Volume 1

DYNAMISM AND ERROR: A CRITIQUE OF PROCESS THOUGHT AND ITS RAMIFICATIONS ON CONTEMPORARY THEOLOGY

“My own path, however, is not to celebrate moving deeper and deeper into God’s death and all its Nietzschen ramifications but to affirm that God can be reborn for us when freed from those features that have become both incredible and oppressive. Altizer is not interested in such a theoretical possibility. . . . He places his hope. . . . that in the depths of Hell we will find salvation. . . . I, on the other hand, do not have confidence that we will find salvation in the depths of Hell. I fear we will find only Hell.”1

The Words of Dr. John B. Cobb, Jr. sound forth with passion and sincerity. They possess a certain transparency that is both vulnerable and appealing, allowing one to peer into the very heart of the man. At first glance, this statement is one that most evangelicals, being unfamiliar with Cobb, would find themselves in hearty agreement with, many of them likely to believe that the doctrinal convictions behind it are orthodox. Quite the contrary is actually true. Cobb seems to present a view of God that is alive and well and vitally involved in the world, much unlike Dr. Thomas Altizer, whom he criticizes above. Upon even a cursory examination, however, it would not take any length of time to discover the twisted, anemic nature of the impotent “god” which Cobb purports. (Read entire article)

JESUS AS AN AGENT OF CHANGE IN JOHN 21

As Jesus appears to the disciples by the Sea of Galilee after his resurrection, he comes as an agent of change. In this role, although he encounters the disciples first as a group but in subsequent scenes, he interacts only with Peter. Examining this pericope of John 211 using socio-rhetorical interpretation reveals different concepts in these texts. This paper organizes around two elements of socio-rhetorical interpretation: Inner Texture and Intertexture.2

The topic explored here is Jesus’ leadership in bringing change to his disciples. Jesus uses a particular way of bringing this direction to his followers. Discovering this “way of leadership” is the question and once discovered how does it compare with other models of leadership and how does it apply in modern contexts? (Read entire article)

WHERE THERE IS NO VISION: HOW SCIENCE APART FROM REVELATION LED TO HISTORY’S WORST ATROCITIES

It is remarkable how the world can be changed by small things. If the average person was asked to recall something world-changing, I would expect that most would speak of the bombing of Hiroshima, the destruction of the Berlin Wall, the attack on the World Trade Center, or some other event in history in which many people were involved in changing the political direction of a nation or region of the world. Descriptions of these moments in history best fit what would seem to be required to change the world; they were large scale, shocking, and forceful. I wonder how many, if asked, would believe that the world was changed by an event much less massive than the ones mentioned above; that widespread change was brought about by the release of a book that contained less than five hundred pages and was small enough to be carried in one hand. (Read entire article)