Tag: <span>04 thesis</span>

Bowing Before Christ – Nodding to the State? Reading Paul Politically with Oliver O’Donovan and John Howard Yoder (Dorothea H. Bertschmann, 2012)

[embeddoc url="http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/5247/1/THESIS_DOROTHEA_BERTSCHMANN.pdf" download="all" viewer="google"]

The Transformation of Persons and the Concept of Moral Order: A Study of the Evangelical Ethics of Oliver O’Donovan with special reference to the Barth-Brunner Debate (Baker, 2010)

[embeddoc url="https://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/10023/975/Bruce%20D.%20Baker%20PhD%20thesis.PDF" download="all" viewer="google"]

Prophetic Ministry in Jeremiah and Ezekiel (Kathleen Rochester, Durham PhD, 2009)

[gview file="http://www.tyndalehouse.com/Bulletin/61=2010/9%20Rochester.pdf" save="1"]

Full thesis – [gview file="http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/1355/1/1355.pdf" save="1"]

Living Through the Tension: Religion and Public Policy in the Thought of Gilbert Meilaender (Mark W. Foreman, 2008)

A dissertation examining and evaluating Meilaender on the appropriateness of appealing to religious reasons as support for one’s position on public policy.

Whose explanation? Which context?: A narrative theological study of the rationale for divine action in the Exodus plagues narrative (William Ford, Durham PhD, 2005)

[su_document url="etheses.dur.ac.uk/1773/1/1773.pdf"]

Political church and the profane state in John Milbank and William Cavanaugh by Richard Davis (2013)

This thesis argues that the state is neither sacred nor profane, but if accepted as mundane, it is something that can be freely engaged with by the church as part of its overall witness to politics and society. In order to outline and assess the political theology of Milbank and Cavanaugh three biblical and doctrinal lenses – creation, preservation and redemption – are used to judge their work.

Be Who You Are: Karl Barth’s Ethics of Creation (Neal, 2010)

Barth grounds the goodness of creation not in its own independent reality, but in the goodness of Jesus Christ, who, as Barth works out in CD II.2, is the concrete form of the command of God and fulfillment of the covenant between God and humanity. By grounding the goodness of creation in Jesus Christ, Barth makes both the ontological goodness of creation itself and the noetic basis of that goodness dependent on this Christological determination. As a result, scholars have suggested that Barth’s theology really has no proper doctrine of creation at all, i.e. that Barth’s doctrine of creation is simply Christology in disguise.
This dissertation argues that while Barth’s Christological determination of creation is central to Barth’s work, it is not the case that Barth absorbs creation into Christology, i.e. nature into grace, leaving creation without any meaningful ontology of its own. Rather, this dissertation demonstrates that Barth’s ontology of creation is covenantal in structure, but not equivalent to Christology. Furthermore, this dissertation shows that this covenantal structure of creation is specifically ordered so that the creature may realize her goal as God’s covenant partner.