Timeline for What is the origin of the "religion vs. relationship" dichotomy?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 6, 2019 at 19:35 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 47 characters in body
|
| Dec 6, 2019 at 19:22 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Correct reference from blog to Christian Post article
|
| Dec 6, 2019 at 19:16 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Add disclosure to avoid plagiarism
|
| Dec 6, 2019 at 19:01 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 181 characters in body
|
| Dec 6, 2019 at 18:39 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
A paragraph of semantic change to introduce thesis of the ultimate origin of the dichotomy
|
| Dec 5, 2019 at 21:00 | comment | added | KorvinStarmast | Good call on not running down the post modernism hole, and it's humpty dumpty approach to language. | |
| Dec 5, 2019 at 18:31 | comment | added | GratefulDisciple | @KorvinStarmast Another explanation I was contemplating is to blame it on postmodernism in which word-meaning stability is seriously undermined by a social group's deconstructing tendency and by a social group's desire to promote their own meaning. But I doubt that Karl Barth, Billy Graham and John Stott belong to that era, so I decided not to bring up postmodernism, although the rise of the dichotomy usage among evangelicals in the past few decades (more so than other groups, like Catholics, for instance) could be seen as postmodernism in action. | |
| Dec 5, 2019 at 17:49 | comment | added | GratefulDisciple | @KorvinStarmast Yes, unfortunately that's true, and this adds to Dr. Rauser's characterization that the dichotomy is essentially rhetorical, because the speaker chooses to to define "religion" according to the speaker's purpose. What shocked me during the research is how heavy weight evangelicals like Billy Graham and John Stott had a clear influence in spreading the new definition, hence in tracing the origin to the psyche level (because language changes according to human use) my conclusion is that the ultimate origin of the dichotomy is the force of the Good News itself. | |
| Dec 5, 2019 at 13:50 | comment | added | KorvinStarmast | What a great answer, though you may find that in common parlance, the dichotomy is used in a negative sense to cast pejorative assertions against that which the speaker chooses to classify as "the other" aka Religion. | |
| Dec 4, 2019 at 17:44 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Grammar correction
|
| Dec 4, 2019 at 15:00 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
expanded the Karl Barth quote and credit Prof. Rauser explicitly
|
| Dec 4, 2019 at 13:30 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added summary and final analysis
|
| Dec 3, 2019 at 21:04 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 71 characters in body
|
| Dec 3, 2019 at 20:51 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Add personal conclusion
|
| Dec 3, 2019 at 20:46 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Add personal conclusion
|
| Dec 3, 2019 at 19:41 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
grammar edits
|
| Dec 3, 2019 at 19:08 | history | edited | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
minor grammar edits
|
| Dec 3, 2019 at 19:02 | history | answered | GratefulDisciple | CC BY-SA 4.0 |