Talk:Postliberal theology

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Wrong contrast

In contrast to liberal individualism, postliberalism tends toward...

is contextual rubbish, since Postliberal theology contrasts with Liberal theology, not liberalism. Methinks Postliberal theology doesn't give a damn about politics. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 21:18, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Horrible article

Sometimes I miss the Swedish Uncyclopedia, because it has a template This article is stoned asunder, let's rip it!. It would be applicable to this so called article that deserves D-class, alias nonsential rubbish mixed with false prejudices, stupid leaps-to-conclusions, and wild speculations covered up as general statements that sounds true but contains no real semantics. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 21:31, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete?

I've gone through this article and watched it for some time. I have to say and don't really see a purpose other than at one time it was someones personal view. I think it should be a nomination for being deleted. Anyone else agree? disagree? Basileias (talk) 00:08, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nae... However my fingers are itching I think not. Postliberal theology is mentioned in a number of academic theses, so it deserves an article, however not the current text. The section Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and Postliberal Conversions should be deleted, and one link to the current version preserved in this talk page. The section Criticisms should be treated similarly. What is really needed for a future article are the names George Lindbeck, Hans Wilhelm Frei and other scholars at Yale Divinity School, and likewise the section History and Origins. A definition is needed, putting it in a context, probably it is a reaction against modernism, liberal theology, the first section in Theological Platform might be appropriate, but all this material needs sourcing, while much of the rest of the article seems like unnecessary side-tracks and repetition of the content basics. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 12:49, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just What Is 'Postliberal Theology?, by James M. Gustafson
The Origins of Postliberalism, by Gary Dorrien
The Future of Postliberal Theology, by Gary Dorrien
Toward A Postliberal Hermeneutics, by Albert C. Outler
WorldNews: Postliberal theology, a heavyloaded site with videos, this one about postliberal theology,
POSITION on POSTLIBERALISM and POSTMODERNISM in THEOLOGY, by Adrian Worsfold (critical)
God in Postliberal Perspective (Between Realism and Non-Realism), by Robert Andrew Cathey, McCormick Theological Seminary, USA
Paul among the Postliberals: Pauline Theology beyond Christendom and Modernity, by Douglas Harink (abstract only)

Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 14:55, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There should be an article on this topic but this one needs a great deal of fairly expert revision. Are there any statements in the article that are` wrong or very misleading, please? Vernon White ^{. . . Talk} 15:40, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with Categorization

Limiting postliberalism to the Yale School seems problematic, to say the least. Barth, Bonhoeffer and others could and probably should be classified as postliberal insofar as they reasoned through and beyond (neo)liberal philosophical presuppositions. But if they are postliberal, then how can Lindbeck and Hauerwas stand as the true heirs? There needs to be more room made for the likes of Newbigin and the Torrances and the many others who seek to affirm historic tenets of the Christian faith who, both like and unlike neoliberals, speak of God with modern discourse.

I agree with the other comments so far. Someone needs to delete and rewrite this entry from scratch.

NH, 29 Apr 2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stormbuffalo (talk • contribs) 20:49, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]