Skip to main content

What Do You Call a Group of Theologians?

I think the answer should be "an argument", but perhaps that's unfair. I can test my theory this next week, which sees the start of the annual Society for the Study of Theology (UK) conference on the theme of Holy Writ? (The question mark is very suggestive). It looks really good, and the list of plenary speakers is great: Alex Samely (Manchester); Morwenna Ludlow (Exeter); Henk van den Belt (Amsterdam); Walter Moberly (Durham); Anthony Thiselton (Nottingham); Hugh Pyper (Sheffield). The conference lasts several days and is convening this year at York University. I hope to be able to blog a few thoughts from the conference and some info about the plenary sessions, but I shall be presenting a paper at one of the themed seminars on Wednesday afternoon on the interpretation of Barth's ethics of responsibility so may be a bit distracted until then.

So watch this space for more info...

Comments

Rev R Marszalek said…
Sounds really interesting, hope it's thrilling. I am discovering again how helpful Barth can be and will apply his thinking to my exegesis of Romans 7 'divided man.'
8 April 2011 at 21:30
Tintin727272 said…
A confusion of theologians....
8 April 2011 at 22:30
Tintin727272 said…
A waffle of theologians.
8 April 2011 at 22:30
Tintin727272 said…
If there are three of them a trinity of theologians.
8 April 2011 at 22:32
Ian Paul said…
Do blog the papers when you can. Nice revamp to blog!
8 April 2011 at 22:39
Anonymous said…
A "respectful disagreement" of theologians?
8 April 2011 at 23:17
Michael Leyden... said…
Thanks TinTin and Grumpy Cleric for your contributions...I do like a waffle of theologians quite a lot, it suggests a particular thinking pose to my mind (best not explored), but there's something beautifully restrained about "a respectful disagreement" of theologians. Not as grumpy as your username suggests brother Cleric...
9 April 2011 at 11:53
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

David Clough on Barth

For those who are interested, here  is an interview with Professor David Clough from earlier this year on the subject of Barth's theological development. It has recently made its way online...alas, the interviewer (me!) has been edited out. The interview was for a new DVD Interactive Multimedia Timeline created  by R ev. Dr Tim Hull at St John's College Nottingham. Several high quality scholars agreed to be interviewed, including Dr Karen Kilby, Dr Ben Fulford, Professor Antony Thiselton, Professor David Fergusson, and several others forthcoming. David Clough is Professor of Theological Ethics at Chester University, UK, and wrote his doctoral thesis on the interpretation of Barth's ethics. It was published in 2005 as, Ethics in Crisis: Interpreting Barth's Ethics (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005).
1 comment
Continue reading...

Barth on Scripture: George Hunsinger et al.

Finding time for anything other than poor quality posting has been a problem recently: parish ministry rightly has first place, and then there's the small matter of a PhD... BUT, I have had time for some reviewing, and have recently finished a review of George Hunsinger (ed), Thy Word is Truth: Barth on Scripture (Grand Rapids: Eedrmans, 2012). It is a really interesting book, and worthy of reading...in fact read my review in Theology when (if?) it is published later this year. For now, though, here's a lovely quote from hunsinger's introductory chapter as he explains something of the significance of dialectical interpretation for Barth's approach to scripture: The cross and resurrection of Christ, as proclaimed by Paul, were for Barth the paradigmatic case. They were what finally made necessry the procedure of dialectic interpretation. What held Christ's cross and resurrection together, he suggested, was not a concept but a name, not a system but a narrative
Post a Comment
Continue reading...