<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Yoderian Conversation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/2009/06/10/a-yoderian-conversation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/2009/06/10/a-yoderian-conversation/</link>
	<description>Where youthful Barthianism never dies</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:24:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: roger flyer</title>
		<link>http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/2009/06/10/a-yoderian-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-8613</link>
		<dc:creator>roger flyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:14:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/?p=2471#comment-8613</guid>
		<description>We&#039;ll ask him to write it while we haunt the finer place of the Athens of the South he has shown us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;ll ask him to write it while we haunt the finer place of the Athens of the South he has shown us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: R.O. Flyer</title>
		<link>http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/2009/06/10/a-yoderian-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-8572</link>
		<dc:creator>R.O. Flyer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:59:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/?p=2471#comment-8572</guid>
		<description>Hey Nate, while you&#039;re at it, could you write the last chapter of my thesis?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Nate, while you&#8217;re at it, could you write the last chapter of my thesis?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Halden</title>
		<link>http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/2009/06/10/a-yoderian-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-8565</link>
		<dc:creator>Halden</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:20:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/?p=2471#comment-8565</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m sure we will both be eagerly awaiting Nate&#039;s next book, for precisely these reasons.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m sure we will both be eagerly awaiting Nate&#8217;s next book, for precisely these reasons.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken oakes</title>
		<link>http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/2009/06/10/a-yoderian-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-8564</link>
		<dc:creator>ken oakes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:19:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/?p=2471#comment-8564</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know Yoder half as well as most people here, but from conversations with some friends, putting the issue of a doctrine of creation solely in terms of a doctrine of Christ and the powers seems fairly restrictive, and might not fully represent the scope of Yoder&#039;s position.

In one sense, I can agree with you. My worry would be that a doctrine of creation done in this way becomes a wholly reactive and negative undertaking (retrospective yes, and that aspect is fine with me), and will probably lack a full account of God&#039;s creative intentions that were then and now being thwarted. It is the *positive* side of a doctrine of creation that interests me, and that is what I think is absent from a lot of works done in a more Barthian or Yoderian vein.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know Yoder half as well as most people here, but from conversations with some friends, putting the issue of a doctrine of creation solely in terms of a doctrine of Christ and the powers seems fairly restrictive, and might not fully represent the scope of Yoder&#8217;s position.</p>
<p>In one sense, I can agree with you. My worry would be that a doctrine of creation done in this way becomes a wholly reactive and negative undertaking (retrospective yes, and that aspect is fine with me), and will probably lack a full account of God&#8217;s creative intentions that were then and now being thwarted. It is the *positive* side of a doctrine of creation that interests me, and that is what I think is absent from a lot of works done in a more Barthian or Yoderian vein.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Halden</title>
		<link>http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/2009/06/10/a-yoderian-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-8562</link>
		<dc:creator>Halden</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:40:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/?p=2471#comment-8562</guid>
		<description>I suppose I didn&#039;t need the jerk quotes. What I was trying to get at though, was how, for Yoder there is no such thing as a doctrine of creation that could be understood as something independent of the New Testament&#039;s theology of Christ and the powers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suppose I didn&#8217;t need the jerk quotes. What I was trying to get at though, was how, for Yoder there is no such thing as a doctrine of creation that could be understood as something independent of the New Testament&#8217;s theology of Christ and the powers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken oakes</title>
		<link>http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/2009/06/10/a-yoderian-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-8561</link>
		<dc:creator>ken oakes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:23:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/?p=2471#comment-8561</guid>
		<description>Nate,

Your productivity puts us more snail-ish type scholars to shame.

If your piece doesn&#039;t already have a name, may I suggest a working title that Scott Prather and I have been kicking around for some book that will probably never be written: &quot;A Good Doctrine of Creation - Finally!&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nate,</p>
<p>Your productivity puts us more snail-ish type scholars to shame.</p>
<p>If your piece doesn&#8217;t already have a name, may I suggest a working title that Scott Prather and I have been kicking around for some book that will probably never be written: &#8220;A Good Doctrine of Creation &#8211; Finally!&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nate Kerr</title>
		<link>http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/2009/06/10/a-yoderian-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-8560</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate Kerr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:02:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/?p=2471#comment-8560</guid>
		<description>Ken:

I am working on this exact question right now.  It will be the first essay in my next book.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ken:</p>
<p>I am working on this exact question right now.  It will be the first essay in my next book.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken oakes</title>
		<link>http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/2009/06/10/a-yoderian-conversation/comment-page-1/#comment-8558</link>
		<dc:creator>ken oakes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 06:32:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhabitatiodei.com/?p=2471#comment-8558</guid>
		<description>Why is &quot;doctrine of creation&quot; in scare-quotes? One of the main questions that both Barthians and Yoderians need to answer (although probably not Barth and Yoder themselves) is what to do with a doctrine of creation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why is &#8220;doctrine of creation&#8221; in scare-quotes? One of the main questions that both Barthians and Yoderians need to answer (although probably not Barth and Yoder themselves) is what to do with a doctrine of creation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

