Intercultural Theology and the Historicity of Thinking

D. Grube
{"title":"Intercultural Theology and the Historicity of Thinking","authors":"D. Grube","doi":"10.1558/isit.31380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I analyze the German-speaking discussion on the discipline of Intercultural Theology. Among others, I criticize Schmidt-Leukel’s suggestion to define it as interreligious theology. This definition being somewhat arbitrary, I suggest reconstructing it under the parameters of philosophical and cultural insights that acknowledge the historicity of thinking and the ethnocentricity of justification. This move allows to allows “transmission-centered approaches” to be replaced by “context-sensitive” ones that honor the subject status of the Christian Other.","PeriodicalId":323507,"journal":{"name":"Interreligious Studies and Intercultural Theology","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interreligious Studies and Intercultural Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1558/isit.31380","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, I analyze the German-speaking discussion on the discipline of Intercultural Theology. Among others, I criticize Schmidt-Leukel’s suggestion to define it as interreligious theology. This definition being somewhat arbitrary, I suggest reconstructing it under the parameters of philosophical and cultural insights that acknowledge the historicity of thinking and the ethnocentricity of justification. This move allows to allows “transmission-centered approaches” to be replaced by “context-sensitive” ones that honor the subject status of the Christian Other.
跨文化神学与思维的历史性
在这篇文章中,我分析了德语中关于跨文化神学学科的讨论。其中,我批评施密特-洛克尔(Schmidt-Leukel)将其定义为跨宗教神学的建议。这个定义有些武断,我建议在哲学和文化见解的参数下重建它,承认思想的历史性和证明的种族中心性。这一举动允许“以传播为中心的方法”被“上下文敏感”的方法所取代,这种方法尊重基督教他者的主体地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信