Biblical witness and economy in the writings of Klaus Nürnberger

Christoffel Lombaard

doi:10.4102/hts.v76i2.6092

Abstract

Given the purpose of this special edition, to consider theologically the implications of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, in this contribution, the writings of one of the important yet under-appreciated South African figures in thinking from biblical theology on matters of economics, Klaus Nurnberger, are taken into review. The relationship between (1) biblical witness and (2) faith and (3) deeds stands central in Nurnberger’s theological framework. His interdisciplinarity has lasting validity because he takes seriously the disciplines involved, such as historical Bible scholarship, economic theory, social theory and the like. By his own reckoning, it is partly because of this kind of interdisciplinarity that Nurnberger’s contributions on this topic had in a sense been marginalised. For this reason too, it is important in a new era to review sympathetically and appropriate critically the significant contributions of Nurnberger on the biblical witness to economic engagement. Contribution: This research article, as a part of this themed collection, considers theologically the implications of the Fourth Industrial Revolution with a review of Nurnberger’s contributions on the biblical witness to economic engagement. Nurnberger’s interdisciplinarity in his contributions helps set the direction for future engagements in the dawning post-secular era.

Highlights

Weaving believing and livingReligious fundamentalism and modernist exclusion of religion from the public sphere have at least two aspects in common, despite their directly opposing views on the place of religion in life
Dixon [1910–1915] volumes) and modernist exclusion of religion from the public sphere have at least two aspects in common, despite their directly opposing views on the place of religion in life. Whilst the former holds that religion should permeate, even dominate all expressions of human life, the latter holds that religion should be excluded from all expressions of human life
In both cases – the two commonalities – these views are held to the exclusion of any other in a markedly non-tolerant manner and do so with the intent to serve humanity: it would be to our benefit to follow this one path. Both these possibilities had been actively present throughout the previous century and are still very alive to our senses as expressions of the good life here in the first fifth of the present century. Both are much more straightforward possibilities, offering little room for nuance, alternatives or discrete permutations; in liberal democracies, and especially amongst the educated political, academic and economic elite in such societies, the reflex has been to the secular side of this oppositioning

Summary

Introduction

Weaving believing and livingReligious fundamentalism (which may in its current form be formally traced to the ed. Dixon [1910–1915] volumes) and modernist exclusion of religion from the public sphere (as Holyoake [1896] called secularism; see Benson [2004:83–98] for a fuller context and current reception) have at least two aspects in common, despite their directly opposing views on the place of religion in life.

Results

Conclusion