Article Sidebar
Article Details
The author(s) retain copyright on work published by AOSIS unless specified otherwise.
Licensing and publishing rights
Author(s) of work published by AOSIS are required to grant AOSIS the unlimited rights to publish the definitive work in any format, language and medium, for any lawful purpose. AOSIS requires journal authors to publish their work in open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.
Read more here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
The authors retain the non-exclusive right to do anything they wish with the published article(s), provided attribution is given to the applicable journal with details of the original publication, as set out in the official citation of the article published in the journal. The retained right specifically includes the right to post the article on the authors’ or their institution’s websites or in institutional repositories.
Previously published work may have been published under a different licence. We advise the community that if they would like to reuse the work to consult the applicable licence at article level.
Main Article Content
Doing classical theology in context
Abstract
This article is about doing classical theology in context. The weight of my argument is that classical text of Karl Barth’s theology is great intellectual text means: being addressed by this text in the context in which one lives. The basic keywords that constitute a rule for reading those texts are “equality”, “event” and “recontextualisation”. The article contains two sections: The first section elaborates statements about the challenge of the event and the project of rereading classics by way of recontextualisation. The word “event” refers to true and innovating moments in history which one can share, or which one can betray. Classical texts always share in those liberative moments. The question then is in what sense do they present a challenge to the contemporary reader. The second section elaborates the position of man as central and all decisive for doing theology in context now. In this section, the author appeals for a renewal of the classical anthropology as an anthropology of hope. This anthropology contradicts postmodern concepts of otherness.
