development of sola fide . In chapter 3 the views of John Calvin are examined. Three key perspectives on the meaning of sola fide through which the Reformation tradition can be examined and the views of current evangelicals tested are isolated: the passive definition of justifying faith, the distinction between justifying faith and obedience, and the dichotomy between the law and the gospel. Chapter 4 examines the Reformation tradition. An accurate assessment of the meaning of sola fide for that tradition may be best achieved by the examination of its a major creeds and confessions. The three key perspectives on the meaning of justification by faith alone previously isolated are found consistently embedded in the 16 th and 17 th century creeds of Protestantism. Having seen the unified meaning of justification sola fide in Calvin, Luther, and the Protestant tradition, chapters 5, 6, and 7 examine the views of three influential evangelical theologians in light of this crucial tradition. The views of Daniel Fuller, Norman Shepherd, and Don Garlington are weighed in the balance of the historic Reformation doctrine of justification by faith alone and found to depart from the historic doctrine. Chapter 8 seeks to make clear a number of important conclusions from the study as a whole. / This item is only available to students and faculty of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. If you are not associated with SBTS, this dissertation may be purchased from <a href="http://disexpress.umi.com/dxweb">http://disexpress.umi.com/dxweb</a> or downloaded through ProQuest's Dissertation and Theses database if your institution subscribes to that service.

Thesis advisor: Stephen J. Pope / In the book Agape and Eros, Anders Nygren proposes a way to understand and analyze Christian love in four “dimensions.” He writes: Love expresses a relation between a subject who loves and an object that is loved. If we turn our attention to the object, and confine ourselves to personal objects, love will be seen to take four different forms, which we shall here describe as the ‘dimensions' of love. These are (1) God's love for man, (2) man's love for God, (3) man's love for his fellow-man, and (4) man's self-love. Throughout the course of her writing, Dorothy Day addresses each of these “dimensions of love” and proposes that none can exist properly in isolation from the other three. How did Dorothy Day understand the proper relationship between these four dimensions? Is her description of the integration of these four dimensions of love appropriate to Christian theology and ethics, and is she consistent in her theology? I argue that Day's writing reveals a harmonious and proper integration of these four dimensions of love, and that she does so properly within the framework of Christian theology. I will do so in the following steps: I will begin by examining Day's understanding of God's love for humanity (Part I), our love for God (Part II), proper love for neighbor (Part III), and proper love for self (Part IV). I will then present a counter-argument (Part VI), and will conclude with an explanation of Day's integration of the four dimensions of love (Part V). / Thesis (BA) — Boston College, 2003. / Submitted to: Boston College. College of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Theology. / Discipline: College Honors Program.

No description available.

Thesis (M.A.)--Covenant Theological Seminary, 2007. / Includes abstract. Tsdḳ appears in Hebrew script on t.p. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 99-104).

Thesis (M.A.B.S.)--Multnomah Graduate School of Ministry, 1988. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 73-76).

Thesis (doctoral)--Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, 1965. / Includes bibliographical references (p. ix-xi).

Thesis (M.C.S.)--Regent College, 2000. / Abstract and vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 138-147).

Thesis (Th. M.)--Regent College, Vancouver, BC, 2002. / Abstract and vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves [214]-223).