Rijksuniversiteit Groningen in the Netherlands. After an MA thesis in philosophy of religion on the work of Wittgensteinian philosopher D.Z. Phillips, he obtained a PhD in systematic theology from the Protestant Theological University in the Netherlands, investigating the relationship between systematic theology and ordinary language of faith from a Wittgensteinian perspective. He served for four years as a pastor in a congregation of the Protestant church in the Netherlands, and lectured in theology, philosophy and ethics at Justo Mwale University, Lusaka, in Zambia for six years. In Zambia, he became interested in African theology and the distinctive character of African language of faith. He published widely in leading international journals in theology and philosophy of religion, and he edited four books on contemporary themes in African theology with contributions from all over Southern Africa. I thank Dr Naomi Haynes and Dr Chammah Kaunda for their comments on a chapter of this book. I thank Sherri and Dustin Ellington, and Jolanda and Charles Cartwright for their comments and corrections of my English. And, finally, my wife, Johanneke: you are a part of this book every step of the way. Thank you for exploring the world together with me!
This article argues for acknowledging the existence of an absolute distinction between faith and science. It is often assumed in the science and religion debate that such a distinction would be ahistorical and uncontextual. After discussing this critique, the analogy with love and facts will be used to explain how an absolute distinction between faith and science may exist nonetheless. This contrast, however, does not imply compartmentalization. It is shown that the absolute distinction between faith and science is of crucial importance to understand the historical contexts that so many contributors to the science and religion debate refer to in their argument against the approaches of Independence or Contrast. The article concludes that within our messy and complex practices there is an absolute distinction between faith and science—our historical contexts cannot be understood without it.
This account of religious change in Zambia discloses shifts in the ideas and practices of Christian unity since independence. It shows that state-backed appeals, at times repressive, under the slogan 'one nation, one church' gave way to a series of alternatives in institutional ecumenism, leading towards a challenge to the very nature of ecumenism, grassroots as well as institutional. The new stress is on individual choice and personal services, and yet membership in congregations persistsa complex, even contradictory, situation here conceptualised as 'multiple devotions'. The disclosure in this article calls into question conventional views of the importance of schism in churches and brings certain current tendencies -'multiple devotions', 'charismatic transmission', 'mushrooming churches'into focus in relation to wider, even global, religious movements, including the impact of neo-Pentecostalism and the striking new efflorescence of evangelical bodies self-labelled as 'Ministries International', in an imported style. The analysis suggests that in many of the 'Ministries International' there is a turn from church membership with fellowship in a solidary congregation to an individualistic patron-client relationship between pastor and believer. Each Ministry presupposes an asymmetrical relationship: one person ministers to another. Instead of a group of people coming together, a Ministry International offers services to whoever is interested, often on a casual basis; and, although without any drive for older forms of church unity or usual aspirations for past forms of grassroots ecumenism, the Ministries International are widely perceived to be a force for interdenominational tolerance.
Abstract:Can a contemplative philosopher describe a particular religious practice as superstitious, or is he thereby overstepping his boundaries? I will discuss the way in which the Wittgensteinian philosopher of religion D.Z. Phillips uses 'superstition' as a contemplative term. His use of the distinction between genuine religion and superstition is not a weakness as is often supposed, but a necessity. Without contemplating 'superstition' and 'genuine religion' Phillips would not have been able to elucidate the meaning that religious beliefs have in the lives of both the faithful and their critics.I will defend the aptness of Phillips's use of this term and illustrate his approach using examples such as the concept of genuine friendship or gratitude, and then I apply this approach to the question whether, from a philosophical point of view, particular Christian practices such as the prosperity gospel are genuinely religious or should be called superstitious.
Religion in Africa is in many respects becoming religion without belief and community again, I will argue in this article. Europeans arriving in Africa did not recognize African religion, because Africans did not have the kind of belief and community characteristic of European concepts of religion. Pentecostalization brings back this African concept of religion without worship groups defined by an adherence to a particular picture of the world, and I will show what this means at grassroots level. What matters in this concept of religion is whether something works rather than some implied truth-claims about the world. Instead of forming groups, Neo-Pentecostal ministries are more often organized around the vertical relationship between the man/woman of God and his/her client. The Pentecostalization of Christianity in Africa has led to a form of religion in which beliefs and community are not of central importance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.