• English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • English 
    • English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • OAI Data Pool
  • OAI Harvested Content
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • OAI Data Pool
  • OAI Harvested Content
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Browse

All of the LibraryCommunitiesPublication DateTitlesSubjectsAuthorsThis CollectionPublication DateTitlesSubjectsAuthorsProfilesView

My Account

LoginRegister

The Library

AboutNew SubmissionSubmission GuideSearch GuideRepository PolicyContact

THE THEOLOGIES OF EDWARD FARLEY AND JAMES MCCLENDON IN CRITICAL DIALOGUE

  • CSV
  • RefMan
  • EndNote
  • BibTex
  • RefWorks
Author(s)
Theologies Of Edward Farley
Thomas W. Harrington
James Mcclendon
Thomas W. Harrington
M. Agr
M. Div
Contributor(s)
The Pennsylvania State University CiteSeerX Archives

Full record
Show full item record
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/1003911
Online Access
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.920.825
http://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article%3D1107%26context%3Ddissertations_mu
Abstract
A lively theological debate in recent decades has been the dispute over theological method between “revisionist ” and “narrativist ” theologians. To explore and evaluate this debate I consider the work of “revisionist ” theologian Edward Farley and of “narrativist ” theologian James William McClendon, Jr. Farley’s method calls, first, for an attempt to uncover faith realities that can be directly perceived, such as the faith community’s efforts to remove ethnic boundaries, and, second, for an endeavor to examine how such realities indirectly demonstrate the existence of additional faith realities, such as the character of God. In contrast, McClendon’s method calls for an attempt to ground doctrine in various sources, such as experience, community and the narrative of Christian tradition, but most especially in the narrative of Scripture, conceived of as the word of God. An endeavor to address adequately their understandings of theological method requires not only a direct analysis of the methods themselves (set forth in chapters 1 and 2) but also an examination of how these methods may be applied in the construction of doctrine. Thus, (in chapters 3 and 4) I consider the manner in which Farley’s and
Date
2016-09-24
Type
text
Identifier
oai:CiteSeerX.psu:10.1.1.920.825
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.920.825
Copyright/License
Metadata may be used without restrictions as long as the oai identifier remains attached to it.
Collections
OAI Harvested Content

entitlement

 
DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2021)  DuraSpace
Quick Guide | Contact Us
Open Repository is a service operated by 
Atmire NV
 

Export search results

The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.