Theology of religions and intertextuality: A case study of christian–confucian and islamic–confucian dialogue in the early 20th-century China

Wai Luen KWOK*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

In this paper, I will propose an intertextual theology of religions from a non-Western cultural perspective through the works in The True Light Review, an official magazine of Chinese Baptist churches, and Yue Hua, a prominent and long-lived Muslim magazine. My aim is to show that the religious discourses in these Chinese religious periodicals inform us of an alternative understanding of literary construction of religious plurality and challenge the current versions of theology of religions. With the concept of intertextuality, the differentiation and integration of religious identities indicates that language-constituted realities are multi-dimensional and multi-directional. In some respects, religious believers would like to differentiate themselves in the search for an authentic and meaningful life, but, they are nonetheless already interconnected and interrelated. In some other respects, they approach and embrace each other for integration to assert a common identity among religions in that area, but that could transform their religions with new meaning. Our case study will also further theological reflection of the nature of Christian life in predominantly non-Christian societies as an intertextual religious reality.

Original languageEnglish
Article number417
JournalReligions
Volume10
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2019

Scopus Subject Areas

  • Religious studies

User-Defined Keywords

  • Chinese Christianity
  • Chinese Islam
  • Confucianism
  • Intertextuality
  • Postliberal theology
  • Theology of religions

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Theology of religions and intertextuality: A case study of christian–confucian and islamic–confucian dialogue in the early 20th-century China'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this