Дисертації з теми "Contributions in Christian doctrine of justification"

This dissertation demonstrates that Richard Hooker’s doctrine of justification, as reflected in his A learned Discourse of Justification, Workes, and How the Foundation of Faith is Overthrown,  continues the Protestant tradition of Lutheran and Reformed theology, in spite of various claims which associate Hooker with Catholicism and via media Anglicanism.  Though it stays in the line established by W. J. Torrance Kirby and Nigel Atkinson, who limited their arguments in favour of Hooker’s Reformed theology to Martin Luther and John Calvin, this thesis makes reference also to Philip Melanchthon, Ulrich Zwingli, Martin Bucer and Theodore Beza.  As a result of the fact that the vast majority of studies in Richard Hooker’s theology have concentrated on his later theology of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, this dissertation is limited to his early theology and more specifically, to his A Learned Discourse of Justification.   The first chapter is an updated study in Richard Hooker scholarship, with comments on the most important works in the field.  The next three chapters present fundamental aspects of the doctrine of justification in Lutheran, Early Reformed, and Classical Reformed theology with special reference to the ideas which were taken over by Richard Hooker himself.  A chapter on the doctrine of justification in the time of Richard Hooker follows and introduces the debates which shaped his soteriology.  The last four chapters provide a detailed analysis and some concluding remarks on Richard Hooker’s understanding of justification and especially on his concept of righteousness as the essence of justification.  The righteousness of justification as objective faith centres on Hooker’s concern with the salvation of Catholics, which provides the starting point of his minute analysis of justification.  The practical implications of this doctrine are revealed in Hooker’s treatment of the righteousness of sanctification as subjective faith, which discloses his fundamental belief in the importance of Scripture for the salvation of humanity.

This project examines the relationship of doctrine and moral formation or ethics in the work of James Wm. McClendon, Jr. The general thesis is that McClendon understood ethics to relate to doctrine in such a way that ethics constitutes a type of justification for the truthfulness of doctrinal confession. After introducing the logic for considering atonement and moral formation together in this manner, the project proceeds by explaining McClendon's "narrative" epistemology. This introductory material is followed by an examination of historical Anabaptism and "postmodernism" as communities of reference that contribute to McClendon's epistemological vision. The project then moves to an explication of McClendon's own presentation of the nature of doctrine (specifically the atonement) and ethics, primarily as seen in his three-volume systematic theology, followed by an analysis of McClendon's presentation of his own epistemological method from his book Convections. The final chapter before the Conclusion examines the way the material in the first 5 chapters is manifest in, and depends on, McClendon's sense of the nature of ecclesiology. The Conclusion then summarizes the argument and draws attention to several areas where McClendon's vision and methodology open to several critical questions. My conclusion is that McClendon's understanding of the nature of the atonement is manifest in his sense of the place and function of moral formation of the church, and that this relationship explains how McClendon understands Christian confession to be justifiably held by the Church.

Thesis (PhD)--Stellenbosch University, 2012.
ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This study examines the work of John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards, and N.T. Wright on the doctrine of Justification. As a comparative study in theology, this work aims to discover areas of continuity and discontinuity between these three theologians. Since all three are identified, or self-identity, with the Reformed theological tradition, it seeks to discern whether the Reformed tradition has been historically open to change, development and transformation in the articulation of doctrine. An underlying question in the study of Calvin, Edwards, and Wright on Justification is what it means to faithfully embody a theological tradition while standing critically within it. As this pertains to the Reformed tradition, the question is whether this robust theological tradition is in fact a “living tradition,” open to fresh insight and re-articulation from succeeding generations of scholars. In this sense, the study examines whether the Reformed tradition has been generally faithful to the principles of semper reformanda and sola scriptura. The work briefly traces the historical development of the doctrine of Justification through some of the major periods of church history. This is followed by chapters on Calvin, Edwards, and Wright, one chapter each, in order to examine their major works on the subject. This analysis takes note of how each one defines particular subjects related to Justification. These include the notions of “justification” itself, “faith,” “the righteousness of God,” “imputation,” and the place of obedience and good works in relation to justification. The sections on Calvin, Edwards, and Wright also include some discussion of scholarly response, reception, or evaluation of each one’s work. The final chapter discusses the idea of “tradition” as a dynamic, living, and on-going conversation about doctrine. This section also focuses on some of the main areas of agreement and disagreement in the views on Justification between Calvin, Edwards, and Wright. The overall aim is to take one of the principle theologians of the Protestant Reformation, and the Reformed tradition in particular – John Calvin – and to see how later theologians, in different historical contexts, develop, build upon, react to, or contribute to Calvin’s doctrine. Edwards represents 18th century Puritan-influenced American Colonialists and the Reformed theology of their day. N.T. Wright represents 20th and 21st century English Biblical scholarship. Wright approaches the subject of Justification as an Anglican New Testament specialist and historian. Since both Edwards and Wright are associated with the Reformed tradition and have found commentators and respondents within that tradition, they become important voices for discerning the direction this doctrine has taken since the time of the Reformation. Ultimately, one hopes that if a living theological tradition is discernible and demonstrable, this can contribute positively to the current debates on Justification within the Reformed churches, further encouraging the semper reformanda principle. Furthermore, one hopes that a living Reformed tradition will enable improved ecumenical relationships and lead to greater unity in the universal Church which has often been divided over the doctrine of Justification. Perhaps the work of Calvin, Edwards, and Wright can assist today’s Reformed theologians by pointing us in a constructive way forward.
AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie studie ondersoek die werk van Johannes Calvyn, Jonathan Edwards, en NT Wright ten opsigte van die leerstelling aangaande die regverdigmaking deur die geloof. As 'n vergelykende studie in die teologie, het hierdie studie ten doel om areas van kontinuïteit en diskontinuïteit tussen hierdie drie teoloë te vind. Aangesien al drie geïdentifiseer word, of self-identifiseer, met die Gereformeerde teologiese tradisie, poog die studie om te onderskei of die Gereformeerde tradisie histories oop was vir verandering, ontwikkeling en transformasie ten opsigte van die artikulasie van hierdie leerstelling. 'n Onderliggende vraag by die studie van Calvyn, Edwards, en Wright aangaande die leer van die regverdigmaking deur die geloof is die vraag wat dit beteken om 'n teologiese tradisie getrou te beliggaam en terselfdertyd krities binne die tradisie te staan. Aangesien hierdie studie verwys na die Gereformeerde tradisie, is die vraag of dié robuuste teologiese tradisie in werklikheid 'n "lewende tradisie" is wat oop is vir vars insigte en re-artikulasies deur opvolgende geslagte van navorsers. In hierdie opsig ondersoek die proefskrif of die Gereformeerde tradisie oor die algemeen getrou was aan die beginsels van semper reformanda en sola Scriptura. Die studie skets kortliks die historiese ontwikkeling van die leer van die regverdigmaking deur die geloof tydens enkele belangrike tydperke in die kerkgeskiedenis. Dan volg hoofstukke oor onderskeidelik Calvyn, Edwards, en Wright, waarin hulle belangrike werke oor die onderwerp ondersoek word. Hierdie analise neem kennis van hoe elkeen van hulle bepaalde onderwerpe definieer wat met die leerstelling oor die regverdiging deur die geloof verband hou. Dit sluit in die begrippe "regverdigmaking", "geloof", “God se geregtigheid", "toerekening", en die posisie van gehoorsaamheid en goeie werke in verhouding tot regverdigmaking. Die gedeeltes oor Calvyn, Edwards, en Wright sluit ook ‘n bespreking van die akademiese resepsie en evaluering van elkeen se werk in. Die laaste hoofstuk bespreek die idee van "tradisie" as 'n dinamiese, lewende, en deurlopende gesprek oor doktriene. Hierdie afdeling fokus ook op 'n paar van die belangrikste ooreenkomste en verskille in Calvyn, Edwards, en Wright se standpunte oor regverdigmaking. Die oorhoofse doel is om te kyk na die werk van een van die vooraanstaande teoloë van die Protestantse Hervorming, spesifiek in die Gereformeerde tradisie - Johannes Calvyn - en te ondersoek hoe latere teoloë, in verskillende historiese kontekste, sy artikulasie van die leerstelling oor regverdigmaking ontwikkel, daarop bou, daarop reageer, of daartoe bydra. Edwards verteenwoordig die 18de eeuse Puriteins-beïnvloede Amerikaanse kolonialiste en die Gereformeerde teologie van hul dag. N.T. Wright is gekies as verteenwoorder uit die 20ste en 21ste eeuse Engelstalige wetenskaplike wereld. Wright benader die onderwerp van regverdigmaking as 'n Anglikaanse Nuwe Testamentiese spesialis en historikus. Aangesien sowel Edwards as Wright verbonde is aan die Gereformeerde tradisie en gespreksgenote binne daardie tradisie gevind het, gee hulle ʼn belangrike aanduiding van die rigting waarin hierdie leerstelling sedert die Reformasie ontwikkel het. Ten slotte, ‘n fokus op 'n lewende teologiese tradisie kan 'n positiewe bydrae lewer tot die huidige debatte oor regverdigmaking in die Gereformeerde kerke, en die beginsel van semper reformanda verder aanmoedig. Die fokus op ʼn 'n lewende Gereformeerde tradisie kan beter ekumeniese verhoudings bevorder en tot groter eenheid in die universele (“katolieke”) kerk lei, wat dikwels oor die leer van die regverdigmaking deur die geloof verdeel is en verdeel word. Miskien kan die werk van Calvyn, Edwards, en Wright vir vandag se Gereformeerde teoloë ʼn konstruktiewe rigting vorentoe aandui.

This work proposes that the foundation for justice in society begins with an understanding of personhood that begins with Christian theology. While ethical stances such as the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights are helpful in articulating the bounds of justice in society, such humanistic declarations and programs may reach an impasse if they do not incorporate the depth and complexity of human personhood revealed in Jesus Christ. I will make this argument by comparing the Christian anthropologies of two prominent advocates for social justice in the Catholic and Protestant traditions: Karol Wojytla/Pope John Paul II and Karl Barth. Parts One and Two of this thesis will examine the strong critique which both of these men offered within their own historical context toward systems which denied the vital connection between Christian theology and persons in society. These parts will outline the distinctly Christian anthropologies that each theologian proposed as a basis for social justice. The final part of this thesis will set these two anthropologies in critical interaction with one another in the key area of divergence: the ontology of human personhood and the methodological issues integral to it. While John Paul has raised critical issues which are central to social ethics and has articulated many of the complexities of human action, Karl Barth's Christological anthropology proposes an ontological construct of being which critically critiques human motivation and behaviour while also providing a social starting point for personal ethics.

This thesis examines the controversy surrounding the doctrine of atonement among transatlantic Methodist during the Victorian and Progressive Eras. Beginning in the eighteenth century, it establishes the dominant theories of the atonement present among English and American Methodists and the cultural-philosophical worldview Methodists used to support these theories. It then explores the extent to which ordinary and influential Methodists throughout the nineteenth century carried forward traditional opinions on the doctrine before examining in closer detail the controversies surrounding the doctrine at the opening of the twentieth century. It finds that from the 1750s to the 1830s transatlantic Methodists supported a range of substitutionary views of the atonement, from the satisfaction and Christus Victor theories to a vicarious atonement with penal emphases. Beginning in the 1830s and continuing through the 1870s, transatlantic Methodists embraced features of the moral government theory, with varying degrees, while retaining an emphasis on traditional substitutionary theories. Methodists during this period were indebted to an Enlightenment worldview. Between 1880 and 1914 transatlantic Methodists gradually accepted a Romantic philosophical outlook with the result that they began altering their conceptions of the atonement. Methodists during this period tended to move in three directions. Progressive Methodists jettisoned prevailing views of the atonement preferring to embrace the moral influence theory. Mediating Methodists challenged traditionally constructed theories for similar reasons but tended to support a theory in which God was viewed as a friendlier deity while retaining substitutionary conceptions of the atonement. Conservatives took a custodial approach whereby traditional conceptions of the atonement were vehemently defended. Furthermore, that transatlantic Methodists were involved in significant discussions surrounding the revision of their theology of atonement in light of modernism in the years surrounding 1900 contributed to their remaining on the periphery of the Fundamentalist-Modernist in subsequent decades.

This study examined the issues of the interpretation, transmission and appropriation of the doctrine of justification by faith alone within the context of the Lutheran Church in Nigeria, Gongola Diocese. Using contextualization as my main tool in this exploration, I argue that intercultural communication holds the key to unlocking how effectively and appropriately these three engagements with theology are executed within the context of this study. The Lutheran church and indeed most Protestant denominations assert that justification by faith alone is the cardinal doctrine of Christianity. Scholars are however concerned that there is great level of ignorance among members and misappropriation of justification by faith alone in the lives of members of these denominations. Many reasons were advanced as being responsible for this, some of which include: its absence from the preaching agenda of Protestant pulpits, and inadequate teaching from the church, its clergy and theological educators. Other reasons are its failure to be shown to be clearly applicable to lived experiences of the people in their contemporary challenges. The message of justification by faith alone has not been adequately translated into people's social, and religious-cultural world views. The LCCN as an institution subscribes to Luther's teachings as expressed in his writings and taught by the Lutheran Church globally. However, the LCCN is faced with the problem of how to transmit the meaning of justification by faith alone to its members. This study therefore sought to investigate the underlying factors for this development. The question that the study wished to answer was: How does the interpretation of justification by faith alone by the Lutheran Church of Christ in Nigeria (as an institution) enhance its understanding and appropriation by members and serves as a guide in this study? In attempting to answer this question three theories were used as framework with which to test the church's interpretation of this doctrine. These theories are: 1) gospel and culture in dialogue; 2) translatability, and 3) contextual theological education programmes for the training of both clergy and laity. This is an empirical qualitative study and was structured into eight chapters. Participants in this study were categorized into five groups: church leaders, seminary lecturers, clergy, seminary students, and lay members. Through in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with participants, relevant data was generated and analysed manually. The study found that the LCCN's interpretation of justification by faith alone is detached from the religious and cultural world view of its members; this has in turn created a conflict in how it is understood and appropriated in their lived experiences. The message of justification by faith (the gospel) has not been allowed to engage in dialogue with the culture of the people, rather culture is perceived as evil or something to be avoided. Thus, I argue that this failure on the part of the missionaries and the indigenous leadership of the LCCN to employ intercultural communication in transmitting the message of justification by faith alone is the major cause of the problem. Most of the participants including the leaders of the church acknowledged that the church, the seminary and the clergy have not been faithful in transmitting the appropriate message of justification by faith alone. The conclusion of this study therefore, is that the LCCN's interpretation of justification by faith alone does not enhance its understanding and appropriation by members. This thesis proposes that the Lunguda practice of ntsandah provides an entry point for a proper informed interpretation of justification by faith alone. For this to be possible, the gospel and culture must engage in dialogue through viable a contextual theological education programme for the training of both clergy and the laity.
Thesis (Ph.D.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2012.

[Greek words romanized in title and description] This dissertation defends the thesis that the Pauline phrase, pistis Christou ("faith of Christ" [Rom 3:22,26; Gal 2:16, 20; 3:22; Phil 3:9; Eph 3:12]), in its various contexts, is best translated as "faith in Christ" (objective genitive) and not "faith/faithfulness of Christ" (subjective genitive). Chapter 1 surveys the history of the debate from 1795 to the present. Chapter 2 gives an overview of the use of pistis ("faith") in the LXX and the rest of the NT corpus outside of Paul's letters. It is argued that the LXX usage of pistis supports the subjective genitive interpretation, but the NT usage argues for the objective genitive interpretation. Chapter 3 investigates the use of "faith" in the writings of the apostolic fathers. The research shows that the fathers use pistis along the lines of NT writers and the evidence from their writings also supports our thesis concerning the pistis Christou phrase in Paul. Chapter 4 addresses the nature of the genitive case, Paul's use of the genitives Christou, kuriou, and Theou. Also in chapter 4, the main arguments made in defense of the Subjective genitive interpretation are summarized and evaluated. Chapters 5-7 are exegetical in nature and make up the core of this dissertation. Arguments are made from the context of each letter in which the pistis Christou phrase appears (Romans, Galatians, and Philippians). First, the meaning of pistis Christou is sought in its immediate context and the results evaluated in light of the broader context of each letter. We found that in all these instances, the reading "faith in Christ" for pistis Christou is the more probable reading in context. Chapter 8 summarizes the results of this investigation and evaluates the thesis proposed in this dissertation. Appendices 1-4 cover topics such as (1) why the debate is limited to the subjective and objective genitives (appendix 1), (2) examples of subjective and objective genitives in the NT (appendix 2), (3) pistis in the rest of Paul's letters (appendix 3), and (4) pistis Christou in Ephesians 3:12 (appendix 4).
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 http://disexpress.umi.com/dxweb or downloaded through ProQuest's Dissertation and Theses database if your institution subscribes to that service.

This study investigates the meaning of Paul's expression 'works of the law' ( tpycx vOμou) • A survey of representative scholars regarding Paul's attitude toward the Mosaic law demonstrates that confusion over this issue continues as a difficulty in Pauline studies. It is suggested that ascertaining the meaning of this expression will help alleviate that confusion. This study indicates that Paul's use of tpyov is ethically neutral: 'work' itself is neither positive nor negative for Paul. The ethical orientation of a given 'work' is determined by the descriptors Paul attaches to it. Paul speaks positively and negatively about the law itself, yet only negative descriptors are used with tpycxvOμou. This gives significant direction for the interpretation of 'works of the law.' The historical backgrounds of Galatians and Romans support this negative orientation for tpycx vOμou. These letters were written to confront separate crisis situations in different churches. Yet they share common situational elements. Paul was faced in both churches with a form of 'judaizing' opposition that insisted that Gentile converts become 'practical Jews' in order to 'complete' the Abrahamic covenant through the Mosaic. Paul addresses this threat to these churches by means of epistolographical and rhetorical mechanisms. He uses these persuasive communication devices powerfully, insisting that these converts recognize what it means to be 'in Christ,' and what it means and does not mean to be 'Jewish.' 'Works of the law' are not necessary for salvation, and were never intended for redemption. Likewise, identity as one who performs 'works of the law' does not provide any claim upon God. One does not have to become a 'practical Jew' to have a right relationship to God, and a Jew has no redemptive status before God on the basis of ethnicity. 'Works of the law,' then, serve as a factor in Paul's polemics because the continuing validity of the Mosaic law is the issue being addressed by Paul and his opponents. They are a feature in Paul's view of the law because he is both positive and negative toward the law, depending upon one's intended salvific orientation to God through it
Psychology of Education
D. Th. (New Testament)