Putting Personal Experience Back into the Equation: A Reply to Clinton and Bookman
The role of the person in interpreting the Bible and integrating psychology and theology has always been problematic. Some approaches emphasize personal, subjective experience. Others emphasize objective biblical truth. This article attempts to show the importance and difficulty in communicating bal...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Sage Publishing
1996
|
| Dans: |
Journal of psychology and theology
Année: 1996, Volume: 24, Numéro: 2, Pages: 155-161 |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Édition parallèle: | Non-électronique
|
| Résumé: | The role of the person in interpreting the Bible and integrating psychology and theology has always been problematic. Some approaches emphasize personal, subjective experience. Others emphasize objective biblical truth. This article attempts to show the importance and difficulty in communicating balance of the two extremes. Critiques of my prior attempts to bring personal experience back into the equation are evaluated—in terms of biblical interpretation that is first, dominated by and second, free from personal experience. It is concluded that God himself has put both Scripture and the person at the heart of interpretation and integration. We dare not remove either one. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2328-1162 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Journal of psychology and theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/009164719602400207 |