<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article
  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.2 20120330//EN" "http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.2/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"
         xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
         article-type="research-article"
         dtd-version="1.2"
         xml:lang="en">
   <front>
      <journal-meta>
         <journal-id>ZYGO</journal-id>
         <journal-title-group>
            <journal-title>Zygon®</journal-title>
            <abbrev-journal-title/>
         </journal-title-group>
         <issn pub-type="print">0591-2385</issn>
         <issn pub-type="electronic">1467-9744</issn>
      </journal-meta>
      <article-meta>
         <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/1467-9744.00525</article-id>
         <title-group>
            <article-title>Teaching Genesis: A Present‐Day Approach Inspired by the Prophet Nathan</article-title>
         </title-group>
         <contrib-group>
            <contrib contrib-type="author">
               <name name-style="western">
                  <surname>Reich</surname>
                  <given-names>K. Helmut</given-names>
               </name>
            </contrib>
         </contrib-group>
         <aff id="a1"/>
         <pub-date publication-format="electronic" iso-8601-date="2003-09-02">
            <day>02</day>
            <month>09</month>
            <year>2003</year>
         </pub-date>
         <volume>38</volume>
         <issue>3</issue>
         <issue-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/zygo.2003.38.issue-3</issue-id>
         <fpage>633</fpage>
         <lpage>641</lpage>
         <permissions/>
         <abstract>
            <p>The prophets Nathan (2 Samuel 12:1–15) and John the Baptist (Mark 6:16–28) had comparable tasks before them: to convince their respective kings about the wrongs of taking somebody else's wife and marrying her. Nathan succeeded, while John failed and furthermore lost his life. What made the difference? One possible explanation is that Nathan proceeded in two steps: (1) Tell an interesting, nonthreatening story that nevertheless makes the point at issue; (2) transfer that message to the case at hand. In contrast, John used a direct approach, which raised apprehension, even fear (on the part of Herodias, the woman involved), and led to failure. That lesson has wider applications, as illustrated here for teaching the biblical Genesis narration. The other ingredient in this teaching is relational and contextual reasoning (RCR), the use of which is also indicated for other issues besides teaching Genesis.</p>
         </abstract>
         <kwd-group>
            <kwd>cognitive development as aim of education</kwd>
            <kwd>differentiating</kwd>
            <kwd>integrating</kwd>
            <kwd>logic</kwd>
            <kwd>Nathan's detour as shortcut</kwd>
            <kwd>overcoming cognitive conflict</kwd>
            <kwd>relational and contextual reasoning (RCR)</kwd>
         </kwd-group>
         <counts>
            <fig-count count="0"/>
            <table-count count="1"/>
         </counts>
      </article-meta>
   </front>
   <body/>
   <back>
      <ref-list>
         <ref id="b1">
            <mixed-citation id="cit1" publication-type="journal">Bedau, Hugo, and PaulOppenheim. 1961. “Complementarity in Quantum Mechanics.”<source>Synthese 
        </source>13: 201–32.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b2">
            <mixed-citation id="cit2" publication-type="book">Fetz, Reto L., 
K. HelmutReich, and PeterValentin. 2001. Weltbildentwicklung und Schöpfungverständnis. Eine strukturgenetische Untersuchung bei Kindern und Jugendlichen [Children's and adolescents' worldview development and understanding of Genesis according to the Bible. A structure‐genetic study]. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b3">
            <mixed-citation id="cit3" publication-type="book">Mörike, Eduard. [1829] 1997. Sämtliche Werke [Collected works]. 6th ed., commentary by H.Koopmann. Düsseldorf: Artemis and Winkler.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b4">
            <mixed-citation id="cit4" publication-type="journal">Murken, Sebastian, and Ashiq AliShah. 2002. “Naturalistic and Islamic Approaches to Psychology, Psychotherapy, and Religion: Metaphysical Assumptions and Methodology—A Discussion.”<source>The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 
        </source>12 (4): 239–54. Special issue, “From Conflict to Dialogue: Examining Western and Islamic Approaches in Psychology of Religion.”</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b5">
            <mixed-citation id="cit5" publication-type="book">Oser, Fritz K., and Franz J.Baeriswyl. [1996] 2001. <source>“Choreographies of Teaching: Bridging Instruction to Learning.” 
        </source> In Handbook of Research on Teaching, 4th ed., ed. V.Richardson, 1031–65. Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b6">
            <mixed-citation id="cit6" publication-type="journal">Reich, K. Helmut. 1989. “Between Religion and Science: Complementarity in the Religious Thinking of Young People.”<source>British Journal of Religious Education 
        </source>11 (Spring): 62–69.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b7">
            <mixed-citation id="cit7" publication-type="journal">
——. 1990. “The Relation between Science and Theology: The Case for Complementarity Revisited.”<source>Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 
        </source>25 (December): 369–90.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b8">
            <mixed-citation id="cit8" publication-type="journal">
——. 1995. “From Either/Or to Both‐And through Cognitive Development.”<source>Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children 
        </source>12 (2): 12–15.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b9">
            <mixed-citation id="cit9" publication-type="book">
——. 1996. <source>“Relational and Contextual Reasoning in Religious Education: A Theorybased Empirical Study.” 
        </source> In Research in Religious Education, ed. L. J.Francis, 
W. K.Kay, and W. S.Campbell, 129–44. Leominster, U.K.: Gracewing.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b10">
            <mixed-citation id="cit10" publication-type="book">
——. 1997. <source>“Umwege im Unterricht als Abkürzung: Schnellere Einsicht und geringerer Lernwiderstand der SchülerInnen” 
        </source> [Detours as short‐cut: students learn faster and resist less]. In Lernkultur im Wandel [Educational Culture in a Process of Change], ed. E.Beck, 
T.Guldimann, and M.Zutavern, 179–89. St. Gallen, Switzerland: UKV, Fachverlag für Wissenschaft und Studium.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b11">
            <mixed-citation id="cit11" publication-type="book">
——. 2002. Developing the Horizons of the Mind: Relational and Contextual Reasoning and the Resolution of Cognitive Conflict. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b12">
            <mixed-citation id="cit12" publication-type="journal">
——. 2003a. “Es nicht logisch, aber doch wahr!” [It is not logical, yet true!]. <source>Katechetische Blätter 
        </source>128 (1): 8–13.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b13">
            <mixed-citation id="cit13" publication-type="journal">
——. 2003b. “Developing the Horizons of the Mind: Reich's Response to the Commentators.”<source>Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 
        </source>38 (June): 459–66.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b14">
            <mixed-citation id="cit14" publication-type="book">Reich, K. Helmut, and AnkeSchröder. 1995. Komplementäres Denken im Religionsunterricht. Ein Werkstattbericht über unser Unterrichtsprojekt. [RCR in religious education. A status report on our project]. Rehburg‐Loccum, Germany: 
Religionspädagogisches Institut (RPI) Loccum, Loccumer Pelikan, Sonderheft 3.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b15">
            <mixed-citation id="cit15" publication-type="book">Schnekenburger, Inga. 2001. Das Buch der Bilder [The Book of Pictures]. <ext-link xlink:href="http://www.onlinekunst.de/rilke/rilke_herbst.html">http://www.onlinekunst.de/rilke/rilke_herbst.html</ext-link>
            </mixed-citation>
         </ref>
         <ref id="b16">
            <mixed-citation id="cit16" publication-type="book">van derMeer, Jitse M., ed. 1996. Facets of Faith and Science. Vol. 4: Interpreting God's Action in the World. Ancaster, Ontario: The Pascal Center for Advanced Studies in Faith and Science, Redeemer College, and Lanham, Md.: University Press of America.
</mixed-citation>
         </ref>
      </ref-list>
   </back>
</article>
