<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Krisis &#38; Praxis &#187; Hermeneutics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/category/hermeneutics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com</link>
	<description>To Understand Truth and to Attain the True</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Dec 2011 04:56:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Allah and Tuhan in Bible Translation</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2010/01/allah-and-tuhan-in-bible-translation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2010/01/allah-and-tuhan-in-bible-translation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 02:40:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Biblical Textual Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Concept of God]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hermeneutics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.krisispraxis.com/?p=251</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why It is Not Possible to Substitute Allah with Tuhan in Bible Translation Muslims in other parts of the world (Arabs, Persians, North Africans, Pakistanis and Indonesians) have no objection and are not worried about getting confused when Christians use the word Allah. In contrast, some Malaysian Muslims claim to be confused; a strange phenomenon [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2010/01/allah-and-tuhan-in-bible-translation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Translating the Names of God</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2010/01/translating-the-names-of-god/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2010/01/translating-the-names-of-god/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 02:25:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Biblical Textual Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Concept of God]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hermeneutics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.krisispraxis.com/?p=247</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[TRANSLATING THE NAMES OF GOD: Recent experience from Indonesia and Malaysia D. Soesilo Note &#8211; This is partial reproduction of the original article. Reproduced with permission from the author The Situation in Malaysia The situation in Malaysia in regard to the use of the divine names is different to that in Indonesia in one important [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2010/01/translating-the-names-of-god/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Response to Prof. Dzulkufli Abdul Razak Misreading of the Malay Bible</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2009/03/response-to-prof-dzulkufli-abdul-razak-misreading-of-the-malay-bible/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2009/03/response-to-prof-dzulkufli-abdul-razak-misreading-of-the-malay-bible/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 01:37:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hermeneutics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interfaith Encounters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Islam]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.krisispraxis.com/?p=166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tan Sri Prof. Dzulkufli Abdul Razak, Vice Chancellor of University Science Malaysia wrote an article on the use of &#8216;Allah&#8217; in the Malay Bible, Alkitab (Bahasa Indonesia version) in the SUN on 11 March 2009. LINK It would have been easy just to dismiss this article since its premise is flawed from the word go: [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2009/03/response-to-prof-dzulkufli-abdul-razak-misreading-of-the-malay-bible/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Postmodernity and the Crisis of Truth</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/11/postmodernity-and-the-crisis-of-truth/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/11/postmodernity-and-the-crisis-of-truth/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2007 06:55:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hermeneutics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theological Issues]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2007/11/postmodernity-and-the-crisis-of-truth/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anthony Thiselton links Postmodernity to the crisis of truth. To this one would naturally ask the question, â€œWhy a crisis of truthâ€?? Is the linkage a matter or causality, that is, to suggest that Postmodernity is the cause of the crisis, or  is the linkage merely descriptive? In the latter case, Postmodernity would be a description of a general condition of society where people in general and intellectuals in particular have lost confidence in attaining consensus regarding matters of truth.

What are the contours of the contemporary crisis of truth? One cannot help but be struck by the proliferation of theories spinning across the various disciplines of Western academia. Such proliferation is accompanied by intense disputes with no obvious winner. There is no evidence that the competing theories will be subsumed under an overarching, unifying framework. The resulting fragmentation of knowledge leads to doubts about the viability of the academic enterprise in securing certain or indubitable knowledge]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/11/postmodernity-and-the-crisis-of-truth/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hermeneutical Circle: Inseparability of Theory and Praxis</title>
		<link>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/02/hermeneutical-circleinseparability-of-theory-and-praxis/</link>
		<comments>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/02/hermeneutical-circleinseparability-of-theory-and-praxis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:12:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kam Weng</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hermeneutics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Theological Issues]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krisispraxis.ath.cx/archives/2007/02/hermeneutical-circleinseparability-of-theory-and-praxis/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It has become fashionable in some Christian circles to deride the need for theory or to disabuse the importance given to doctrinal orthodoxy as a poor substitute for living faith. Indeed, it is claimed that pre-occupation with doctrinal orthodoxy leads to judgmentalism. Hence the favourite slogan "From absolute to authentic". I think these criticisms are unfair. . . 
Given the distinction between, but inseparability of theory and practice, it is unnecessary and unacceptable to emphasize any one of the components over the other. After all, â€œtruth as transformation always involves truth as disclosure; speaking the truth is never separable but is distinguishable from doing the truth.â€?]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.krisispraxis.com/archives/2007/02/hermeneutical-circleinseparability-of-theory-and-praxis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

