Thursday, July 26, 2007

Poteriology...

Finished Harry Potter and the Doom of Puberty yesterday. It strikes me that it is a very long time since JK Rowling was a teenager and I imagine life with her would be akin to living with PMT personified - now there's a thought. Moving on with the rapidity of Rowling's narrative shift (minus the "I'm really angry for no reason other than I'm a teenager plot twist"), a couple of things made me chuckle inside (oh what a little monster I am). Obviously relating things to theology (thus, Poteriology which I am very proud of to be honest), I thought I would try and highlight how 'conservative' Rowlings' soteriology is. I say this because she appears to have a very tight mechanism for salvation viz. Harry Potter MUST die for Voldemort to be defeated. (Harry takes death fairly well considering he gets angry about every other little minor detail - sorry... this is an aside). Anyway, with questions of necessity frequently besetting soteriology (from Athanasius, Irenaeus through to Jungel's masterly work Gott als Geheimnis der Welt, via Anselm and Thomas etc.) I found the link interesting.

Furthermore, the most tendentious (sorry, I used this word in the post below but it's a good word) aspect within current evangelicalism finds itself lodged on the question of whether or not the cross should be described in terms of cosmic child abuse (Steve Chalke et al.). However, on reading the Potter finale, I was struck by how the same phrase could have been utilised of the relationship between Dumbledore and Harry - viz. Harry is groomed by Dumbledore to a position where he learns he must die after 17 years etc. The parallels are striking and yet I bet you ANYTHING no one will pull JK Rowling up on this 'ethico-theological' point. Fascinating yeah?

Labels: , ,

|

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Reformed Theology - a Delicate Approach to an Unassailable Topic

I just thought I'd put my neck out and try to qualify a few thoughts that I've been having regarding Reformed Theology. I just want to be very honest and put down a few critiques of what I see as Reformed Theology.

But First: A little bit of clarification. Any term like Reformed Theology will become a tendentious point to anyone. Unfortunately, however, unless the term is carefully defined, any critique is useless. Although Reformed Theology should technically refer to the strains of theology which appeared during the Reformation of the Church (i.e. Luther onwards as far as you like) to me, the idea of Reformed Theology has moved on (as any oft-repeated phrase will) to refer to the theology of a group of people who call themselves the Reformed. I say this to highlight the gap between the reformed theology of Calvin and the Reformed Theology of today. Where do they differ? For me, the Reformers sought to correct a movement in theology which they saw as being ill-conceived (i.e. methodological reformation semper reformanda) whereas today, the idea of Reformed Theology carries with it a certain degree of epistemological solidity (i.e. subscription to certain mental affirmations). There is, I think, a big gap berween the two.

Next: Some praises to be sung of the Reformed Church.

1 - to a certain degree, a positive approach to the theological task
2 - a high doctrine of scripture
3 - a certain continuity (thought not always beneficial)
4 - a good pedigree

So where can it be critiqued?: As I have already hinted, my major bone-picking comes from a methodological angle. As I have said, Reformed Theology as I defined it does not have a 'reforming' tendency. The cry of Semper Reformata!, although often repeated within Reformed churches, is nothing more than an empty cry, highlighting how much of the Reformed church has become a copy-catting of the great reformers of old. The mentality is this - Calvin cried semper reformata and therefore so must I. How does this translate into methodological terms? Well, for example, if Calvin affirmed x on a subject, so must I affirm x on a subject. Why is this mistaken logic? Because for Calvin, x is affirmed because scripture affirms y and Calvin's theological method z leads to x (i.e y + z = x). For the Reformed church, the x of affirmation is a result of z - the affirmation that Calvin believes it and y - the scripture must be read in this light. Thus, y = z = x. A vicious circle in which the theological affirmation is begun with rather than arrived at. Thus, an adherant to Reformed Theology becomes overly concerned with epistemological affirmation so much so that salvation becomes "What I believe" and all other aspects of faith fall out of the window.

Am I being harsh? I don't think so. How about the claim that, methodologically, Reformed theology falls into a rut? Well, I think this becomes self-evident. Say that someone affirming to be Reformed comes up with a different stance on a certain theological principle than his Reformed predecessors? Is he still Reformed? No... Because the important thing for the Reformed Theologian is that he affirms those principles of the Reformed Tradition. Ultimately then, the Reformed Church can never reform because, to reform is to transgress the epistemological affirmations of the Reformed Church and, thus, to cease to be Reformed. The Reformed Church has so moved on from the theological method of the Reformed fathers that it has supressed itself into a corner.

It is for this reason that I am happy to move on from calling myself Reformed in the sense of the term described above. However, this neglect is merely linguistic or grammatical. I still appreciate much of what Calvin wrote and moreso his theological method. I will still plumb the depths of Owen and Edwards and Bucer and Luther and Martyr Vermigli and the others and still learn from their greatness. But I have come to the conclusion that what has become Reformed Theology would make the Reformers turn in their graves and cannot be ultimately helpful.

Labels:

|

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Nothing really matters now you're gone...

I have been absent a lot recently - number of reasons:

1 - new car to work on

2 - People are still wanting photos from Asda

3 - I've not had much time to read stuff

4 - therefore, nothing too interesting to say

5 - I was laid low by some dread tonsillitis (man flu according to my mum)

6 - the golf was on - it was so exciting. I hope you all got to enjoy some of the action over the last weekend

In my absence I have been awarded my first blogging award... I'm sure it was meant as a compliment. Indeed, I took it that way. However, I feel a little guilty for the hint that I should post more - well... more often than George Bush has a tube stuck up his rear end or so the analogy went...

Labels: , , , ,

|

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

I don't know what meme means...

But there is a quite good one on the go at Ben Myers blog here.

Here's my offering - I confess:

1 - that the more I study theology, the more I'm convinced I shouldn't study theology.

2 - that I think Reformed Theology is dying out and yet I'm not sure I'm that sad about it.

3 - that, although I love Calvin, I usually give up in Book IV of the Institutes because it's boring.

4 - I wrote an essay citing Eberhard Jungel last semester even though I didn't have a monkeys about what Jungel said on the subject.

5 - I'd probably rather go out on a golf course than attend a theological conference at a top university.

6 - that I heard NT Wright give a lecture last semester and I thought he was a little pathetic.

7 - that I used a urinal next to Alvin Plantinga once.

8 - that I believe all theologians should seek to emmulate Dr House in their approach to theological method (well... mutatis mutandis).

9 - that I'm running out of clever aphorisms.

10 - that I don't understand how academics believe in revelation because the whole premiss of academia is that the cleverest know more wheras theology suggests otherwise.

Labels: ,

|

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Northern Lights...

I read a book this week that more than 20 people have read before. I say this because the more I read, the less people seem to care about the books I read! Anyway, I pulled Northern Lights by Philip Pullman off the shelf without really knowing much to read about it other than the fact that it is probably in the list of banned books which the Vatican mark as 'off limits', etc. To be honest with you, I'm not altogether certain myself what category or genre to place it in myself. It's not quite deserving of the kind of accolade deserved by such cultural warnings as "1984", "Catch-22" or "Fahrenheit 451" (or indeed any other book with a digit in the title). But then again, is it a children's book. I'm glad I'm not a kid any more (well...) if that is the case. What is it?

Tell you what... Can I be brutally honest. I thought it was terrible. Want to know why? It's not because I felt that I disagreed with the message Pullman was attempting (I say attempting because I'm not sure if he knew what it was he was trying to attempt), it was because it was a BAD story. I got bored. That is THE worst account of any novel. Who cares if it spews forth hatred - I can bypass that quite easily - I don't equate what I read by someone else as my own - when I read a book, I want to be gripped, and gripped I was not (so much so that I had to bring myself to read the final few pages of the book after I put it down for some menial task). It's trash.

Philip Pullman is an Oxford graduate. But the fact of the matter is, clever men don't, as a logical inference, write good childrens' books - cf. Richard Bauckham. The storyline was boring in Northern Lights because there was some tedious inevitability about the whole proceding. Lyra is in trouble - rescued by some other implausible plotline. Message to Pullman - storylines need some kind of plausibility or the audience loses faith. You suspend your disbelief sure, but after a while you lose faith with the author and get annoyed that you know all will be well. I think a good story should follow the pattern of St Tom's primary and secondary causality - you know the characters will be alright but you're not sure how this will pan out. Pullman abuses this aspect so much that primary causality wins out.

As for the critique of the church or religion or Christianity or whatever it was - good authors tend to hide their messages within the text. Pullman is not even that nuanced - the Church is... oh... the Church... even the 'clever' little nomenclature - Dust - was explained as original sin. The daemons are called souls at some points. By the end of the book I felt he should have called the book "Why I am an Angry Old Man Who Can't Get Over his Problem". Maybe I'm being harsh - I don't think so. You know what - he's no Tolkien or Lewis and here is why. Thier messages lie beneath the text so cunningly that you might suspect that they weren't there. Pullman is so outraged by his underlying theme he keeps giving the game away. Tolkien loved the narrative element of LOTR - Lewis could be mistaken for writing kiddies books. Pullman, however, will never be remembered as more than a man who was annoyed by something and so wrote a story around it.

Labels: , , , ,

|

Friday, June 08, 2007

Me and Links...

"What am I up to over the long, summer months?" I hear you ask. "Tell us Jon so that we may know more of how you live; a veritable intellectual hermit in the land of scholastic aridity!"

Well... Not a lot is the answer. I began work yesterday back at ASDA Crewe Photocentre - I did an evening shift (6-10) for the first time and, after I had done all the photos that needed doing, I got to read some of Steve Holmes article on Divine Simplicity so it was fairly good - getting paid to read academic articles - now there's a first (no pun intended). Other than that, reading, mainly Jungel although I read "Northern Lights" (of which a post soon methinks) and I'm working my way through Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy. I've signed up to a local gym in a bid to finally hone my body into some more herculean form ("Can you?" you ask) although I've found the rowing machine a good way of keeping the cardio-vascular in tip-top condish. I've been watching my way through Jeeves and Wooster too - the Fry and Laurie series. Amazing - it makes me in someway proud of my British heritage and anyone wanting an adaquate understanding of the way we Brits are now should seek to learn how we were then as an explanation. I've decided Hugh Laurie is a genius and I'm downloading the first series of House to "give it a go". Golf hasn't been as forthcoming as I'd hoped because it costs money which I don't have so I may have to wait for my first paycheck for that. But on the whole, I'm keeping myself busy.

Everyone else posts links - why shouldn't I?

Alastair begins his guest posting series on the doctrine of atonement with an offering from Mark Jones on the Reformed History of the Doctrine of Atonement

Alan finally links to my blog... No doubt he deemed it 'orthodox' after squaring it up with this...

Caleb has moved to a new blogspot - here...

Some guy has been writing nasty things about Jim West - read the slurs to his good name here...

Alan asked me if I mentioned Barth in EVERY essay I wrote (which I thought was harsh because he's only read one of my essays and it's NOT true) - for those of you who want to know more about Barth, WTM has compiled a wonderful post about reading Barth

On the subject of Barth, Theo Hawksley wins an automatic promotion for sainthood after making me this wonderful Karl Barth sock puppet...


She wrote: "It's probably best if you're not seen talking to him - at least not on a regular basis, or not until you can blame it on the stress of dissertation..." Ooops... too late...

Watch out for Michael Jensen... He's a testament to the old addage - "Just because your daddy is a bigwig in Australia - doesn't mean you don't end up killing babies..."

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

|

Wednesday, June 06, 2007

Calvin for Armchair Theologians...

WTM reviews ‘Calvin for Armchair Theologians’ by Christopher Elwood and writes:

This book pleasantly surprised me. I did not expect to find within it such a well-balanced and thorough introduction to Calvin. But, I now believe that there is no better book to recommend to the non-academic as an introduction to Calvin’s life and work.

Read the rest of the review here...

Labels: , ,

|

1689 and all that...

For those (hundreds...) of you who are interested, my article on the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith can be read here... Just remember I have full copyright for this article and, should you be fool-hardy enough to try to pass it off as your own, I will hunt you down with a copy of the Summae Theologicae (the 60 vol. Latin-English) and, thus, Thomas will come down so hard on your head you will never rise again...

Labels: , , ,

|

Monday, June 04, 2007

The Possibilities of Theology - Exploring Eberhard Jüngel

This is a series being hosted over at my other blog (the boring one...) on the theology of Eberhard Jüngel. I'll be trying to post a number of items which explore his theology from the eponymous book which is edited by John Webster. These are the posts:

§1 The Being and Attributes of God. Eberhard Jüngel's dispute with the Classical Philosophical Tradition

Labels: ,

|

Saturday, June 02, 2007

In which Barth’s Göttingen Dogmatics are discussed and Ben Myers begins a rumour that Karl Barth is NOT dead...

Over at Jim West's Blog, Jim discusses the (im...) possible release of the second volume of Barth’s Göttingen Dogmatics by Eerdmans next month. However, if you read the comments carefully, Ben Myers errs on the side of caution because it's probable that Karl Barth hasn't even started writing the volume yet... (although he has written it in German... I don't know... ask him).

Labels: , , ,

|

Book to Good Home...

I went to Hay on Wye yesterday - the Jewel of Britain I like to think of it as. Anyway, I managed to pick up a cheap copy of Polanyi's work Personal Knowledge of which I already have a copy. So if anyone can promise that they will make good use of it, I'll send it to you free of charge. Just let me know...

Labels: ,

|

A New Book...

Arrived through the post today. Nice and shiny and new. It's called The Possibilities of Theology: Studies in the Theology of Eberhard Jüngel and it's basically a compilation of essays edited by (who else but) John Webster. There are about 9 essays in the book and so I intend to work through the book and then offer a response to each chapter where I seek to interact with the argument of each author respectively. However, before you sigh to yourselves and make mental notes to avoid this site for the next few days, I'll post them up on Bazaar and link across to them from one post here.

Labels: ,

|

Thursday, May 31, 2007

Human Nature...

I've just watched over the latest Dr Who offering (I missed it last Saturday) and, my goodness, what an episode it is. As a theologian, anything with the title Human Nature is going to be good and this did not prove otherwise. Imagine this - you have a Time Lord being chased by some bad aliens - the only way he can escape is by emptying himself of his "Time Lord-ness" (oh look at me... all Karl Barth and inventing new words...) and becoming human... The theological links are tangible.

The themes being bandied around Dr Who at the moment are wonderful - cf. my reference to Caleb's blog where he talks about the episode "Gridlock". I think the potential for sci-fi to raise theological (and, more broadly, philosophical) questions is phenomenal. Maybe we are in a postmodern society - the era of the superhero - the era of the story-teller...

Perhaps...

Labels: , , , ,

|

A Little Treat for You...

A number of you have been asking me to upload my Karl Barth dance remix and so I thought I would comply. However, I've gone one better. I made a little video to go with it and uploaded it onto youtube. So help yourselves to The Barthman's Deck-laration. Enjoy!

Labels: ,

|

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

Poems...

There is a strange propensity for theologians to suppose they are able poets (I include myself in this indictment). Check out DW Congdon's blog where a poetry extravaganza is unfolding before our eyes!

Labels: ,

|

Monday, May 28, 2007

Academic Journal...

I had my first article accepted by an academic journal. Admittedly, it is an essay on the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith and it was accepted by the Baptist Quarterly so not TOO impressive. But still - I was introduced to the whole world of academic editing - what a tedious process. 5 hours and 900 words less and I'm not sure the paper is any the better for it. If anyone cares, I might post a PDF of the final article on here later.

Labels: , ,

|

Sunday, May 27, 2007

Whitsun Weddings...

I don't often do this. Two things actually... 1 - post a poem or 2 - observe a date in the Christian liturgical calender. But there is a gamut of BAD poems on peoples' blogs and so I thought I would post a GOOD one. As it is Whit Sunday, what better time to post a poem from Philip Larkin's magnum opus the Whitsun Weddings. This poem is the eponymous poem - "The Whitsun Weddings". I thought of cutting it down but it just has to be appreciated. This is poetry:

That Whitsun, I was late getting away:
Not till about
One-twenty on the sunlit Saturday
Did my three-quarters-empty train pull out,
All windows down, all cushions hot, all sense
Of being in a hurry gone. We ran
Behind the backs of houses, crossed a street
Of blinding windscreens, smelt the fish-dock; thence
The river's level drifting breadth began,
Where sky and Lincolnshire and water meet.

All afternoon, through the tall heat that slept
For miles island,
A slow and stopping curve southwards we kept.
Wide farms went by, short-shadowed cattle, and
Canals with floatings of industrial froth;
A hothouse flashed uniquely: hedges dipped
And rose: and now and then a smell of grass
Displace the reek of buttoned carriage-cloth
Until the next town, new and nondescript,
Approached with acres of dismantled cars.

At first, I didn't notice what a noise
The weddings made
Each station that we stopped at: sun destroys
The interest of what's happening in the shade,
And down the long cool platforms whoops and skirls
I took for porters larking with the mails,
And went on reading. Once we started, though,
We passed them, grinning and pomaded, girls
In parodies of fashion, heels and veils,
All posed irresolutely, watching us go,

As if out on the end of an event
Waving goodbye
To something that survived it. Struck, I leant
More promptly out next time, more curiously,
And saw it all again in different terms:
The fathers with broad belts under their suits
And seamy foreheads; mothers loud and fat;
An uncle shouting smut; and then the perms,
The nylon gloves and jewelry-substitutes,
The lemons, mauves, and olive-ochers that

Marked off the girls unreally from the rest.
Yes, from cafes
And banquet-halls up yards, and bunting-dressed
Coach-party annexes, the wedding-days
Were coming to an end. All down the line
Fresh couples climbed abroad: the rest stood round;
The last confetti and advice were thrown,
And, as we moved, each face seemed to define
Just what it saw departing: children frowned
At something dull; fathers had never known

Success so huge and wholly farcical;
The women shared
The secret like a happy funeral;
While girls, gripping their handbags tighter, stared
At a religious wounding. Free at last,
And loaded with the sum of all they saw,
We hurried towards London, shuffling gouts of steam.
Now fields were building-plots. and poplars cast
Long shadows over major roads, and for
Some fifty minutes, that in time would seem

Just long enough to settle hats and say
I nearly died,
A dozen marriages got under way.
They watched the landscape, sitting side by side
-An Odeon went past, a cooling tower,
And someone running up to bowl -and none
Thought of the others they would never meet
Or how their lives would all contain this hour.
I thought of London spread out in the sun,
Its postal districts packed like squares of wheat:

There we were aimed. And as we raced across
Bright knots of rail
Past standing Pullmans, walls of blackened moss
Came close, and it was nearly done, this frail
Traveling coincidence; and what it held
Stood ready to be loosed with all the power
That being changed can give. We slowed again,
And as the tightened brakes took hold, there swelled
A sense of falling, like an arrow-shower
Sent out of sight, somewhere becoming rain.

Labels: , ,

|

Friday, May 25, 2007

Logos Bible Software...

I've been contacted by the staff of Logos Bible Software to let me know that they're just about to publish an electronic edition Barth’s Barth's Church Dogmatics. You can visit its Pre-Pub product page here. The Logos edition will be fully searchable, and all references and footnotes will operate as hotspots, immediately presenting the cited information whenever the cursor rolls over them. All this and more make this esteemed work even more useful for study.

Labels: ,

|

Thursday, May 24, 2007

The Bruised Reed...

I've just noticed that my friend Rich has a new blog... I'll change the sidebar accordingly

Labels:

|

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

You know what word I hate?

Heresy... You know why? Because I've never used a word SO misused in my entire life... Apart from maybe the word literally...

Anyway, I was reading a few blogs around and I found a couple of good posts HERE and HERE on heresy.

Here's a quote from one:

"I'm just gonna go public with this, but I'm sorry, all this "you're a heretic, no you're a heretic" junk that is being thrown around by Pipa on Wilkins, Robbins on Wilson, Wilson on Robbins n' crew, Robbin's on Shephard, Beisner on Shephard, Van Tillians on Clarkians, heck, the list goes on and on and on, and it's downright lame.

I'm sorry, but has everyone forgotten that a heresy is violating one of the ecumenical creeds (and NO, the Westminster Confession is NOT an ecumenical creed)??

It really bothers me. All these learned men get a little following and the next thing you know they're all role-playing as Martin Lurther, nailing their 95 thesis that don't matter on a door that nobody cares about, thinking they've just defended the Church from some great evil. I mean geez, pull your head out of your posterior. And no, saying "well they should care" is simply weak and indicates an unwillingness to come to grips with the utterly insignificant role we play in the grand scheme of things."

I agree - we protestants have no right to use the word heretic the way we do. It's both wrong and unhelpful. That doesn't mean I'm advocating people who disagree with me. I'm just admitting that, on occaision, I have been known to be wrong. I wish the Reformed Church could admit the same...

Labels:

|

Website designed by Peter Roberts