Scielo RSS <![CDATA[In die Skriflig ]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/rss.php?pid=2305-085320130002&lang=es vol. 47 num. 2 lang. es <![CDATA[SciELO Logo]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/img/en/fbpelogp.gif http://www.scielo.org.za <![CDATA[<b>Die Heidelbergse Kategismus 1563-2013: Na 450 jaar steeds lewend en relevant</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200001&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es <![CDATA[<b>The Heidelberg Catechism, 1563-2013: After 450 years still alive and relevant</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200002&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es <![CDATA[<b>Cosmology from the perspective of the New Testament and some related documents</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200003&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es <![CDATA[<b>An ethics of love</b>: <b>The ethical relevance of the Heidelberg Catechism</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200004&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es Hierdie artikel behandel die etiese perspektiewe van die Heidelbergse Kategismus - een van die prominente belydenisskrifte in die gereformeerde tradisie. Die etiese relevansie is ingebed in die konfessie se verklaring van die tien gebooie. Die artikel verduidelik dat die etiek van die Heidelbergse Kategismus ten diepste 'n karakteretiek is en dat dit gelowiges oproep tot 'n etiek van liefde. Hierdie liefde sluit in liefde vir die verbondsgemeenskap, die bediening van die Woord, die heiligheid van God en die waardigheid van mense, die gemeenskap van die gelowiges, gesag, die lewe, die huwelik, privaatbesit en arbeid asook waarheid en geregtigheid. As gevolg van die sinekdogeekarakter van die wet is hierdie etiek van liefde vandag baie relevant.<hr/>This article deals with the ethical relevance of one of the prominent confessions in the reformed tradition, namely the Heidelberg Cathechism. The ethical relevance lies in the confession's elucidation of the ten commandments and its application to moral conduct. The article explains that the ethics of the Heidelberg Catechism is essentially a virtue ethics calling for an ethics of love. This love should include love for the covenantal communion, ministry of the Word, the holiness of God and the dignity of people, the communion of the saints, authority, life, marriage, private property and labour, and truth and justice. Due to the synecdochical character of the ten commandments this ethics of love is highy relevant in the present times. <![CDATA[<b>The doctrine on God, as demonstrated and confessed in the Heidelberg Catechism</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200005&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es Although the Heidelberg Catechism (HC) does not deal with a systematic doctrine on God and although there are not many sources available on the specific subject, it is a most important subject when dealing with the theology of the HC (W. van 't Spijker). Due to the prescribed length of the article, it only focuses on two aspects of the doctrine on God, namely the Trinity and the relationship between God and the cosmos (reality). Futhermore, today there is an emphasis on a new concept of God, known as Panentheism. In this concept, God and his creation are identified with each other. In the South African context, the article deals very shortly with the viewpoints of Spangenberg, Van Aarde and Müller in this regard. The God confessed in the HC is the triune God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. In the closest and most logical coherence with this, the HC confesses the deity of Christ and of the Holy Spirit. The HC also proceeds from the premise of the historical, bodily resurrection of Christ from the dead. As far as the relationship between God and creation is concerned, the HC, in agreement with the church of the first centuries, confesses and teaches a personal God, the Father of Jesus Christ, who for the sake of Christ is the Father of the elect. This God is the almighty creator of heaven and earth. He lives in a covenant relationship with his creation, which he sustains and governs at every moment. He is both transcendent and immanent.<hr/>Alhoewel die Heidelbergse Kategismus (HK) nie 'n sistematiese Godsleer bevat soos sommige van die ander belydenisskrifte nie en bronne oor die spesifieke onderwerp betreklik skaars is, is dit tog een van die belangrikste onderwerpe wanneer daar oor die teologie van die HK gehandel word (W. van 't Spijker). Vanweë die voorgeskrewe lengte, word daar in hierdie artikel slegs op twee aspekte van die Godsleer gefokus, naamlik die Drie-eenheid en die verhouding van God tot die kosmos (werklikheid). Hierdie twee aspekte is juis besonder relevant in die lig van standpunte wat die leer van die Drie-eenheid in gedrang bring deur onder andere die Godheid van Christus en sy liggaamlike opstanding te bevraagteken. Verder word daar vandag gepleit vir 'n nuwe Godsbegrip, bekend as Panenteïsme, waardeur die grens tussen God en sy skepping vervaag. In die Suid-Afrikaanse konteks word hier kortliks aandag aan die standpunte van van Spangenberg, Van Aarde en Müller gegee. Die God wat in die HK bely word, is die drie-enige God: Vader, Seun en Heilige Gees. In die nouste en logiese samehang hiermee bely die HK die Godheid van Christus en van die Heilige Gees. Wat die verhouding tussen God en die skepping betref, bely en leer die HK, in ooreenstemming met die kerk van die eerste eeue, 'n persoonlike God - die Vader van Jesus Christus wat ter wille van Christus die Vader is van die uitverkorenes. Hierdie God is die almagtige Skepper van hemel en aarde. Hy leef in 'n verbondsverhouding met sy skepping wat Hy elke oomblik onderhou en regeer. Hy is tegelyk transendent en immanent. <![CDATA[<b>The reception of the Heidelberg Catechism (Sunday 17 and 22) with regard to the resurrection within the nineteenth century Dutch Reformed Church (Part 1)</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200006&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es Met die 450e herdenking van die Heidelbergse Kategismus (HK) as vertrekpunt word in twee artikels gepoog om lig te werp op die plek, die rol en die interpretasie van die opstanding van Jesus Christus uit veral Sondag 17 en 22, spesifiek in die konteks van twee besondere eras in die Nederduitse Gereformeerde (NG) Kerk. Na 'n kort bespreking van die Heidelbergse Kategismus , word in hierdie eerste artikel uitgebreid gekyk na die resepsie van die betrokke HK-geloofsartikels in die era van Andrew Murray, spesifiek teen die agtergrond van die negentiende-eeuse liberale teologie in Nederland. In 'n tweede artikel word soortgelyk gekyk na die resepsie van die betrokke HK-geloofsartikels in die NG Kerk na 2000, veral teen die agtergrond van die herverskyning van die liberale teologie in die vorm van die Jesus Seminaar, die Nuwe Hervorming en die aanhangers daarvan se standpunte binne die NG Kerk. Sowel die negentiende-eeuse liberale stryd in die NG Kerk as die stryd rondom die opstanding in die NG Kerk van die eerste dekade van die een-en-twintigste eeu, soos in die tweede artikel duidelik sal blyk, was gekenmerk deur kontekstueelbepaalde uniekhede. Die gemene deler is dat albei deel was van tye van teologiese vrysinnigheid. In die lig van hierdie bespreking, ook ten opsigte van die negentiende eeu, sal tot die gevolgtrekking gekom word dat die NG Kerk, wat sy identiteit as gereformeerde kerk betref, tans waarskynlik in 'n kritieke geloofs- en toekomskrisis verkeer wat kommerwekkende gevolge vir sy Skrifverstaan en getuienis as belydenis en belydende kerk van Jesus Christus en sy toekoms inhou. Alleen 'n duidelike visie, verantwoordelike leierskap en die herontdekking van die kruis en die opstanding as ononderhandelbare heilsgebeure, wat ook deur die HK gehandhaaf word, sal die NG Kerk kan red van 'n snelwentelende afwaartse spiraal. Slegs die pasgenoemde faktore kan 'n herstellende, positiewe en dinamiese oplossing vir hierdie proses bied wat sigself tans in die NG Kerk afspeel.<hr/>With the 450th celebrations of the origin of the Heidelberg Catechism (HC) in mind, the main aim of two articles is to focus on the place, role and interpretation of the doctrine of the resurrection in this Catechism, within two very specific and critical eras in the history of the Dutch Reformed Church; (DRC) in South Africa. After a brief introduction to the Heidelberg Catechism, the aim in this first article is to focus extensively on the reception of the HC in the time of Andrew Murray during the nineteenth century, and specifically against the background of the then liberal theology in both the Netherlands and South Africa. In the second article I look at the reception of the same HC articles of faith in the DRC since 2000, against the background of the reappearance of the nineteenth century liberal theology in the form of the Jesus Seminar, the New Reformation and those sympathetic to the latter in the DR Church. It will become clear that both these nineteenth and twenty-first century developments had their own unique contexts. What they had in common was a specific theological liberal-mindedness. In view of this discussion about the nineteenth century developments, it will be concluded that the DR Church as a reformed church is currently not only caught up in an identity crisis but even in a survival crisis of no small proportions. This also has serious implications for its use of Scriptures and its confessional character. Only a strong vision, able leadership from all parties within the church and a rediscovery of the redeeming power of the cross and of the resurrection as basic doctrinal tenets, also upheld by the HC, can save the DR Church from an ever moving downward spiral. Only these factors can provide a remedial, positive and dynamic solution to this process in the DR Church. <![CDATA[<b>The reception of the Heidelberg Catechism (Sunday 17 and 22) with regard to the resurrection within the Dutch Reformed Church since 2000 (Part 2)</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200007&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es Met die 450e herdenking van die Heidelbergse Kategismus as vertrekpunt, word met die huidige en die vorige artikel gepoog om lig te werp op die plek, die rol en die interpretasie van die opstanding van Jesus Christus in veral Sondag 17 en 22, spesifiek in die konteks van twee besondere eras in die Nederduitse Gereformeerde (NG) Kerk. In die vorige artikel is allereers 'n bespreking gevoer oor die Heidelbergse Kategismus (HK). Daar is gekyk na die resepsie van die betrokke HK-geloofsartikels in die era van Andrew Murray, spesifiek teen die agtergrond van die negentiende-eeuse liberale teologie in Nederland. In die huidige artikel word soortgelyk gekyk na die resepsie van die betrokke HK-geloofsartikels in die NG Kerk na 2000, teen die agtergrond van die herverskyning van die negentiende-eeuse liberale teologie in die vorm van die Jesus Seminaar, die Nuwe Hervorming en ondersteuners daarvan binne die NG Kerk. Sowel die negentiende-eeuse liberale stryd in die NG Kerk asook die stryd oor die opstanding in die NG Kerk van die eerste dekade van die een-en-twintigste eeu, soos verder in hierdie artikel sal blyk, was gekenmerk deur kontekstueelbepaalde uniekhede. Die gemene deler was dat albei deel was van tye van teologiese vrysinnigheid. In die lig van hierdie bespreking word tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die NG Kerk tans, betreffende haar identiteit as gereformeerde kerk waarskynlik in 'n kritieke geloofs- en toekomskrisis verkeer. Dit impliseer kommerwekkende gevolge vir haar Skrifverstaan en getuienis as belydenis en belydende kerk van Jesus Christus en haar toekoms. Alleen duidelike visie, verantwoordelike leierskap en 'n herontdekking van die verlossingskrag van Christus se kruis en opstanding sal herstellende, positiewe en dinamiese oplossings kan bied om sodoende die NG Kerk te red van 'n snelwentelende afwaartse spiraal.<hr/>With the 450th celebrations of the origin of the Heidelberg Catechism (HC) in mind, the main aim of this and the previous article is to focus on the place, role and interpretation of the doctrine of the resurrection in HC (Sunday 17 and 22), within two very specific and critical eras in the history of the Dutch Reformed Church (DRC) in South Africa. The first article focused on the reception of the HC in the time of Andrew Murray during the nineteenth century, and specifically against the background of the then liberal theology in both the Netherlands and South Africa. In this current article I look at the reception of the same HC articles (Sunday 17 and 22) in the DRC after 2000, against the background of the reappearance of the nineteenth century liberal theology in the Netherlands, and specifically with reference to the Jesus Seminar, the New Reformation and those sympathetic to the latter in the DRC. Both these nineteenth- and twenty-first-century developments had their own unique contexts but what they had in common were a specific theological liberal mindset. In view of this discussion it is concluded that the DRC as a reformed church is not only caught up in an identity crisis, but even in a survival crisis of no small proportions. This also has serious implications for its use of Scripture and its confessional character. Only strong vision, able leadership and a rediscovery of the redeeming power of the cross and resurrection of Christ will be able to provide a remedial, positive, and dynamic solution, saving the DRC from an ever downward spiral. <![CDATA[<b>From reformation to counter-reformation to further reformation</b>: <b>A picture of the anti-Roman background of the Heidelberg Catechism</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200008&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es The anti-Roman sentiment of the Heidelberg Catechism is well-documented. In its contents the Catechism often seeks to combat Roman doctrine. However, this anti-Roman sentiment did not have its origin from textbooks and it was not merely an academic exercise. It was first and foremost a reaction to the ecclesiastical context of that time. At the same time that Elector Frederick III commissioned the writing of the Heidelberg Catechism, the Council of Trent was meeting on the other side of the Alpine mountains. Remarkably, this meeting had only recently decided to write a catechism of its own. It is very likely that the decision-makers in Heidelberg were aware of what was happening in Trent, and reacted accordingly. Underlying the decision to commission and write the Heidelberg Catechism was the acknowledgment of the importance of catechetical teaching. In several documents, which are closely related to the Heidelberg Catechism, the importance of catechetical teaching is highlighted. Interestingly, however, these documents also contrast the reformed principal of catechetical teaching with the Roman sacrament of confirmation. Whereas catechetical teaching leads children on the way from their baptism to the Lord's Supper, the sacrament of confirmation takes away the urgency for any form of catechetical teaching.<hr/>Daar is reeds baie geskryf oor die anti-Roomse sentiment wat uit die Heidelbergse Kategismus spreek. Inhoudelik voer die Kategismus dikwels 'n stryd met die Roomse leer. Die oorsprong van hierdie anti-Roomse sentiment kom egter nie net uit handboeke nie en dit was ook nie bloot 'n akademiese oefening nie. Dit was eerstens veral 'n reaksie op die kerklike konteks van daardie tyd. Dieselfde tyd toe Keurvors Frederick III opdrag gegee het vir die opstel van die Heidelbergse Kategismus, het die Konsilie van Trente aan die oorkant van die Alpe vergader. Dit is merkwaardig dat hierdie vergadering kort voor dit besluit het om op sy eie 'n kategismus op te stel. Die besluitnemers in Heidelberg was heel waarskynlik volkome bewus van wat in Trente gebeur het en het dienooreenkomstig opgetree. Onderliggend aan die besluit om opdrag te gee tot die opstel van die Heidelbergse Kategismus, was die besef van die belangrikheid van kategese. In verskeie dokumente wat nóú aan die Heidelbergse Kategismus verwant is, word die belangrikheid van kategese beklemtoon. Dit is egter interessant dat hierdie dokumente ook die kontras tussen die gereformeerde beginsel van kategetiese onderrig en die Roomse sakrament van die vormsel aantoon. Terwyl kategetiese onderrig kinders vanaf hulle doop tot by die nagmaal begelei, misken die sakrament van die vormsel die noodsaaklikheid van enige vorm van kategetiese onderrig. <![CDATA[<b>The Heidelberg Catechism on people as the image of God</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200009&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es Hierdie artikel fokus op relevante konfessionele standpunte oor die tema van imago Dei in die reformatoriese en voor-reformatoriese teologie wat as historiese en sistematiese kontekstualisering dien vir die daaropvolgende uitleg van die tema soos wat dit in die Heidelbergse Kategismus hanteer word. 'n Bondige bespreking van die histories-kritiese uitleg van Genesis 1:26-27 word aan die orde gestel om as oorgang te dien tot 'n kritiese waardering van die Kategismus vanuit die perspektief van die eietydse teologie. Die uitleg van Genesis 1:26-27 dien as die vernaamste impuls om die tema in die eietydse teologie onbevange en los van die uitsluitende dwang van tradisionele konfessionele geskille aan die orde te stel, maar met inagneming van 'n ryke teologiese tradisie. In wese is die betoog dat die mens as beeld van God geroepe is om God se heerlikheid en eer op aarde uit te dra en hierdie opvatting word ook in die Heidelbergse Kategismus teruggevind.<hr/>This article focuses on the relevant confessional statements about the theme imago Dei in reformed- and pre-reformed theology that served as the historical and systematic contextualisation of the subsequent interpretation of the theme as it is treated in the Heidelberg Catechism. A concise discussion of the historical-critical interpretation of Genesis 1:26-27 follows in order to serve as a transition to the critical appreciation of the Catechism from the perspective of contemporary theology. The interpretation of Genesis 1:26-27 served as the main impetus for the open-minded discussion of the theme in contemporary theology, apart from the exclusive constraints of the traditional confessional disputes, but with appreciative consideration for our rich theological tradition. In essence, the author argues that all people, because they are created in the image of God, are called upon to glorify God on earth and that this belief is already formulated in the Heidelberg Catechism. <![CDATA[<b>The first translations of the Heidelberg Catechism in Afrikaans</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200010&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es Hierdie artikel diep die geskiedenis van die eerste vertalings van die Heidelbergse Kategismus in Afrikaans uit die primêre bronne op. Die Belydenisskrifte (insluitende die Kategismus) is gedurende die eerste helfte van die twintigste eeu in Afrikaans oorgesit tydens 'n vertalingsprojek waaraan die drie Hollands-Afrikaanse Kerke van gereformeerde belydenis saamgewerk het. In hierdie geskiedenis kan drie fases onderskei word. Die aanvanklike fase (1913-1927) eindig in die gemeenskaplike oortuiging dat die werk aan die Bybelvertalers oorgelaat moet word. Daarmee is beslag gegee aan 'n tweede fase (1927-1936). In 1936 is die vertaling voltooi en in 'n Formulierboek vir die 'drie Hollandse Kerke' gepubliseer. Die derde fase (1936-1950) behels die ontvangs van die Formulierboek. Slegs die Gereformeerde Kerk in Suid-Afrika (GKSA) het die vertaling amptelik aanvaar, omdat dit op die Nederlandse teksuitgawe berus het wat F.L. Rutgers in samewerking met Herman Bavinck en Abraham Kuyper in 1897 vir die Gereformeerde Kerken in Nederland besorg het. Die ander twee Kerke het aansluiting gevind by hulle eie negentiende-eeuse tekstradisie. In 1945 het die Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk van Afrika (NHK) 'n eie vertaling as Belydenisskrifte, gebede en formuliere die lig laat sien. Hierdie vertaling is gebaseer op die (Nederlandse) krities bewerkte teksuitgawe wat Van Toornenbergen in sy boek, De symbolische schriften (1895), opgeneem het. Die Nederduitse Gereformeerde Kerk (NGK) het in 1950 sy vertaling van die Belydenisskrifte en Formuliere voltooi. Dit is hoofsaaklik geanker in die (Nederlandse) tekste van die Formulierboek der N.G. Kerk in Z. Afrika (1907), wat op sy beurt ook in ooreenstemming was met die tekstradisie waarmee Van Toornenbergen gewerk het.<hr/>This article traces the history of the first Afrikaans translations of the Heidelberg Catechism from primary sources. In a mutual project the three Dutch-Afrikaans and reformed churches translated their Doctrinal Standards (including the Catechism) during the first half of the twentieth century in Afrikaans. In this regard three phases can be distinguished. The initial phase (1913-1927) ended in the decision to assign the work of translation to the Bible translators. That inaugurated the second phase (1927-1936). In 1936, their translation was completed and a Formulierboek was published for the 'three Dutch Churches'. The reception of the Formulierboek constituted the third distinctive phase (1936-1950). Only the Reformed Church in South Africa (GKSA) officially accepted the translation, because it was based on the recognised Dutch text edition prepared by F.L. Rutgers in collaboration with Herman Bavinck and Abraham Kuyper for the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands in 1897. The other two Afrikaans Churches followed different text editions. In 1945, the Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk van Afrika (NHK) published its own translation of the Belydenisskrifte, gebede en formuliere. This translation is based on the (Dutch) critically edited text edition of Van Toornenbergen, published in his book, De symbolische schriften (1895). In 1950 the Dutch Reformed Church (NGK) received its translation of the Doctrinal Standards and Formularies. This translation was rooted in the (Dutch) texts of the Formulierboek der N.G. Kerk in Z. Afrika (1907), which was in turn also embedded in the Van Toornenbergen text tradition. <![CDATA[<b>Cosmologies of the ancient Mediterranean world</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200011&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es Cosmology is concerned with the order of the universe and seeks to provide an account, not only of that order, but also of the mind or reason behind it. In antiquity, the cosmos was usually understood religiously, such that the cosmologies of the ancient Mediterranean world were either religious in nature or constituted a reaction to a religiously conceived understanding of the structures of the universe. The oldest form in which ancient cosmologies occur is myth, which, owing to its elasticity as a form, enabled them to be appropriated, adapted and used by different groups. In addition, different cosmologies co-existed within the same ancient culture, each having an authoritative status. This article provides an introductory overview of these cosmological myths and argues that a comparative approach is the most fruitful way to study them. Emphasis is given to certain prominent cosmological topics, including theogony (the genesis of the divine) or the relationship of the divine to the cosmos, cosmogony (the genesis of the cosmos), and anthropogony (the origin of humans within the cosmos). Although these myths vary greatly in terms of content and how they envision the origin of the cosmos, many of them depict death as part of the structure of the universe.<hr/>Kosmologie het te doen met die orde van die heelal en wil rekenskap gee van hierdie orde en ook van die bewussyn daaragter. In die antieke tyd is die kosmos gewoonlik godsdienstig verstaan, met die gevolg dat die kosmologieë van die antieke Mediterreense wêreld óf 'n godsdienstige aard gehad het óf bestaan het uit 'n reaksie op 'n godsdienstig-geskepte begrip van die strukture van die heelal. Mites was die oudste vorm waarin antieke kosmologieë voorkom wat vanweë hulle plooibaarheid dit bewerk het dat hierdie kosmologieë deur verskillende groepe toegeëien, aangepas en gebruik kon word. Hierbenewens het verskillende kosmologieë in die antieke kultuur langs mekaar bestaan - elkeen met sy eie gesagstatus. Hierdie artikel bied 'n inleidende oorsig oor hierdie kosmologiese mites en redeneer dat 'n vergelykende benadering die mees geskikte vir die bestudering van hierdie mites is. Daar word op sekere prominente kosmologiese temas gefokus, waaronder teogonie (die ontstaan van die goddelike) of die verhouding tussen die goddelike en die kosmos, kosmogonie (die ontstaan van die kosmos), en antroponogie (die ontstaan van die mens binne die kosmos). Alhoewel hierdie mites grootliks verskil in terme van inhoud en hoe dit die ontstaan van die kosmos visualiseer, word die dood as deel van die opbou van die heelal deur baie van hulle uitgebeeld. <![CDATA[<b>Creation and the revelation of God's children</b>: <b>Liberation of enslaved bodies</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200012&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es In the first part of the article the role of Romans 8:18-30, within Romans 5:1-8:39, is briefly discussed. In the second part a summary of the argument of Romans 7:7-17, as presupposition for the understanding of Romans 8:18-30, is given. In the third part a close reading of Romans 8:18-30 is given, followed by concluding remarks. The article illustrates that Paul's line of thought moves from the future transformation of the believers to the transformation of the creation.<hr/>In die eerste deel van die artikel word die rol van Romeine 8:18-30 as deel van Romeine 5:1-8:39, kortliks bespreek. In die tweede deel word 'n samevatting van die argument van Romeine 7:7-17 gegee - dit is die voorveronderstelling om Romeine 8:18-30 te verstaan. In die derde deel word 'n noukeurige uitleg van Romeine 8:18-30 gegee, gevolg deur slotopmerkings. Die artikel illustreer dat Paulus, op grond van die toekomstige transformasie van die gelowiges, afsluit met die idee dat die skepping volkome verander sal word. <![CDATA[<b>Faith and knowledge in the Heidelberg Catechism</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200013&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es Die wyse waarop die noue band tussen geloof en kennis verstaan moet word, figureer huidig steeds in teologiese debatte. In hierdie artikel word die verband wat deur vraag en antwoord 21 van die Heidelbergse Kategismus tussen geloof en kennis getrek word, bestudeer. In reaksie op die skolastiek van die laat-Middeleeue toe verintellektualisering van geloof besonder beklemtoon is, het die Reformasie 'n klaarblyklike gebalanseerde nuansering van die verband tussen geloof en kennis tot gevolg gehad. Veral Calvyn het 'n besondere bydrae hiertoe gelewer en het 'n bepaalde invloed gehad op die formulering van geloof se kenniselement. Dit het ruimte gebied waarbinne Ursinus en die res van die betrokke kommissie hierdie unieke verband kon vasvang in die Kategismus as konfessie. Die Skrifgronde hiervoor is Hebreërs 11:1, 3 sowel as Jakobus 2:19. Albei hierdie Skrifdele dien as bewysgronde om die kennisaspek van geloof te begrond. Hierdie artikel dui aan hoe die Kategismus bogenoemde Skrifgronde verreken om geloof as voorwetenskaplike kennis te beskryf. Die kenniselement van geloof is die voorveronderstelling wat die eksegeet by die aanvang van sy wetenskaplike aktiwiteit op die tafel wil plaas. Hierdie voorwetenskaplike kennis dien ter ondersteuning van wetenskaplike teorievorming.<hr/>The way in which the close relation between faith and knowledge should be understood, is still very prominent in current theological debates. This article studies the connection that is being described between faith and knowledge by question and answer 21 of the Heidelberg Catechism. In response to the scholasticism of the late Middle Ages with its particular emphasis on the knowledge element of faith, the time of the Reformation apparently brought a more balanced view on the relationship between faith and knowledge thanks to specifically Calvin who had a certain influence on the formulation of faith's knowledge component. This gave to Ursinus and the rest of the commission responsible the breeding ground to capture this unique relationship into the Catechism as confession. Scriptural grounds for this relationship are found in Hebrews 11:1, 3 and James 2:19. Both these passages serve as basis for the knowledge aspect of faith. This article shows how the Catechism discounts these Scriptural passages to describe faith as a pre-scientific element in the scientific process. The knowledge-element of faith is the presupposition which the exegete wants to place on the table. This pre-scientific knowledge serves as support for the formulation of scientific theories. <![CDATA[<b>The law is gospel: The Heidelberg Cathecism still relevant after 450 years</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200014&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es In die denke van Martin Luther bestaan daar spanning tussen die wet van God en die evangelie. Vir Luther is liefde die eie werk en die wet die vreemde werk van God. Daarteenoor integreer of versoen Johannes Calvyn God se wet met die evangelie. Hy vertolk die openingswoorde van die wet byvoorbeeld as liefdevol en bevrydend en daarom evangelies. Calvyn beskou die wet as die manier waarop 'n Christen sy liefde vir God uitleef en sy dankaarheid teenoor God vir sy verlossing betoon. Calvyn se siening oor die verhouding tussen die wet en die evangelie het 'n betekenisvolle invloed op die Heidelbergse Kategismus se formulering ten opsigte van hierdie saak. Volgens die Kategismus is die wet evangelie, of die vorm wat die evangelie in die lewe van die mens aanneem.<hr/>In the thought of Martin Luther tension exists between the law of God and the gospel. Luther regards love as the own work of God and the law as something strange to the Lord. John Calvin, however, integrates Gods law and the gospel to the extent that the opening words of the ten commandments are regarded as words of love and redemption and therefore evangelical. To Calvin the law becomes the way in which a converted Christian lives and shows his gratitude to God for his salvation. Calvin's view on the relationship between law and gospel had a significant influence on the way in which the Heidelberg Cathecism formulates these two concepts. For the Cathecism the law is gospel or the form in which the gospel takes shape in human life. <![CDATA[<b>Towards a better understanding of forgiveness of sins in the first commentaries on the Heidelberg Catechism</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200015&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es With regard to the issue of the forgiveness of sins in the Heidelberg Catechism, this paper shows that not only was there agreement and the same basic approach to issues of faith to be found in the commentaries of Ursinus and Olevianus, but also a valuable complementing of each other's work. The influence of Calvin, with whom both of them have studied in Geneva, is obvious in their doctrinal approach. Whereas Ursinus tended more towards an academic correctness in his Explicationum Catecheticarum, Olevianus added a pastoral and spiritual dimension in his Vester Grundt. Although some theologians questioned the role of Olevianus in the compilation of the Heidelberg Catechism, recent research adequately shows that both of them were indeed involved, and were well-endowed with the necessary background for providing a further exposition of the Catechism. Both of them emphasise the unquestionable and sole merit of Jesus Christ, through his vicarious death on the cross, as the only ground for God's gracious forgiveness of the sinner. It is God's free gift, appropriated through faith and trust in the merit of Christ.<hr/>Hierdie artikel toon aan dat daar, wat die vergifnis van sonde betref, nie net groot ooreenstemming en dieselfde basiese benadering ten opsigte van geloofskwessies in die kommentare van Ursinus en Olevianus op die Heidelbergse Kategismus is nie, maar dat daar ook 'n waardevolle wedersydse aanvulling van mekaar se werk is. Albei het by geleentheid in Genéve onder Calvyn gestudeer: sy invloed is onmiskenbaar in hulle leerstellige benaderings. In Ursinus se Explicationum Catecheticarum weeg die akademiese korrektheid swaarder, terwyl daar in Olevianus se Vester Grundt ook 'n pastorale en spirituele dimensie bykom. Olevianus se betrokkenheid by die opstel van die Heidelbergse Kategismus is soms sterk bevraagteken, maar nuwe navorsing laat genoegsaam blyk dat albei teoloë inderdaad deel gehad het daaraan, en ook goed toegerus was met die nodige agtergrond om 'n nadere verklaring van die Kategismus die lig te laat sien. Albei benadruk die onbetwisbare en enigste verdienste van Jesus Christus deur sy middellike dood aan die kruis as enigste grond vir God se genadige vergifnis van die sondaar. Dit is God se vrye guns, wat aangeneem word in geloof en vertroue deur die verdienste van Christus. <![CDATA[<b>A hermeneutical reflection on the resurrection of Jesus Christ in question and answer 45 of the Heidelberg Catechism</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200016&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es This article is an attempt to elaborate hermeneutically on the different historical contexts, related the one to the other and to the centre point of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, in question and answer 45 of the Heidelberg Catechism. The aim is not only to find the true meaning that the Heidelberg Catechism intends to convey in the mentioned question and answer, but also to explain the underlying hermeneutical thinking as well as to bring to the surface and explain alternative assumptions that ordinary church-going Christians experience as the unusual outcome of an unknown and different kind of approach. Different hermeneutical processes lead to different outcomes of understanding - sometimes worlds apart.<hr/>Vanuit die sentrale punt van die opstanding van Jesus Christus in vraag en antwoord 45 van die Heidelbergse Kategismus, wil hierdie artikel in 'n hermeneutiese besinning oor die verskillende verbandhoudende historiese kontekste uitbrei. Die doel is nie slegs om die ware betekenis te vind van wat die Heidelbergse Kategismus in genoemde vraag en antwoord poog om weer te gee nie, maar ook om die onderliggende hermeneutiese denke te verduidelik en alternatiewe aannames, wat gewone Christen-kerkgangers as 'n vreemde en verskillende benaderings ervaar, na die oppervlakte te bring en te verduidelik. Verskillende hermeneutiese prosesse lei tot verskillende uitkomste van verstaan - soms wêrelde van mekaar verwyderd. <![CDATA[<b>'And thou shalt teach these words diligently ...': Remarks on the purpose of the Heidelberg Catechism regarding its teaching nature</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200017&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es As is well-known, the Heidelberg Catechism (HC) has not only become one of the most important confessions of faith since the 16th century, it has also been a significant aid to catechesis, even to this day. In this contribution, the catechetical purpose of the HC is examined with regard to its origins. Three texts that accompanied the first editions of the Heidelberg Catechism in 1563 are scrutinised: two prefaces by Frederick III, and the Palatine Church Order. The youth as well as the rest of the congregation, should be guided in the fear of the Lord so that they may attain sufficient knowledge of and a living faith in the Lord of Scripture. The HC does not merely have theoretical purposes. Its contents and structure were carefully composed to teach the most significant parts of Christian faith in a short and simple way on a regular and frequent basis. This teaching is not only the responsibility of the church or minister, but also of the parents and the teachers. In this comprehensive approach to instruction in the Christian faith, there is no contradiction between Scripture as the Word of God and the HC. Hence, teaching and preaching the HC does justice to the command that the gospel should be proclaimed, preached, taught, learned and understood.<hr/>Dit is algemeen bekend dat die Heidelbergse Kategismus nie net een van die belangrikste geloofbelydenisse sedert die sestiende eeu is nie, maar ook 'n buitengewone kategetiese hulpmiddel was en steeds is. In hierdie bydrae word die kategetiese doel van die Heidelbergse Kategismus onder die loep geneem met verwysing na die ontstaansgeskiedenis daarvan. Drie tekste uit die eerste jaar van die kategismus se 1563-uitgawe, naamlik twee verskillende voorwoorde deur Frederik III en die Kerkorde van die Palts word daarvoor ondersoek. Die jeug sowel as die res van die gemeente moet in die vrees van God tot voldoende kennis en 'n lewende geloof in die Here van die Skrif gelei word. Die Heidelbergse Kategismus het nie net teoretiese betekenis nie. Die inhoud en struktuur daarvan is noukeurig saamgestel om die jeug, sowel as die hele gemeente oor die belangrikste stukke van die Christelike geloof op 'n kort en eenvoudige manier asook op 'n gereelde basis, te onderrig. Die onderrig is nie die verantwoordelikheid van die kerk of die predikant alleen nie, maar ook dié van ouers en onderwysers. In hierdie omvattende benadering is daar geen teenstrydigheid tussen die Skrif as die Woord van God en die Heidelbergse Kategismus nie. Gevolglik laat die onderwys en die prediking van die Heidelbergse Kategismus reg geskied aan die opgawe dat die evangelie verkondig, gepreek, onderrig sowel as geleer en verstaan moet word. <![CDATA[<b>Five pearls in the Heidelberg Catechism</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200018&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es In dit artikel bespreek ik vijf 'parels' uit de Heidelbergse Catechismus. Zij laten elk een unieke kant van het leerboek zien. Ten eerste bezien we hoe de Heidelbergse Catechismus kinderen leert leven als gedoopte mensen. Daarna komt de christologische concentratie aan de orde en vervolgens het onderscheid tussen een 'waar' en een 'oprecht' geloof. In de vierde plaats gaan we in op meer dan 200 uitdrukkingen, waarin de totaliteit en radicaliteit van de relatie van God met ons besproken wordt. De laatste 'parel' betreft het bidden. Het geheel overziende kan worden gezegd dat de Heidelbergse Catechismus ook na 450 jaar een leerboek is van uitnemende betekenis voor kerk en geloof.<hr/>This article features five 'pearls' from the Heidelberg Catechism. Each one reflects a unique side to this textbook of faith. First, we see how the Heidelberg Catechism teaches children to live as baptised people. Then its christological concentration is shown, followed by its distinction between a 'true' [waar] and 'sincere' [oprecht] faith. Fourthly, more than 200 expressions that deal with the total and radical nature of having a relationship with God are explored. The final 'pearl' concerns prayer. Looking at the whole, we note that even after 450 years the Heidelberg Catechism remains of immense value as textbook for church and faith practice. <![CDATA[<b>The first commandment in the Heidelberg Catechism: Theological insights of Philipp Melanchthon and Zacharias Ursinus</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200019&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es This article focuses on the exposition of the first commandment in the Heidelberg Catechism (HC). Reconstructions of the original German and Latin texts are presented. Zacharias Ursinus, the primary author of the HC, was a student of Philipp Melanchthon in Wittenberg. Two important publications of Melanchthon have been revisited in search of the theological background and context behind the HC. Ursinus' expositions of the first commandment in his Small and Large Catechisms, as well as some of the insights into his dogmatic lectures are explained in an effort to create a better understanding of the exposition of the HC.<hr/>Die artikel fokus op die uitleg van die eerste gebod in die Heidelbergse Kategismus (HK). Rekonstruksies van die oorspronklike Duitse en Latynse tekste word voorgelê. Zacharias Ursinus, die primêre outeur van die HK, was 'n leerling van Philipp Melanchthon in Wittenberg. Twee belangrike publikasies van Melanchthon is nagevors in die soeke na die teologiese denkwêreld as agtergrond tot die HK. Ursinus se uitleg van die eerste gebod in sy Klein en Groot Kategismusse, asook sommige van die insigte wat in sy die dogmatieklesings vervat is, word verduidelik in 'n poging om 'n beter begrip van die uitleg van die HK teweeg te bring. <![CDATA[<b>Christology and Christianity: The theological power of the threefold office in Lord's Day 12</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200020&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es The concept of the threefold office of Jesus was developed in the explanation of the name Christ. The three distinct offices of king, priest and prophet in Israel are thought to be united in the one Messiah. Since the unity of all three offices in one person is not found in so many words in one specific text from the Bible, it is regarded as a theological concept. As such it was developed for the first time in the Heidelberg Catechism (HC). This article traces the development of the exposition of the Apostles' Creed in earlier Lutheran and reformed catechisms. Special attention is devoted to the one by Johannes Brenz, which was used in the Palatinate before 1563. The main source of the new Catechism of Heidelberg is the Catechismus minor by Zacharias Ursinus, who himself may have been influenced by Martin Bucer and John Calvin and their respective Catechisms. A special feature of the HC is question and answer (Q/A) 32, devoted to a parallel exposition of the name Christian. Caspar Olevianus' work Vester Grund (A Firm Foundation) is read as a contemporary commentary on the exposition of the Creed. The catechetical power of the concept of Christ's threefold office is finally demonstrated in its use in systematic theologies as by Gerrit Immink and Michael Welker, especially in their Christologies.<hr/>Die konsep van die drievoudige amp van Jesus is ontwikkel in die verklaring van die naam Christus. Die drie onderskeie ampte in Israel, die van koning, priester en profeet, word gesien as verenig in die Messias. Aangesien die vereniging van al drie ampte in een persoon nie soseer in een spesifieke Bybelteks gevind word nie, word dit as 'n teologiese konsep beskou. Dit is sodanig vir die eerste keer in die Heidelbergse Kategismus (HK) ontwikkel. Hierdie artikel ondersoek die ontwikkeling van die uiteensetting van die Apostoliese Geloofsbelydenis in die konteks van vroeëre Lutherse en gereformeerde kategismusse. Daar word veral na Johannes Brenz se Kategismus, wat voor 1563 in die Pfalz gebruik is, gekyk. Die vernaamste bron van die Heidelberger is die sogenaamde Catechismus minor van Zacharias Ursinus, wat weer deur Martin Bucer en Johannes Calvyn en hul onderskeie Kategismus beïnvloed is. 'n Uitstaande kenmerk van die Heidelbergse Kategismus is vraag en antwoord (V/A) 32, wat aan 'n parallelle uiteensetting van die naam Christen gewy is. Dit kan aan die hand van die Engelse vertaling van Caspar Olevianus se werk, A Firm Foundation, verduidelik word. Die kategetiese krag van die konsep van Christus se drievoudige amp word gedemonstreer in die gebruik daarvan in sistematiese teologieë, soos Gerrit Immink en Michael Welker se Christologieë. <![CDATA[<b>A confident call to faith: Rediscovering the relevance of Christian catechisms</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200021&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es Protestant heritage is synonymous with the traditional employment of catechisms and catechetical teaching of both young and old. Many denominations have shifted from this historical approach, not least because of the challenges of so-called catechetical vacuums when facing third-millennial issues. The Heidelberg, Anglican and Westminster Catechisms allow for express distinctions peculiar to each unique Protestant faith constituency, but serve acceptably within the wider ecumenical tradition. A rediscovery of the historical contexts of these historical formulations will illustrate traditional denominational Protestant flexibility accompanying its Christian creedal fixity. This study will refer to confessional content in the main without resorting to particular content. The intention is to show how these polarities could dynamically serve the confessing church in meeting present-day challenges to the Christian faith in a manner that once again will inspire confidence in its catholic witness in the third millennium.<hr/>Die protestantse erfenis is sinoniem met die tradisionele gebruik van die kategismusse en die kategetiese onderrig van oud en jonk. Baie kerkgenootskappe neig weg van hierdie historiese benadering hoofsaaklik as gevolg van die uitdagings van die sogenaamde kategetiese leemtes in die hantering van derde millenniumkwessies. Die Heidelbergse, Anglikaanse en Westminsterse Kategismusse laat ruimte vir spesifieke onderskeidings wat eie is aan elke unieke protestantse geloofsgemeenskap, maar wat nogtans binne die breër ekumeniese tradisie aanvaar word. 'n Herontdekking van die historiese konteks van hierdie tradisionele formulerings sal tradisioneel kerklik-protestantse buigsaamheid illustreer wat met konfessionele vastheid gepaard gaan. Hierdie artikel verwys na konfessionele inhoud oor die algemeen sonder om spesifieke inhoud aan te toon. Die doel is dus om aan te toon hoedanig hierdie polariteite die belydende kerk daadwerklik kan help om die daaglikse uitdagings van die Christelike geloof op so 'n wyse te hanteer dat daar weer vertroue in die algemene getuienis van die kerk in die derde millennium sal wees. <![CDATA[<b>Cosmos, reality and God in the letters of John</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200022&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es The major question addressed in this article is how reality, especially cosmic reality, is perceived in 1 John; in other words: What are the elements of John's cosmological vision as it becomes apparent in his letters? Firstly, the semantics of the word κόσµος itself is investigated. Then concepts related to the cosmological vision of John receive attention, followed by an analysis of the presence of apocalyptic elements that form part of the Johannine view of reality.<hr/>'n Sentrale vraag wat in die artikel hanteer word, is hoe die realiteit, veral die kosmiese realiteit, in 1 Johannes gesien word; met ander woorde: Wat is die elemente van die Johannese kosmologiese visie wat uit die Johannese briewe na vore tree? Die semantiek van die woord κόσµος word eerstens ondersoek, waarna konsepte wat aan die kosmiese visie van Johannes verwant is, aandag kry. Dit word gevolg deur 'n analise van die teenwoordigheid van apokaliptiese elemente wat deel uitmaak van die Johannese siening van realiteit. <![CDATA[<b>Religion, theology and cosmology</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200023&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es Cosmology is one of the predominant research areas of the contemporary world. Advances in modern cosmology have prompted renewed interest in the intersections between religion, theology and cosmology. This article, which is intended as a brief introduction to the series of studies on theological cosmology in this journal, identifies three general areas of theological interest stemming from the modern scientific study of cosmology: contemporary theology and ethics; cosmology and world religions; and ancient cosmologies. These intersections raise important questions about the relationship of religion and cosmology, which has recently been addressed by William Scott Green and is the focus of the final portion of the article.<hr/>Kosmologie is tans een van die belangrikste navorsings-terreine en ontwikkelings in moderne kosmologie. Dit het 'n nuwe belangstelling wakker gemaak in die verband wat tussen godsdiens, teologie en kosmologie bestaan. Hierdie artikel, wat bedoel is as 'n bondige inleiding tot die artikelreeks oor die teologiese kosmologie in hierdie tydskrif, identifiseer drie algemene areas wat van teologiese belang is: die hedendaagse teologie en etiek; die kosmologie en wêreldgodsdienste; en die antieke kosmologieë. Die verband wat tussen hierdie velde bestaan, opper belangrike vrae oor die verhouding tussen godsdiens en kosmologie wat onlangs deur William Scott Green behandel is. Dit is die fokus van die laaste deel van die artikel. <![CDATA[<b>Cosmology in the book of Revelation</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200024&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es The cosmology of the book of Revelation mainly involves God's restored reign over the created universe (κόσµος). Throughout the book, the κόσµος is depicted according to its constituent parts, namely heaven, sea and earth. At first sight, this threefold description seems to stem from the ancient Jewish and mythological three-storied cosmological view of 'up-above', 'here-below' and 'down-under'. However, this correspondence proves to be only superficial. Heaven is used by John not as much in spatial sense as in temporal sense: as symbolic reference to a divine point above time and history. Heaven is also a qualitative reference to a situation of complete obedient worship to God. Earth in John's visions is mostly used as metaphor for sinful mankind under the rule of Satan. Yet, the earth remains part of God's creation under his divine authority, and even becomes a refuge for the church in this dispensation. The sea in Revelation, when not denoting a physical space, is often equated by scholars to the abyss or the underworld. However, in Revelation the sea is mostly used as metaphor for the basic evil from which the beast originates and of everything immoral and impure. The last chapters of Revelation reveal that in the eschaton heaven, sea and earth will all be part of the new creation - renewed to the point where God's reign is restored and acknowledged above all doubt throughout the κόσµος.<hr/>Die kosmologie van Openbaring getuig van God se herstelde regering oor die geskape heelal (κόσµος). Regdeur die boek word die κόσµος volgens sy samestellende dele beskryf, naamlik hemel, see en aarde. Oppervlakkig beskou, lyk hierdie beskrywing na die antieke Joodse en mitologiese drie-verdieping-kosmologie van 'daar bo', 'hier onder' en 'daar onder'. Hierdie ooreenkoms is egter slegs oppervlakkig. Hemel word deur Johannes nie soseer in ruimtelike sin gebruik nie, maar in temporele sin: as simboliese verwysing dat God bo tyd en geskiedenis verhewe is. Hemel is ook 'n kwalitatiewe verwysing na 'n toestand van volmaakte gehoorsame aanbidding van God. Desgelyks word aarde meestal gebruik as metafoor vir 'n sondige mensdom onder Satan se heerskappy. Tog bly die aarde deel van God se skepping onder sy goddelike heerskappy, en word dit selfs aangetoon as 'n toevlugsoord vir die kerk in hierdie bedeling. Waar die see in Openbaring nie na 'n fisiese verskynsel verwys nie, word dit dikwels deur biblioloë op gelyke vlak met die diep put of die onderwêreld gestel. Johannes gebruik die see egter meestal as metafoor vir die boosheid waaruit die dier sy oorsprong het, asook vir alles wat sondig en onrein is. Openbaring 21 en 22 maak bekend dat hemel, see en aarde in die eschaton deel sal wees van die nuwe skepping -vernuwe tot op die punt waar God se heerskappy herstel is en erken word regdeur die κόσµος. <![CDATA[<b>Elements of the universe in Philo's <i>De Vita Mosis:</i> Cosmological theology or theological cosmology?</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200025&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es It is the intention of this article to investigate how Philo's understanding of the universe, and particularly its four basic elements as taught by the Greek philosophers, influenced his description of the God of Israel's world in which the Moses narrative unfolds. Given the fact that Philo was a theologian par excellence, the question can be asked whether Philo's approach is closer to what one might call 'theological cosmology' or rather closer to 'cosmological theology'? After a brief survey of Philo's inclination to interpret Jewish history in the light of Greek cosmology, the study proceeds with his universe as symbolised in the high priest's vestments. The τετρακτύς with its 10 points of harmony is a key to Philo's symbolism and numerology. The article concludes that Philo is not writing cosmology per se in his De Vita Mosis, but he is rather writing a theology that sketches the cosmic superiority and involvement of Israel's God against the backdrop of Greek cosmology as it was influenced by Pythagoras' geometry and numerology as well as by Plato's philosophy. In this sense his account in the De Vita Mosis is closer to a cosmological theology. He utilises the cosmological picture of the Greco-Hellenistic world in order to introduce and present the powerful nature and qualities of Israel's God.<hr/>Hierdie artikel het ten doel om ondersoek in te stel na Philo se begrip van die heelal en veral die vier basiese elemente soos dit deur die Griekse filosowe geleer is. Dit het verder ten doel om vas te stel tot watter mate hierdie denke sy beskrywing van die God van Israel se wêreld, waarbinne die Moses-vertelling ontvou, beïnvloed het. Gegewe die feit dat Philo 'n teoloog par excellence is, kan die vraag gevra word of Philo se benadering nader is aan wat 'n mens 'n 'teologiese kosmologie' kan noem, of eerder nader aan 'n 'kosmologiese teologie' is? Na 'n kort oorsig oor Philo se neiging om die Joodse geskiedenis in die lig van die Griekse kosmologie te interpreteer, analiseer die artikel Philo se heelal soos dit gesimboliseer word in die hoëpriester se klere. Die τετρακτύς met sy 10 punte van harmonie is 'n sleutel tot Philo se simboliek en numerologie. Die artikel kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat Philo nie kosmologie per se in sy De Vita Mosis beskryf nie, maar eerder 'n teologie wat die kosmiese superioriteit en betrokkenheid van Israel se God skets teen die agtergrond van Griekse kosmologie soos dit deur Pythagoras se geometrie en numerologie sowel as deur Plato se filosofie beïnvloed is. In hierdie opsig is sy weergawe in die De Vita Mosis nader aan 'n kosmologiese teologie. Hy maak gebruik van die kosmologiese beeld van die Grieks-Hellenistiese wêreld ten einde die kragtige aard en eienskappe van Israel se God voor te stel en aan te bied. <![CDATA[<b>Belangrike publikasie oor Kategismusprediking</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200026&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es It is the intention of this article to investigate how Philo's understanding of the universe, and particularly its four basic elements as taught by the Greek philosophers, influenced his description of the God of Israel's world in which the Moses narrative unfolds. Given the fact that Philo was a theologian par excellence, the question can be asked whether Philo's approach is closer to what one might call 'theological cosmology' or rather closer to 'cosmological theology'? After a brief survey of Philo's inclination to interpret Jewish history in the light of Greek cosmology, the study proceeds with his universe as symbolised in the high priest's vestments. The τετρακτύς with its 10 points of harmony is a key to Philo's symbolism and numerology. The article concludes that Philo is not writing cosmology per se in his De Vita Mosis, but he is rather writing a theology that sketches the cosmic superiority and involvement of Israel's God against the backdrop of Greek cosmology as it was influenced by Pythagoras' geometry and numerology as well as by Plato's philosophy. In this sense his account in the De Vita Mosis is closer to a cosmological theology. He utilises the cosmological picture of the Greco-Hellenistic world in order to introduce and present the powerful nature and qualities of Israel's God.<hr/>Hierdie artikel het ten doel om ondersoek in te stel na Philo se begrip van die heelal en veral die vier basiese elemente soos dit deur die Griekse filosowe geleer is. Dit het verder ten doel om vas te stel tot watter mate hierdie denke sy beskrywing van die God van Israel se wêreld, waarbinne die Moses-vertelling ontvou, beïnvloed het. Gegewe die feit dat Philo 'n teoloog par excellence is, kan die vraag gevra word of Philo se benadering nader is aan wat 'n mens 'n 'teologiese kosmologie' kan noem, of eerder nader aan 'n 'kosmologiese teologie' is? Na 'n kort oorsig oor Philo se neiging om die Joodse geskiedenis in die lig van die Griekse kosmologie te interpreteer, analiseer die artikel Philo se heelal soos dit gesimboliseer word in die hoëpriester se klere. Die τετρακτύς met sy 10 punte van harmonie is 'n sleutel tot Philo se simboliek en numerologie. Die artikel kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat Philo nie kosmologie per se in sy De Vita Mosis beskryf nie, maar eerder 'n teologie wat die kosmiese superioriteit en betrokkenheid van Israel se God skets teen die agtergrond van Griekse kosmologie soos dit deur Pythagoras se geometrie en numerologie sowel as deur Plato se filosofie beïnvloed is. In hierdie opsig is sy weergawe in die De Vita Mosis nader aan 'n kosmologiese teologie. Hy maak gebruik van die kosmologiese beeld van die Grieks-Hellenistiese wêreld ten einde die kragtige aard en eienskappe van Israel se God voor te stel en aan te bied. <![CDATA[<b>Belangrike publikasie oor Kategismusprediking</b>]]> http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2305-08532013000200027&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es It is the intention of this article to investigate how Philo's understanding of the universe, and particularly its four basic elements as taught by the Greek philosophers, influenced his description of the God of Israel's world in which the Moses narrative unfolds. Given the fact that Philo was a theologian par excellence, the question can be asked whether Philo's approach is closer to what one might call 'theological cosmology' or rather closer to 'cosmological theology'? After a brief survey of Philo's inclination to interpret Jewish history in the light of Greek cosmology, the study proceeds with his universe as symbolised in the high priest's vestments. The τετρακτύς with its 10 points of harmony is a key to Philo's symbolism and numerology. The article concludes that Philo is not writing cosmology per se in his De Vita Mosis, but he is rather writing a theology that sketches the cosmic superiority and involvement of Israel's God against the backdrop of Greek cosmology as it was influenced by Pythagoras' geometry and numerology as well as by Plato's philosophy. In this sense his account in the De Vita Mosis is closer to a cosmological theology. He utilises the cosmological picture of the Greco-Hellenistic world in order to introduce and present the powerful nature and qualities of Israel's God.<hr/>Hierdie artikel het ten doel om ondersoek in te stel na Philo se begrip van die heelal en veral die vier basiese elemente soos dit deur die Griekse filosowe geleer is. Dit het verder ten doel om vas te stel tot watter mate hierdie denke sy beskrywing van die God van Israel se wêreld, waarbinne die Moses-vertelling ontvou, beïnvloed het. Gegewe die feit dat Philo 'n teoloog par excellence is, kan die vraag gevra word of Philo se benadering nader is aan wat 'n mens 'n 'teologiese kosmologie' kan noem, of eerder nader aan 'n 'kosmologiese teologie' is? Na 'n kort oorsig oor Philo se neiging om die Joodse geskiedenis in die lig van die Griekse kosmologie te interpreteer, analiseer die artikel Philo se heelal soos dit gesimboliseer word in die hoëpriester se klere. Die τετρακτύς met sy 10 punte van harmonie is 'n sleutel tot Philo se simboliek en numerologie. Die artikel kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat Philo nie kosmologie per se in sy De Vita Mosis beskryf nie, maar eerder 'n teologie wat die kosmiese superioriteit en betrokkenheid van Israel se God skets teen die agtergrond van Griekse kosmologie soos dit deur Pythagoras se geometrie en numerologie sowel as deur Plato se filosofie beïnvloed is. In hierdie opsig is sy weergawe in die De Vita Mosis nader aan 'n kosmologiese teologie. Hy maak gebruik van die kosmologiese beeld van die Grieks-Hellenistiese wêreld ten einde die kragtige aard en eienskappe van Israel se God voor te stel en aan te bied.