This dissertation offers an account of the different ways in which putatively idealist and transcendental models of sociality, which grounded the subject’s relation to other human beings in the subject’s own cognition, were rejected and replaced. Scrapping this account led to a variety of models of sociality which departed from the subject as the ground of sociality, positing grounds outside of the subject. Hans-Georg Gadamer, Emmanuel Levinas, Franz Rosenzweig, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer represent alternative positions along a spectrum of models of sociality which reject the idealist concept of sociality. The central argument of this dissertation claims that the responses to idealism and transcendental models of sociality ultimately find fault with an inadequate ontology, one which grounds sociality (as well as all of reality) in the cognition of the subject. The ontology of the transcendental model locates the subject as initially unconnected to other subjects such that the first move in relating them together must be epistemological. The social relation is grounded in the subject’s cognitive grasp. Each of the thinkers I examine identifies this as the key problem with idealism; however, their solutions to this problem differ. The differing solutions of Gadamer, Levinas, Rosenzweig, and Bonhoeffer can be identified as occupying different representative positions along a continuum, call it the “scale of social grounding.” What I offer here is a topography of responses to the idealist model of sociality. The ontological ground of sociality, instead of being the subject, is posited as situation of dialogue (Gadamer), the face of the other (Levinas), or divine revelation (Rosenzweig and Bonhoeffer). In each of these alternative models, we see that the subject is conditioned rather than autonomous, that sociality is enacted through temporality and language, and that sociality is principally a normative relation rather than an epistemological one. The story that emerges from my analysis, then, is a richer topography of responses to idealism than has hitherto been mapped out. The responses, represented by Gadamer, Levinas, Rosenzweig, and Bonhoeffer each provide an alternative ontology on which any adequate model of sociality must rest. While my account of the spectrum of ontological responses to idealist sociality does not claim to be exhaustive, it does give a better topography of the field of responses than has hitherto been offered in studies of models of sociality in the 20th century. Finally, this dissertation shows the centrality of providing an alternative ontology to idealism in these projects. Far from rejecting ontology wholesale or merely offering moral revisions to the existing social order, each of the figures I examine in this study radically revise the ground of sociality by articulating a fresh ontological vision which can support social life.

This project will track and explain the development of the Doctrine of Divine Immutability from early mythological and scriptural source material that seems to indicate that divine entities are changeable into metaphysical systems that demand a perfectly consistent deity. The Doctrine of Divine Immutability is a philosophical and theological postulate that has long been a staple of systematic metaphysics and theology, but its function in robust and fully formed systems is different than its function when it is first generated in Ancient Greece and Judah. Methodologically mostly primary sources are studied and compared with interpretive help from relevant secondary sources. Once the generation and evolution of this doctrine is understood, a more holistic understanding of the relationship between religion and philosophy will be evident. Additionally a more robust understanding of Middle Platonism and 1st and 2nd century Christianity and their relationship to Roman Stoicism will be achieved. Of particular importance to contemporary scholarship this work will allow us to understand the doctrine in its context and will shield us from anachronistic readings of the arguments that are bound to cause fundamental errors in scholarship.

Si la religion de Rimbaud implique obligatoirement l’analyse de son anticléricalisme assumé et de sa relation tumultueuse avec le christianisme de son enfance, notamment dans les Premières poésies et Une saison en enfer ; elle implique également, comme nous souhaitons le proposer, en parallèle, dans notre étude, une ouverture de la notion, dans son acception philosophique, permettant de l’élargir à l’ensemble du corpus rimbaldien : Derniers vers et Illuminations. Il s’agit de s’intéresser au sens de l’existence, tel que conçu par Rimbaud à travers son oeuvre poétique, et plus particulièrement aux notions de Temps, de Mémoire et d’Espace : du poète dans son cosmos. Ainsi se dessine une mise en évidence de la manière dont Rimbaud suggère sa vision du monde, simultanément négative et positive : dans son opposition au Christianisme et à son pendant social Bourgeois, ou dans son affirmation d’une réalité différente dans l’Idylle voire l’urbanisme. À cela s’ajoute la question d’une religion dont le mécanisme cyclique pourrait permettre à l’oeuvre d’exister en tant qu’ensemble lié malgré son apparence disjointe. / Writing about the Religion of Rimbaud, implies, by necessity, an analysis of his anticlericalism and his tumultuous relationship with the religion of his youth : Christianity. However if these notions structure our study of Premières poésies and Une saison en enfer, they could not perform in the case of Derniers vers and Illuminations. Making us realize the necessity of opening the religious notion to its philosophical aspect. Then through its poetical work, Rimbaud suggests an interrogation on the sense of the existence and especially on Time, Memory and Space ; that is to say on the Poet and its cosmos. Appears at that moment, simultaneously positive and negative, his vision of the world : his opposition to Christianism and to its social conservative equivalent (Bourgeoisie) but also his affirmation of another reality in Idyll or urbanism. Moreover this religion could link his poetical work as a whole despite its heterogeneous apparence

The aim of this thesis is to define, develop, and defend an interpretation and application of the mystical ontology of Meister Eckhart. Briefly, mystical ontology should be understood as a distinctive theology insofar as it presents God's being, the being of the world, and the individual's being as an essentially unified whole. My research focus for this thesis will then be to situate Eckhart's theology within current debates on mysticism and amidst the post-Kantian philosophical turn toward ontology. The cumulative effort of this thesis will reach its height when I apply my conclusions on the mystical nature of being that can be found in Eckhart's medieval writings and transcriptions in order to address the modern, theological problem of secularity. This effort will be implemented with the objective of creating a space for dialogue between Christian theology and the generally secularized culture that, in part, defines the present age. In so doing, this thesis will demonstrate the philosophical and cultural relevance of this particular understanding of the nature of being when treating modern problems in theology. The guiding question for this thesis will be the following: what insights can Meister Eckhart's thought offer to theologians today in addressing the problem of secularity? My overall thesis will then be: the mystical ontology of Meister Eckhart can be interpreted and applied in a manner that successfully opens a space for constructive dialogue between secular culture and the presence of God in the world. Overall, this thesis should be read as a scholarly project on Eckhartian theology and its applicability toward productively treating the problem of secularity. All of my conclusions will be derived as a result of having been situated and argued for amidst current debates on relevant topics, as well as in relation to other major works that are indispensable for such a project. To be clear, my aim will not be to appropriate Eckhart's work and to assimilate it to a post-Kantian perspective. Rather, I will look to Eckhart for his clear and definitive theological statements. I will then interpret those statements and apply them in a manner that efficaciously engages specific principles of secularity in demarcating a common ground for dialogue.

This dissertation’s guiding question is: What was the impact of Martin Heidegger’s early philosophy on Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s theology? I argue that Heidegger’s analysis of Dasein, his technical term for human existence, provides Bonhoeffer with important conceptual tools for developing his Christology, from which the rest of his theology follows. Part of recognizing Heidegger’s importance to Bonhoeffer involves understanding the latter’s critiques of previous notable philosophers such as Kant, Hegel, Husserl, and Scheler. As Bonhoeffer evaluates these philosophers, they lead to theologically unacceptable positions. Heidegger, in contrast, has come to a theologically profitable understanding of human existence and epistemology. Though there are theologically useful elements in Heidegger’s philosophy, there are elements that require significant alteration, and even rejection. Heidegger recognizes that epistemology must be based on actual human existence, and he can account for the historical continuity of human existence; however, because of Heidegger’s anthropocentric philosophy, he cannot account for God’s transcendence necessary for proper theology. Bonhoeffer then applies the conceptual tools he has appropriated from Heidegger to revelation, Christology, and the church. This eliminates the anthropocentrism that made transcendence impossible, while maintaining the benefits of Heidegger’s philosophy in order to account for Christian existence. Understanding Bonhoeffer’s appropriation of Heidegger is additionally important for understanding Heidegger’s potential relation to theology. This dissertation concludes by placing Bonhoeffer in the context of other theological appropriations of Heidegger. In light of this context and Heidegger’s own understanding of philosophy’s relation to theology, I argue that Bonhoeffer represents one, viable theological use of Heidegger.

This study sets out to reclaim the ontological epistemology of Saint Thomas Aquinas which serves as a unifier of knowledge in being, within the philosophical milieu of being’s forgottenness. Post-Humean and Kantian thought made appearance rather than being solely accessible to the thinking subject. The consequence has been the marginalisation of being as reflected in truth – influenced by scientistic and postmodern paradigms – which has contributed to both the paucity of meaningless metaphysics, and the conceptualisation of science and faith as necessarily opposing categories. To the end of establishing that science and faith have points of intersection, it is argued that the reclamation of Thomist natural philosophy leads to the defence of a clarified form of realism. Establishing the “real” implies that the metaphysical dimensions of the problem of existence can be explored. Within this realist model, the “pre-Modern” Thomistic theory of “scientia” is employed to bring physical and natural science and metaphysics into relationship as components of true knowledge of being. Consequently, the author puts forth that “scientia” is exemplified in, amongst others, the particular science of cosmology since the rudimentary point of engagement between physical and metaphysical science occurs in the act of creation, that is, when being comes into existence. Whilst metaphysics is often disregarded, it is consistently proposed that the causal nature of being demands – by its presence – a more robust account than physical and natural science can offer. The contribution made by this work rests in its ontologically-formed epistemic typology whereby “hard” science and faith are related in boundary areas of knowledge, that is, when metaphysical problems emerge from within physical and natural science. By reimaging “hard” science and reasonable faith within “scientia”, both approaches are conceived as adequating to truth when their content is reflective of being. / Thesis (DPhil)--University of Pretoria, 2014. / lk2014 / Philosophy / DPhil / Unrestricted

Afrikaans: In hierdie proefskrif word 'n postmoderne weergawe van die filosofiese redekritiek gesitueer binne die hermeneutiese raamwerke van die onderskeie eietydse diskoerse van die filosofie en die gangbare teologie in die Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk van Afrika. Vanuit 'n Kantiaanse oriëntering word aangetoon dat daar pogings was om die spanning tussen moderne filosofie en die gangbare teologie in die Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk te bestendig. Die vrugbare gesprek in die Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk oor die verhouding teologie-filosofie gedurende die negentigerjare word in hierdie verband krities geresumeer en van 'n analitiese forum voorsien. Postmoderniteit word vervolgens geanaliseer en beskryf as wesenlik redekritiek met dringende identiteitskritiese implikasies. Hier kry die kandidaat se teologiese aansluiting by 'n filosofiese kontinuum waarvan Nietzsche die oorsprong was en wat eietyds verteenwoordig word deur veral Foucault en Adorno, reliëf. Vanuit hierdie weergawe van die postmoderne redekritiek tree die kandidaat, met verwysing na 'n "negatief-dialektiese teologie" en 'n "postmoderne hermeneutiek", met die gevestigde etiese-, konfessionele- en dialektiese tradisielyne in die gangbare teologie in die Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk en die neerslagte daarvan in hierdie kerk se lewe en werk, in gesprek. English: From the premise of a (postmodern) critique of instrumental reason, this dissertation explores some consequences of such a critique for church and theology. The candidate finds an intimate relation between the philosophical critiques of reason in the work of Nietzsche, Adorno, Foucault and his own theological position which is being described as a "negative dialectical theology". A postmodern critique of reason as presented here is very specific in its relation to history, society and knowledge. It has as its main influence or philosophical source the Kantian project of limiting conventional theoretical rationality. From this Kantian position it proceeds to show how Nietzsche exploited the Kantian notion of the limits of reason and how Adorno and Foucault extended Nietzsche's position to its most extreme but, nevertheless, logical socio-historical consequences. This critique of reason boils down to a somewhat subversive stance. By teaming up with Adorno and Foucault, the candidate describes both modernity and Enlightenment as something to be overcome, to be transgressed, exactly because of the dangerously ambivalent nature of modernity's favorite presentation of rationality: instrumental reason, which focuses on identity thinking, cognitive results and the formalization of reality. The implications of a postmodern critique of reason extend towards a deep rooted pessimism of modern culture, a critique of its systems of knowledge and actions, a critique (or at least recognition) of the typical-modern configuration of power into "normal" socio-historical discourses such as those we find in the institusionalised church and in theology, a critique of identity thinking, a critique of rational propositions (without necessarily agitating for an epistemological relativism), an encouragement to honour the inherent flaws in language and linguistic constructions, the ability to recognize and honour singularity whilst shifting the focus away from universal claims or "master narratives" and, last but not least, the critical recognition of "Otherness" or non-identity. These consequences are brought forward into the socio-historical reality, life and work of the Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk van Afrika and its current theology by strategic means of a negative dialectical theology, a theology which is mutually Nietzschean, Adornian and Foucauldian in its philosophical nature and eventually, in its theological convictions. / Thesis (DPhil (New Testament))--University of Pretoria, 2007. / New Testament Studies / unrestricted

The book of Qoheleth (Ecclesiastes) is perhaps the most intriguing book in the Old Testament. Readers of every age can appreciate its theme, dealing with the futility of seeking to uncover life’s mystery. Yet Qoheleth has been interpreted in many different ways. The interpretations have ranged from tragic pessimism to a triumph of piety over skepticism. It is the contention of this thesis that a proper perspective on Qoheleth’s intention can best be gained in terms of the author’s use of tradition. Qoheleth displays an awareness of such Hebrew traditions as Wisdom, the Pentateuch, Israelite history and the prophets. Though Qoheleth does not refer specifically to the Law or to Yahweh, the God of Israel, he does not deny them. Moreover, he seems familiar with both the Pentateuch (e.g. the creation account) and the historical writings in the prophets (e.g. the account of Solomon). Qoheleth is also consistent with Old Testament theology in holding that God’s ways cannot be comprehended by man, and that it is good for man to enjoy the life that God has given him. It is also likely that Qoheleth was familiar with the traditions of Greece and the Near East. There are many parallels between Qoheleth and these cultures, but all that these seem to represent is parallel development. For Qoheleth does not reveal any dependence on the traditions of these cultures. Rather Qoheleth differs sharply in that he refutes both the Hellenistic belief in an after life (3:21) and the tragic pessimism of Ancient Near Eastern documents. When Qoheleth is understood in terms of the author’s use of tradition, this book is found to be true to Hebrew tradition. In this way readers are afforded a proper perspective as to how Qoheleth is best interpreted. The book is found to be practical, advising the reader to enjoy life rather than despair of it.

Thomas Hobbes’s knowledge of religious doctrine, typology, and use religious rhetoric in his writings is often glossed over in an over-eager attempt to establish his preeminence as a founder of modern political theory and the social contract tradition. Such action, however is an injustice to Hobbes himself, who recognized that in order to establish a new, and arguably radical, political position founded upon reason and nominalist materialism he had to reform people’s understanding of religious revelation, and Christianity specifically. Rather than merely move to a new epistemological foundation, Hobbes was aware that the only way to ensure religion does become a phoenix was to examine and undermine the foundations of religious thought in its own terms. This reformation of religious language, critique of Christianity, and attempt to eliminate man’s belief in their obligation to God was done in order to promote a civil society in which religion was servant of the state. Through reforming religious language, Hobbes was able to demote religion as a worldview; removing man’s fear of the afterlife or obligation to obey God over a civil sovereign. Religious doctrine no longer was in competition with the civil state, but is transformed into a tool of the state, one which philosophically founds the modern arguments for religious toleration.

This decolonizing interpretive analysis serves to provide bicultural researchers the opportunity to engage and challenge the dominant literature on pedagogy, curriculum, methodology, and schooling. Bicultural researchers have been forced to navigate the dialectical social terrain of dominant/subordinate tensions and contradictions, as part of their process of survival, as subaltern or subordinate cultural citizens and critical scholars. This study seeks to deconstruct Eurocentric epistemicides that compartmentalize knowledge, particularly within the fields of theology and education. Western Christianity tends to separate God from humanity. This is an epistemological problem. The nature of this study necessitates a process by which critical theory, critical pedagogy, and liberation theology serve to reconstruct traditional Westernized notions of the interrelatedness of theology and education. This study seeks to determine what can be learned from a critical pedagogy of Jesus Christ by examining His integration of theology and pedagogy as presented in His praxis detailed in the New Testament. Jesus is positioned as the literal embodiment of both theology and pedagogy, where both are procured through praxis for liberation, resulting in an emancipatory pedagogy that reconciles humanity back to God and God to humanity.