Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #628579 in Books
• Published on: 1996-10-01
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 162 pages

Customer Reviews

Excellent introduction to foundationalism and theology
Nancy Murphy's central thesis is that modern philosophy has created a situation where Liberal and Conservative theologians are, because of their foundationalist method, intractable in their relation to the other camp. The first half of the book examines this claim in respect of three opposing positions i) how we know God ii) the role and form of religious language and, iii) how God acts in the world. The second half argues that the intractability of the Liberal-Conservative positions is based on foundationalist methods and that with their apparent demise a postfoundationalist approach, such as those of Thiemann and Lindbeck, opens up a whole range of options that overcomes the Liberal-Conservative divide.

All this is done in a remarkably clear way and in a relatively small book. This book is an excellent introduction to contemporary changes in theological method that commonly come under the label of postmodern. From this basis theology will not be trapped in a pre-determined set of options as Murphy shows in reference to many areas of contemporary theology such as religion and science and the use of feminine language as a referent of God. Overall, this book will undoubtably make you think and question the way theology is done. My one major complaint is that while this book is an issue based book a more thorough exposition of the key theologians would have made this a more theologically important work.

Beyond Comparison, How Ontology set the Epestimic Agenda
Nancey begins her philosophical waltz as most desirous of going "where no one has gone before" and consequently suffers the same fate. In an attempt to criticize the naivete of both her Liberal and Fundamental theological interlocutors, regarding situational relativity and their obliviousness to it, she fails to either recognize (at best) or admit (at worst) that her own critical apparatus is little more than an enculturation "effect" of the disembededness of life - even her own - in the context of the "high noon" of modernity; and thus the deafning silence regarding ontology. Whether comparing propositional revelation with expressive reflection, metaphysical foundationalism with antifoundationalism, niave realism with pragmatic realism , or divine interventionism and natural immanentism, all are conveniently addressed from within the most precarious of theological\philosophical positions i.e. with their ontological feet planted firmly in mid air. Of course my own critical observations are being advanced within a particular tradition, of and for which I thank God, I gladly admit it and I might add the "True" and\or "Real" one. One where Biblical Holism not only addresses the musings of the scholarly, with their "webs" of epistemology and the hue and cry of antifoundational foundations, accompanied by their creative and pragmatic realism (supported by assertive fiat) but also the reality of Creation which (whether consented to or not) provides the ultimate foundation against which there is no escape. Is not it interesting that even for the postmodern "evangelical" avant garde we are often surprised at the light orthodox and historic Christianity can shed own our autonomous musings. At one point she displays excitement regarding the prospects of rapprochment within this chronological "snobbery" milieu but the seeming discrepancies adumbrated are only convenient constructs advanced by academic status seekers and lagging christian want-to-be's whose ideas await the same honor of previous fads - obscurity. As if these issues have not been or can not be resolved satisfactorily within the anamnesis of the Reformed faith she inadvertantly confuses idols for ideas and most who are enchanted by reading will probably not be the better served. As Christians given the imperative to take "every thought captive to the obedience of Christ" we can do better than this and indeed must. This fails to be "Beyond" anything but not above serious reconsideration!