Thesis (S.T.M.)--Dallas Theological Seminary, 1990. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 67-75).

Thesis (Th. M.)--Dallas Theological Seminary, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 85-91).

Thesis (M.C.S.)--Regent College, 2006. / Abstract and vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 121-132).

Thesis (Th. M.)--St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary, 2008. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 148-151).

Thesis (D.W.S.)--Institute for Worship Studies, 2006. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 164-170).

Thesis (M.C.S.)--Regent College, Vancouver, BC, 2007. / Abstract and vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 95-105).

Thesis (D. Miss.)--Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1993. / Abstract. Includes Japanese translation of Hesselgrave's Today's choices for tomorrow's mission. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 90-95).

The recent rapid warming of the planet, driven overwhelmingly by human emissions and activities, represents a novel and dire threat to both human and natural systems. It also constitutes an unprecedented global injustice, with those facing the first and, in many cases, the worst impacts being least responsible for causing the problem: the global poor, other species and future generations. Awakening to such a threat also presents a challenge for ethical deliberation, through provoking deep emotional responses that disturb settled identities. In view of all this, the task of ethical deliberation is urgently required. Yet it is itself vulnerable to being derailed by a variety of coping mechanisms that operate to keep the true scale of the problem below the level of our full attention and prevent the necessary frank assessment of what may be required of us. These largely unconscious protective strategies also open the door to those very emotions being exploited by the cultural, economic and political forces primarily responsible for the crisis in the first place. Hence, superficial and inadequate responses proliferate while many feel paralysed into inaction. In the face of this threat to thought, this project seeks to articulate an identity and stance based on Christian theological resources that opens up new space for ethical deliberation in the face of climate fears. Instead of being paralysed by such fears, this thesis argues that fear can instead illuminate and motivate when it is resituated in the service of love through solidarity with the suffering Christ, the poor and with the whole community of creation.

This study seeks to give an exposition of the development of theology at the Stellenbosch Kweekskool from 1859 until 1919, a period that coincided with the formative years of Afrikaner nationalism. John Murray (1826-1882) was nurtured in evangelical Calvinism but received his theological training in 'moderate' Utrecht. As Calvinist he emphasized salvation by grace and Christian obedience, as evangelical, union with Christ, and as kenoticist he emphasized the relevance of the humanity of Christ. N.J. Hofmeyr (1827-1909) was converted under an evangelical Lutheran and received his training in Utrecht, in the heyday of Dutch ethical and German mediating theology. He was fascinated by the historical Jesus. In his view, the 'religion of Jesus' was not the moralistic one imagined by the modernists, but an experience of sonship, continually challenged by severe temptations. The central theme of his theology was the huiothesia, the sonship of Jesus being the prototype of our sonship. As he was the spiritual father of many generations of Stellenbosch students, his Christocentric emphasis and his doctrine of huiothesia played an important role in the development of NGK spirituality. Other themes in Hofmeyr's theology bore the marks of mediating theology: The idea that the conscience is the voice of God, the 'natural' compatibility between the human and the divine, the importance of experience in the theological enterprise and the idea that grace must accommodate itself to nature. J.I. Marais (1848-1919) and P.J.G. de Vos (1842-1931), who received part of their training in Scotland, were more conservative in theology than Hofmeyr. By the turn of the century De Vos has fully accepted scholastic Calvinism and premillenniaIism; Marais accepted premillennialism around 1914. The experiences of the Anglo-Boer War precipitated the close relationship between the Afrikaner and the NGK, and the lack of a strong doctrine of the church in Stellenbosch theology added to the blurring of distinctions between church and people. The national church of the Scots and Dutch traditions became the volkskerk of the Afrikaner. Important biblical dimensions of Murray and Hofmeyr's theology were neglected after Hofmeyr's death. The conviction that God revealed himself completely in the human Christ was weakened by fundamentalism and the tendency to see God's will in the history of the volk. Their eschatology - which expected great success for the gospel - was replaced by premillennialism, which expected only limited success for missions before the parousia. Hofmeyr's social gospel, which was applied to the problem of the 'poor whites', was gradually replaced by a negative view of the social relevance of the gospel, especially in racial matters. This gradual change of theological direction involved a growing sympathy with fundamentalism and Kuyperianism, but did not consist in a full revival of reformation theology

This work examines the historical details and the theological implications of a controversy that took place at Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  The controversy began when Associate Professor Norman Shepherd’s teaching on James 2:14-21 came under intense scrutiny. He was dismissed from his teaching post despite repeated exonerations by the seminary’s board, faculty and by his own presbytery. He taught that the formula <i>justification by faith alone</i> does not appear in Scripture or in the Westminster Standards and that Luther’s insertion of the particle <i>alone</i> in the formula<i> justification by faith alone</i> is exegetically indefensible.  The view of Calvin, and not that of Luther, has been given confessional standing in the <i>Westminster Confession of Faith</i>.  Calvin’s independence from Luther is essential for understanding this controversy. Part One explicates the administrative and procedural history of the controversy, and it identifies the major points of disagreement.  It details the processes and approaches that were used, neglected, or abused: interpersonal communications, group discussions, committee meetings, etc.  These data are evidence that the board did not have “adequate grounds” to dismiss Shepherd. Part Two examines the theology and the integrity of a document titled “The Commission on Allegations Regarding Professor Shepherd: Summary of Allegations”.  This document is examined for three reasons: it represents the mature theological expression of Shepherd’s opponents; the commission’s hearing is the last forum in which Shepherd was examined by the seminary; and the judgement of the commission is a matter of record. Shepherd’s repeated exonerations by the seminary and by his presbytery affirm that his understanding of justification by faith, his exegesis of James 2, his teaching on baptism, and his understanding of the “covenant dynamic” do not represent departures from historic Reformed theology; his formulations are orthodox.