h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Christian Theology: The Academic Subject - A1126351
Author: Towel Surfer † (a mouse in your space) U235328 ((2 * 3) + (5 / (3 + 2)))*(- 2 + 8) = 42 in Classic GOO - U235328

I think this entry meets the guidlines and is finished. Please feel free to comment.

*bookmarks* for later. No problems with the title though

Thoroughly enjoyed reading this entry - it was very clear and easy to understand, and even related to the title.

Nice one!

You may want to note that you refer to God either being part of the world, or creator of it. To fit with the Christian viewpoint, you should probably expand that to the universe, or even the universe of space-time.

theology does not repeat not repeat NOT assum,e that there is a god. i am an atheist theologian. i know many other atheist theologians. it is the study of what god is said to be and to have been. simply that.

this article is very wrong, im afraid. i know christian theologians who disagree that one can know god. read any paul tillich?

My answers so far, Please note I am not trying to be condescending to anyone or make personal attacks in any way. It is the article that is submitted here for PR, not me, or you. The article has been submitted for PR for helpful criticism, not for unhelpful abuse. I may restate the posting you make to what I think you mean, before answering it. If in doing this I am mistaken then please correct me. http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/classic/F133070?thread=301435 botogol I have thanked botogol for his comments, and I have asked botogol to join us on this PR thread, to keep us all in one place. Zarquon's Singing Fish! (ACE & Scout) Post2 I am glad that you find there are no problems with the title. I am unclear what is to be understood by �*bookmarks* for later� though. Rains (harassing traffic in Coventry - this is MY right of way!!!!) Post3 Thanks for the totally positive and encouraging comments! FordsTowel Post4 I think that you mean under �Na�ve, serious questions� in which I refer to the question: �Is there a God who is not one of the things in the world but who is responsible for the existence of the world?� This is a question asked. At this point in the article, we have not yet reached the more specific Christian viewpoint � with more �givens�. �World�, I think here can be taken to mean �Universe�. If I am incorrect then I am happy for a correction at the Editorial Stage, or for an annotation to be inserted. �Flames� from fundamentalists (religious or scientific) could then be directed to the Editor(s) and not me. If you are asking �why not call the article �Theology� instead of �Christian Theology� � the answer is that this PR would be clogged with non-Christian complaints (see the Oxford English Dictionary on the subject; and I am aware of Institutions offering �Theology� on the one hand while others offer �Christian Theology on the other). The title of the article, thus far, is un-contentious? Please do not ignite any �flaming� on the subject. The trajectory of the article (from the general to the particular) is to submit that Theology is as defined in paragraph 1 � and state the given jumping off points � before stating the questions asked by the subject in an academic way. The �in-flight correction� is given to reach Christian Theology � which adds more givens of its own. It is hoped in this way to avoid a long list of �other Theologies� that the reader may want to read about, but which do not fall under the heading. UnC13 H3avy0R (133t) (aNaRcy 4 eVa! D00D) Post5 & post6 Post 5 >>theology does not repeat not repeat NOT >> One �not� (not in caps) would have got the point to me without the rather explicit and offensive condescension. �If there is no God, there can be no Theology, only the history of what humans have believed about their gods. Theology assumes that there is a God, and that it is possible to know Him.� Taking posts 5 and 6 together then, is none of the article valid or true? Perhaps you may take the time to go through the article line-by-line too find any bits worthy of being kept (if any) and let me know here? What are, in your opinion, the �givens� that Theology takes as its starting point(s), (if any)? If there is no God as a given, and/or we cannot know God (substituted Him already, point conceded � we have not reached Christian Theology yet) then what is to be studied as Theology (not from belief, but academically)? Science assumes that we can know the Universe, otherwise we are just communicating about fiction, are we not? What is the motivation for studying Theology? ��only the history of what humans have believed about their gods.� [?] To you all, thanks for all the contributions. I am unclear as to how much modification is to be enacted in the article from PR assuming that I have answered any particular criticism to my satisfaction? I would appreciate authoritative (Editorial) guidance on this subject. Thanks again,

theology, as a formal study, is the study of christianity. it studies what christians believe, how they have come to believe it and influences. you can study what the evangelists were trying to say, you can study hebrew history, or church history, or the philosophy of religion, or what the bible is saying. you can also study pre hebrew texts and see what light they shed on genesis. it doesnt require a belief in god to do this.

other religions have theologies, but Theology simply means the study of christianity. there was a forum in which a debate about this erupted; the article fdoesnt need to be called christian theology, but perhaps nit should, to avoid clarification.

To clarify, FordsTowel, by *bookmarks*, I meant that I hadn't time to look at the entry thoroughly, but that I would come back to it later, which I will.

UH, there's been enough said about 'Theology' and 'Christian Theology'. Let's not resurrect that argument.

no indeed. im still right

(copied from the discussion forum, as requested)

<>

Ummm... no I don't think so

Now let's see
<> A fact, yes
<> This one's not a fact, but an opinion, but I would agree with it, some wouldn't
<>
This doesn't follow.
IF Theology addresses the question: is there a god? then I would agree that it addresses an important question.
IF Theology simply 'assumes there is a god' as you say...well then Theology ignores rather an important question.

In fact existence of god is rather crucial to the importance of Theology. If there were a god, well then it would indeed follow that Theology is very worthwhile. In fact there is no god, so it follows that much of Theology is rather pointless, except in as much as it could be viewed as a branch of social sciences, anthropology perhaps, studying the supernatural beliefs of humans. This is very useful to helping us understand humanb behaviours, and human history. But I don't think it's quite what you have in mind.

On the distinction between Theology and Christian Theology, and whether there is one, I'll remain silent, but I think you your article should be clearer on where you stand on that

This posting is my update after posts 8, 9 and 10.
I am not trying to ignore anyone posting after 10. I have not answered beyond 10 yet (if any) because of the time taken to reply here, between , and otherwise having an off-line life. Sorry.

Hi
UnC13 H3avy0R (133t) (aNaRcy 4 eVa! D00D)
and others,

Post 8>>Theology, as a formal study, is the study of Christianity. It studies what Christians believe, how they have come to believe it and influences. You can study what the evangelists were trying to say, you can study Hebrew history, or church history, or the philosophy of religion, or what the bible is saying. You can also study pre Hebrew texts and see what light they shed on genesis. It doesn’t require a belief in god to do this.

Other religions have theologies, but Theology simply means the study of Christianity. There was a forum in which a debate about this erupted; the article doesn’t need to be called Christian theology, but perhaps it should, to avoid clarification. <<

I totally agree with all that is in the above, as I have quoted it – adding some Capital Letters, etc.

Please note that I use Classic GOO for H2G2. Upon using your link above (post 8 or 10) I noticed that you are an Official Sub Editor, (although this may not be apparent in other ‘skins’).

So let us move forwards from this point.

You refer to some forum ‘erupting’, but no matter, since I do not know the forum – can I take post 8, with punctuation, as your authoritative statement as an Official Sub Editor? So if I inserted ‘verbatim’, the punctuated posting, into the article would you take the ‘flames’ from the ‘dissenters’ and would the article go into the Edited Guide under your patronage? How would you want to be cited?

A technical point – I have yet to read how to add Guide ML (GML?) footnotes, if required.

To add a footnote:

Type what you want to say here.

and bingo! It will appear at the bottom of the entry with a superscript number.

yes, you can

i dont want to denigrate any beliefs, you see. i respect them. the article just has to have balance - theology is merely a study

Theology *is* a study; this is the description of theology from a Christian viewpoint. The entry runs through a definition of theology "in general" before moving onto this specific field, which was why I felt it was easy to read and follow.

(I would probably post similar comments if this had been written about Muslim theology, or Hindu, etc etc.... assuming it was structured like this entry)

UH, sorry for being pedantic, but it sounded earlier as if you were being a bit aggressive in your disagreements. But we're all allowed our opinions

This seems to be a discussion more about the validity of religion rather than the entry itself....

<>

I think that's because you've justified the importance of theology solely in terms of the importance of god. (ie the reason theology is important, is because it's about God, and everyone can see God is important).

Alternatively you could have said say that theology is important because it is the study of what people think and beleive about their gods, and what people believe about their gods is important because it has driven, and contimues to drive a great deal of human behaviour and history.

<<...theology is important because it is the study of what people think and believe about their gods, and what people believe about their gods is important because it has driven, and continues to drive a great deal of human behaviour and history.>>

I agree with that - certainly from a historical perspective.

Please note that I have been off-line due to a BT line fault.

Incorporating ‘Post 8’, the ‘authoritative statement’ of an Official Sub Editor.
UnC13 H3avy0R (133t) (aNaRcy 4 eVa! D00D)

<> Towel Surfer † (a mouse in your space) U235328 ((2 * 3) + (5 / (3 + 2)))*(- 2 + 8) = 42 in Classic GOO

Text to be incorporated:

Post 8<>
<>

1 <>
Result: the title remains ‘Christian Theology: The Academic Subject’.

2<>
<>
<>

Effect on article, para 1:

Old<>

New<>

Effect on article, para 2:

Old<>

New >>Other religions have theologies, but Theology simply means the study of Christianity. Theology touches on the possibility of faith; at the same time, it involves understanding – since we should not talk nonsense – and it tries to think through the implications of saying that our relationship to God is the core of who we are.>>

Effect on article, ‘Theology and Metaphysics’

Old<< Theology possesses more given material than Metaphysics. Philosophy, or Metaphysics, is concerned with the being of everything in the world. But Metaphysics is concerned with the world as it can be understood by reason and the senses only. It does not assume the existence of God, or the revelation of Him in Jesus of Nazareth.>>

New<>

Effect on article, ‘Naïve, serious questions’

Old<>

Old<>

New<>

New<>

Effect on article, ‘Theology: God revealed in Jesus’

Old<>

New<<Christian Theology, that is to say Theology, is taken to be from a standpoint of the Biblical Old Covenant as mediated through the New Covenant – the one being in continuum with the other. It is the academics of God as revealed by and in Jesus of Nazareth (as both God and human) proclaimed to the world. Christians believe that there is no, nor can be, any other God outside of the Trinity. The Bible always assumes that there is a God. Genesis does not begin with a proof of the existence of God: it begins with the words, 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth'.
3 <>

Old/New: The article already says the same thing, distributed in the text of the final section.

Article is now updated as per post 18
See also:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/classic/AddThread?inreplyto=3851147
This thread above should also be added to comments for PR (from direct comments on the article).

Do you mean F133070?thread=302609 ?