首页> 外文学位 >The doctrine of sin in ecumenical perspective: A comparison of Karl Barth and Karl Rahner.
【24h】

The doctrine of sin in ecumenical perspective: A comparison of Karl Barth and Karl Rahner.

机译:普世主义视角下的罪学说:卡尔·巴特和卡尔·拉纳的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

According to Hans Kung, Roman Catholic and Protestant theologians have reached fundamental agreement on the doctrine of justification. If this is so, then we can also expect to find such agreement on the doctrine of sin, for these two doctrines are but different sides of the same coin. This study tests this hypothesis by comparing Karl Barth's and Karl Rahner's views of sin.; Fruitful comparison of Barth and Rahner is made possible by the material overlap in their theologies resulting from Barth's move away from Protestant liberalism toward a more orthodox theology and Rahner's move away from Neo-Scholasticism to a more critical theology.; Comparison is made difficult by (1) the traditionally different points of departure of the Roman Catholic and the Protestant theology of sin, and (2) the difference between Rahner's transcendental method and Barth's narrative strategy.; While Rahner founds his theology of sin on the concept of human responsibility, Barth takes God's effective act of redemption as the basis for his thinking about sin. Proceeding from the concept of responsibility, Rahner seeks the transcendental conditions of its possibility, but Barth begins with the story of sin's conquest by Jesus Christ, interpreting all other biblical material in its light.; Despite their differences, Barth and Rahner essentially agree in all five areas in which they were compared. (1) They both argue that sin can be known truly only from the revelation of God. (2) Surprisingly, we find agreement in the cluster of issues surrounding the concept of freedom, Barth and Rahner agreeing that human beings have no neutral position vis-a-vis God, and that the sinful act is not free in the same sense as the obedient act. (3) They both describe sin as a three-fold "no": to God, to true human nature and to the neighbor. (4) For both theologians, the subject of the sinful act is the good human creature who is elevated by the address of God or the supernatural existential. (5) According to Barth and Rahner, sin results intrinsically in slavery and condemnation; sin is Hell, and Hell is sin.
机译:根据汉斯·孔(Hans Kung)的说法,罗马天主教和新教神学家已经就称义理论达成了根本共识。如果是这样,那么我们也可以期望在罪恶学说上找到这样的共识,因为这两种学说只是同一枚硬币的不同方面。本研究通过比较卡尔·巴特(Karl Barth)和卡尔·拉纳(Karl Rahner)的犯罪观点来检验这一假设。由于巴特从新教自由主义转向更正统的神学,而拉纳从新学术论转向更批判的神学,这使得巴特和拉纳的神学上的实质性重叠成为可能。 (1)罗马天主教传统上的不同出发点和新教的罪恶神学,(2)拉纳的先验方法与巴特的叙事策略之间的差异使比较变得困难。拉纳在人类责任概念上发现了罪恶神学的同时,巴特以上帝的有效救赎行为为基础来思考罪恶。拉纳从责任的概念出发,寻求其可能性的先验条件,但巴特从耶稣基督征服罪的故事开始,从它的角度解释了所有其他圣经材料。尽管存在差异,但Barth和Rahner在比较它们的所有五个领域中基本上都同意。 (1)他们都争辩说,只有从上帝的启示中才能真正知道罪恶。 (2)令人惊讶的是,我们在围绕自由概念的一系列问题中找到了共识,巴特和拉纳同意人类对上帝没有中立的立场,而有罪的行为与听话的行为。 (3)他们都将罪恶描述为三倍的“不”:对上帝,对真实的人性以及对邻居。 (4)对于两位神学家来说,犯罪行为的对象都是被上帝的称呼或超自然的存在提升的善良人类。 (5)根据Barth和Rahner的说法,犯罪本质上是奴隶制和定罪的结果;罪是地狱,地狱是罪。

著录项

  • 作者

    Highfield, Ronald Curtis.;

  • 作者单位

    Rice University.;

  • 授予单位 Rice University.;
  • 学科 Theology.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1988
  • 页码 256 p.
  • 总页数 256
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 宗教;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号