http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 발행기관 : 창조론오픈포럼 (검색결과 246 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
박찬호(Chan Ho PARK) 창조론오픈포럼 2018 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.12 No.2
Polkinghorne is one of the scientist-theologians such as Ian Barbour and Arthur Peacocke. He opposes to panentheism as the reality of this world. But Polkinghorne accepts it as a description of eschatological state. In this sense this paper deals with his view on the doctrine of kenosis creation. The concept of kenosis creation comes from the kenosis Christology. Even though it has some merits, kenosis Christology has some crucial criticisms. Kenosis creation has no biblical basis. Nevertheless, the idea of kenosis creation has attracted strong attention from several theologians and scientists.
-
박찬호(Chan Ho PARK) 창조론오픈포럼 2021 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.15 No.1
Herman Bavinck is a Dutch Reformed theologian. He is deploying a typical Trinitarian theory of creation. He argues that Christ is not only the mediator in recreation but also the mediator in creation. In the interpretation of Genesis Chapter 1, he distinguishes between creation from nothing in Genesis 1:2 and creation of six days in Genesis 1:3 ff. "Day" in Genesis 1 is not clearly said to be 24 hours, but it is understood as a time of God"s creation, which should not be understood as a geological era. As for the results of research on natural science, proven scientific theories should be accepted as a general revelation, but we should be cautious in accepting scientific findings. In that sense, Bavinck"s doctrine of creation finds a very broad criticism of nebula hypotheses, evolutionary theory, and geology. In modern contexts, Bavinck"s doctrine of creation has a very broad theological spectrum. From the so-called "young earth theory" to the "theistic evolution" theory, it can be said that it is justifiable in Bavinck"s doctrine of creation.
-
-
신은주(Eunjoo SHIN) 창조론오픈포럼 2017 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.11 No.2
In this essay, brief background of Intelligent Design(ID) Movement which was initiated by Phillip Johnson, Michael Behe, William Dembski etc. was introduced. The author shows that criticisms raised by some naturalistic evolutionists for the last 30 years are not fair. Even though there is implicit assumption of theistic worldview in ID Movement, naturalism is also based on atheism which is a strong metaphysical worldview. She argues that any research cannot be separated from researchers’ worldview. She proposes that ID is a good Christian way in the age of science which is a tool for searching divine order in creation.
-
박찬호(Chan Ho PARK) 창조론오픈포럼 2020 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.14 No.1
Recently two books which criticise theistic evolutionism were translated and published. One of them focuses on the historicity of Adam, the fall and the original sin. That is, if we accept theistic evolutionism, we have to deny the traditional doctrine of human beings. For this reason we evangelists do not accept theistic evolutionism. The other book also criticise theistic evolutionism in a similar vein with the former book. One of the writers of this book is Wayne Grudem. He is a renowned Systematic theologian. He mainly focuses on the historicity of Genesis, especially chapters 1-3. If we accept evolutionism, Grudem contends, we miss some traditional interpretation of Genesis 1-3. He enumerates 12 facts including the historicity of Adam which are intimately related to theistic evolutionism. In his Systematic Theology, Grudem already presented his critical view on theistic evolutionism. He acknowledges both Young Earth Theory and Old Earth Theory. Though his view of the Bible is a little strict, his view on the relation between science and theology is generally sound for evangelicals to accept.
-
허정윤(Jung Yoon HEO) 창조론오픈포럼 2018 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.12 No.2
This article is provoked by Terry Mortenson who published a booklet 〈Seven Reasons Why We should Not Accept Millions of Years〉. In the booklet Mortenson denounces scientists who proposed theories of millions years of the earth age, and Christian scholars who attempted to fit the theories into the Bible. The theories includes the Day-Age theory, Gap theory, Local Flood theory, Framework hypothesis, Theistic Evolution, Progressive Creation and so on, excluding the only theory of the earth-age 6,000 years. Reviewing carefully of the evidences of the Bible and scientific theories related with this subject, the author criticizes Mortenson’s view in 〈Seven Reasons Why We should Not Accept Millions of Years〉.
-
-
허정윤(Jung Yoon HUH) 창조론오픈포럼 2016 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.10 No.2
There are wide spectra in both creationism and evolutionism. In this paper, the author introduces main arguments of creationism and the conceptual history of evolutionism and addresses basic issues in creation/evolution controversy, which could lead to reduce unnecessary debates. In particular, the author expects that the four steps in evolutionary history could help evangelical Christians understand what evolutionism is and what evolutionism is not.
-
변희지(Heejee BYUN) 창조론오픈포럼 2016 창조론오픈포럼 Vol.10 No.2
This essay presents 4 views on the historical Adam, shown in 〈Four Views on the Historical Adam〉: Evolutionary Creation, Archetypal Creation, Old Earth Creation and Young Earth Creation. At the end of the essay, the author presents her own mode which is put in between evolutionary and archetypal Creation.
-
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
