Marriage in the theology of Martin Luther – worldly yet sacred: An option between secularism and clericalism

Marriage, according to Martin Luther, is an institution both secular and sacred. It is secular because it is an order of this earthly life. But its institution goes back to the beginning of the human race and that makes marriage sacred, a divine and holy order. It does not – like the sacraments – nourish and strengthen faith or prepare people for the life to come; but it is a secular order in which people can prove faith and love, even though they are apt to fail without the help of the Word and the sacrament. The author applies this view of Luther in terms of two unacceptable extremes: the creation ordinances of Brunner and the analogy of relation of Barth. The dialectic of Law and Gospel should never be dispensed.Marriage is necessary as a remedy for lust, and through marriage God permits sexual intercourse. Similar is the allegory which Paul employs: that Adam and Eve, or marriage itself, is a type of Christ and the church

New lenses for a new future. Why science needs theology and why theology needs science

The ecological crisis almost forces different disciplines to search together for a better world. We all share one earth: the closer we reach a certain point, the closer we come together. This places the paper amid the so-called science and religion dialogue in which theology increasingly cognises empirical research and scientific data. On the other hand, sciences are becoming increasingly aware of the need to transcend their evidential limitations to find a comprehensive paradigm. This paper will apply an exemplary methodology by selecting the eco-theology of Jürgen Moltmann as a theologian who takes relevant results of scientific ecological research seriously. The Club of Rome, on the other hand, is an example of social (and natural) sciences urging to find a new inclusive paradigm for a world in peril. The juxtaposition of theology and science provides the need for a new value system emerging in social sciences. Randers makes clear that the culture of consumerism had to be replaced by cultural elements that provide substantial longer-term satisfaction and increase well-being. The latest report of the Club of Rome (2022) and Moltmann’s latest two titles on this topic (2019 and 2020) have been integrated into the argument and previous publications of the author. Contribution: This exemplary approach contributes to a scientifically grounded and biblically founded eco-theology. The two exponents of science and eco-theology provide the much-needed vocabulary for each other. The Earth Charter, one could add, provides a grammar for the engagement of eco-theology and environmental science

“You must love the earth as yourself”

Wanneer Moltmann skepping en evolusie bespreek, bestempel hy sy metodologie as ’n “teologiese natuur-hermeneutiek” wat met die natuurverskynsels in die lig van die ewigheid omgaan. Met hierdie benadering word die kern van ’n ekoteologie uitgelig wat wetenskaplik gegrond en Bybels verantwoordbaar is en wat sinvol met wetenskap in gesprek kan tree. Moltmann draai geen doekies om oor die siening dat René Descartes se res cogitans (denkende syn) en res extensa (uitgebreide syn) ons werklikheidsverstaan verwring het nie en enige vorm van simbiose van mens en natuur ten nadeel strek. Deur middel van ’n kwantifiseringsdogma het die mens as kennende subjek ’n splytende blik ontwikkel met ’n benadering van verdeel en heers. Die natuurlike omgewing is geheel en al in hierdie beskouing verdinglik. Dit het uiteraard tot ’n antroposentriese werklikheidsverstaan gelei. Soos in vorige werke van Moltmann, wil hy in sy jongste boek (Christliche Erneuerungen in schwierigen Zeiten) mens en natuur weer by mekaar uitbring. Die skrywer van hierdie artikel interpreteer hierdie boek as Moltmann se “teologiese testament” met ’n ekoteologie as die brandpunt van sy denke en deel van die reliëf van hoop. Moltmann haal in hierdie boek onder andere Lukas 10:27–28 aan, maar voeg by dat naas God en jou naaste, jy ook “die aarde moet liefhê soos jouself”. Vir Moltmann is dit duidelik dat die kroon van die skepping nie die mens is nie, maar die Sabbat. Die skepping moet nie antroposentries verstaan word nie, maar biosentries. Daarom benodig ons dringend, sê hy, ’n “Groen Hervorming”. Dit behels ’n beweging van wêreldpolitiek na aardpolitiek, van wêreldekonomie na aardekonomie, en van wêreldreligieë na aardreligie toe. Dit is duidelik dat Moltmann deurgaans Christelike teoloog wil wees. Natuurlik verabsoluteer hy nie hierdie uitgangspunt nie, maar oordeel juis dat die verskillende godsdienste moet besef dat hulle almal een aarde deel. Ons is almal met ’n naelstring aan “Moeder Aarde” verbind. Dieselfde geld ook vir wetenskap en teologie. Hy stel dit duidelik dat die wêreld kontingent is en dat ’n werklikheidsverstaan nie uit ewige prinsipes afgelei kan word nie, maar deur empiriese waarneming gerig moet word. Daarom moet daar in die teologie kennis van die resultate van wetenskaplike navorsing geneem word. Hierdie interpretasie gee ’n belangrike fokus op sowel Moltmann se metodologie as sy teologie van hoop, en dra by tot die diskoers tussen teologie en wetenskap wat mekaar op ’n transversale vlak vind in hulle gemeenskaplike soeke na ’n paradigma wat ’n planetêre welsyn kan vind en bevorder.When Moltmann (2010:140) discusses creation and evolution, he labels his method as a theological nature hermeneutic (“theologischen Naturhermeneutik”) that deals with natural phenomena in the light of eternity. He states that his theological methods developed as he cultivated a perception of theological thought. “The road emerged only as I walked it. And my attempts to walk it are of course determined by my personal biography, and by the political and historical kairos in which I live” (Moltmann 2000:xv). Moltmann tends to repeat thoughts in his publications. When this trend is carefully assessed, it becomes clear that his methodology is not only iterative, but increasingly focused. It is like the action of diamond miners who shake a grid in order to gradually reveal diamonds from the gravel. The word “peril” in the title of Moltmann’s recently published The Spirit of Hope: Theology for a World in Peril (2019) is atypically (for Moltmann) negative compared with the positive views reflected in his other publications. Here he reminds us that Christian faith has much to say in response to a despairing world. In the eternal “yes” of the living God we affirm the goodness and ongoing purpose of our fragile humanity. Likewise, God’s love empowers us to love life and resist a culture of death. The book analyses the challenges of hope in our contemporary world, particularly the environmental crisis. It argues that the Christian faith – and indeed all the world’s religions – must orient itself toward the wholeness of the human family and the physical environment necessary to that wholeness. The author of this article interprets the ideas in the above-mentioned book of Moltmann as the culmination of Moltmann’s legacy, in the form of ecotheology. This is evident in his treatment of Jesus’ summary of the commandments when he spontaneously changes the wording of Luke 10:27–8 by inserting a phrase about the earth: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour [and the earth] as thyself.” This is the quintessence of his ecotheology. The creation command of Genesis 1:28 requires recognition of the dignity of all creatures, as a challenge to Karl Barth who distorted Protestant theology when he declared that creation theology is, in essence, nothing but anthropology. However, “[T]he idea that there is a fundamental difference between human beings and animals is seriously questioned ...” And: “This covenant is anything but Anthropocentric – it is clearly eco-centric” (Labuschagné 1996:127, 131). Four contours are presented in this article with regard to the ecotheology of Moltmann: We need a fresh understanding of the “image of God”; a movement away from human beings as the centre of creation to a cosmic integration. The first creation narrative clearly shows certain circles of environmental concentration: exosphere → atmosphere → hydrosphere → troposphere → biosphere. All the circles are concentric and interdependent. But the dependence is one-directional. We need nature, but nature does not need us. A human is, rather, a “cosmic image”, seeing that the Gestalt of humans is embedded in nature and society. We need a new image of God that moves away from the image of a remote God to an image of an immanent God. The Trinity is the hermeneutical key to interpreting history. God is not a totally different God, but the all-pervasive God. This does not mean that Moltmann supports pantheism or even panentheism. God contracted Godself to free up a void for the creation that is not God. Therefore, God did not only create from nothing but in nothing as well. And now God inhabits this handiwork of God through the Spirit. The implication is therefore that the crown or apex of the creation is not the human-being, but the Sabbath, when God and creature are together in a state of harmony. We need a new understanding of the creation command that moves from domination and subjugation to cosmic love. Humanity is not the Maître et possesseur de la nature, but Genesis 1:29 is to be interpreted as a nutritional command: The animal gets green herbs, but humans have to live from the herbs bearing seed, which obviously implies cultivation. Time is converted into space when God comes. God constitutes the dwelling place for those God has created. The new heaven and the new earth motivate a change from word politics to earth politics. Eschatology is essentially not the end, but the beginning of all things. One world or no world, says Moltmann, and the closer we get to God the closer we get to one another. The new heaven and new earth are the cosmic temple of God. What emerges from Moltmann’s ecotheology is that the contours of theology and science are not only prone to a degree of convergence on a transversal level, but are synergistically integrated, almost like a double helix. Life is the essence of departure of both ecotheology and environmental science. Anthropocentrism is to be discarded and we must comprehend that there is only one planet, Gaia, the Blue Planet, our mother, our Heimat (Moltmann 2018:113). The Club of Rome, for example, advocates the development of a new paradigm of “planetary well-being” and reaches out to theology as a partner, while Moltmann acknowledges that we have to deal with reality in an empirical-inductive way. With this exemplary approach followed, the research project contributes to an ecotheology that is scientifically grounded and biblically founded.http://www.litnet.co.za/category/akademies/litnet-akademiesam2020Dogmatics and Christian Ethic

Ecclesia reformata semper reformanda – die ongemaklike eis

Ecclesia reformata semper reformanda – a hard to do command This article is a reworked version of the Moderator’s opening address at the 68th General Assembly of the Netherdutch Reformed Church of Africa in October 2007. Against the fourth-century background of Emperor Constantine’s “church politics”, the paper reflects on the first-century rhetoric of the Apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 10:3ff and 17ff about non-worldly, divine weapons of warfare, and about boasting and self-commendation. It shows how Paul understood oral rhetorical words as theatrically performed by employing the genre of the so-called “Fool’s speech” by means of which Paul argues that masks disguise the authentic identity of Christ- followers. Paul’s rhetoric is applied in the article as an appeal to the modern-day church to be ecumenically open and anthropologically inclusive. The article demonstrates the uneasiness of some members in the institutional church to proceed along a path of ongoing reformation (ecclesia reformata semper reformanda)

“Genes Я us” – Of juis nie? Oor determinisme en voluntarisme by die mens met verwysing na homoseksualiteit

“Genes Я us” – or not? About human determinism and voluntarism, with reference to homosexuality This article has as its departure point the conviction of some that human genome mapping predisposes human beings genetically and as a consequence, the homosexual person becomes a mere victim of circumstances. Biological determinism and social construc-tionism are not mutually exclusive and although a person is orientated within a web of boundary matters, the depiction of a human being as imago Dei still prevails. A person has the freedom to choose and the responsibility to do so. One’s understanding of reality provides a frame of reference from which a definition of morality is derived. The suggestion of Nancey Murphey to understand reality as a “nonreductive physicalism” is followed. Reductionism in any form is subsequently avoided. A holistic view of humankind in terms of which religious experience is seen as more than some brain functions and people are embedded in a “sacred canopy”, is therefore advocated

‘Epistemology models ontology’− In gesprek met John Polkinghorne

The famous premise of John Polkinghorne, ‘epistemology models ontology’, has been assessed in this article. It is interpreted that its logic is based on a linear trajectory of knowledge → being. Polkinghorne places much emphasis on the fact that he pursues a ‘bottom-up’ approach, that is, an inductive way of going about with reality. He opts for a ‘critical realist’ view of reality that leads him to interpret indeterminacy (Heisenberg) as a sign of actual ontological openness to the future and not primarily as an epistemological deficit. He applies subsequently the doctrine of the Trinity as a hermeneutical tool to understand reality. The author argues that Polkinghorne is inconsistent in this venture and that he should consider a multidimensional approach, where epistemology and ontology model each other mutually, that is, knowledge ↔ being. In order to acknowledge the stratification of reality and the pluriformity of epistemologies, it is suggested that a rather ‘constructive-realist’ approach would serve better the theology of Polkinghorne; this is a shift from epistemology to hermeneutics

Marriage in the theology of Martin Luther - worldly yet sacred : an option between secularism and clericalism

Marriage, according to Martin Luther, is an institution both secular and sacred. It is secular because it is an order of this earthly life. But its institution goes back to the beginning of the human race and that makes marriage sacred, a divine and holy order. It does not – like the sacraments – nourish and strengthen faith or prepare people for the life to come; but it is a secular order in which people can prove faith and love, even though they are apt to fail without the help of the Word and the sacrament. The author applies this view of Luther in terms of two unacceptable extremes: the creation ordinances of Brunner and the analogy of relation of Barth. The dialectic of Law and Gospel should never be dispensed

Panentheism : a functional and inductive endeavour in the dialogue between science and religion

Panentheism is an approach that gains more and more popularity in both systematic and practical theology, as well as in philosophy. But what lies at the heart of panentheism? Could panentheism be the key to a valid contemporary understanding of God and creation? This article aims at illuminating the richness of panentheism whilst at the same time exploring whether this construct could enhance the interdisciplinary dialogue. The author of this article departs from the premise that it is the task of systematic theology to understand reality in a collective enterprise, together with other disciplines and even other sciences. A constructive empiricism could, when combined with the notion of social constructionism, lead to an understanding of reality where reality is more than mere idealistically conceived. Truth is therefore to be replaced with a pragmatic but value-laden concept of understanding. Therefore panentheism and both epistemology and ontology have to be reconsidered. It is the opinion of the author that panentheism can enrich both the dialogue between disciplines as well as the interaction between practical and systematic theology. However, panentheism then has to be even more radical and steer clear of the traditional meaning of space and time.http://www.ve.org.zaam201

Graham Duncan Dedication – A tribute

No abstract availabl

New lenses for a new future. Why science needs theology and why theology needs science

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT : Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.The ecological crisis almost forces different disciplines to search together for a better world. We all share one earth: the closer we reach a certain point, the closer we also come together. This places the paper amid the so-called science and religion dialogue in which theology increasingly takes cognisance of empirical research and scientific data. On the other hand, sciences are becoming increasingly aware of the need to transcend their evidential limitations to find a comprehensive paradigm. This paper will apply an exemplary methodology by selecting the eco-theology of Jürgen Moltmann as a theologian who takes relevant results of scientific ecological research seriously. The Club of Rome, on the other hand, is an example of social (and natural) sciences urging to find a new inclusive paradigm for a world in peril. The juxtaposition of theology and science provides the need for a new value system emerging in social sciences. Randers makes clear that the culture of consumerism had to be replaced by cultural elements that provide substantial longer-term satisfaction and increase well-being. The latest report of the Club of Rome (2022) and Moltmann’s latest two titles on this topic (2019 and 2020) have been integrated into the argument and previous publications of the author.http://www.hts.org.zaDogmatics and Christian Ethic