existdissolve.com
the singularity of being and nothingness
the singularity of being and nothingness
Jun 17th
As regular readers of this blog are aware, I am no stranger to controversy. Many of the theological stances that I take are, shall we say, out of the mainstream of evangelical thought (although it must be noted that I have been heavily commented elsewhere by those committed to Catholic and Orthodox theology).
The consequence of these stances has been severe criticism from some of my detractors. While most are civil enough to disagree with me strongly, there are others who are quick to call into question my orthodoxy (which, interestingly enough, they do not ever actually show where my theology is astray of ecumenical orthodoxy…), my intentions, and even my salvation.
I have been called a heretic, an apostate, a gnostic, a "sophist," a Romanist, an existentialist, a post-modernist, etc. However, the other day I received probably the biggest "compliment"–a particularly fiery blogger labeled me "No. 1 Pagan."
Most would avoid this label, but I have decided to wear it with pride. To reinforce this, I was recently privileged to be award Deviant Monk's "Notable Pagan" award. DM describes the purpose of the award as follows:
The "Notable Pagan" award is given to those bloggers who are labeled "pagan", "heretic", or "blasphemer" by More >
Jun 17th
When, then, the question is asked what we are to believe in regard to religion, it is not necessary to probe into the nature of things, as was done by those whom the Greeks call physici; nor need we be in alarm lest the Christian should be ignorant of the force and number of the elements,–the motion, and order, and eclipses of the heavenly bodies; the form of the heavens; the species and the natures of animals, plants, stones, fountains, rivers, mountains; about chronology and distances; the signs of coming storms; and a thousand other things which those philosophers either have found out, or think they have found out. For even these men themselves, endowed though they are with so much genius, burning with zeal, abounding in leisure, tracking some things by the aid of human conjecture, searching into others with the aids of history and experience, have not found out all things; and even their boasted discoveries are oftener mere guesses than certain knowledge. It is enough for the Christian to believe that the only cause of all created things, whether heavenly or earthly, whether visible or invisible, is the goodness of the Creator the one true God; and More >
Jun 17th
In the incarnation, the Son of God became one with human beings–with Adam. But only at this moment, when he accomplishes the supreme act of love by descending into the night of death, does he bring the journey of the incarnation to its completion. By his death he now clasps the hand of Adam, of every man and woman who awaits him, and brings them to the light. — Benedict XVI, Easter Vigil 2007
Is the not the resurrection–as the completion and pinnacle of Incarnation–what Easter is all about? In Christ, the uncreated God has become created that the beloved creation might be rescued from its shackles of sinfulness and self-destruction. Though we had, in our lust for violence and false-power, distorted and sought to destroy any remnants of the deity within us, the Creator did not forget us, nor did the love of God leave us to spiral into oblivion and non-being. Rather, in the supreme act of the immance of love, God has come to dwell with us that we–though poor, wretched and full of violence and hate–might be restored in the image of divinity. In the immortal words of the blessed St. Athanasius, the reality of Incarnation is that More >
Jun 17th
The words, "Good Friday" seem like somewhat of a misnomer. What is good, after all, about the brutal execution of Jesus of Nazareth? In a world in which violence dominates all media and suffuses the understanding which we have of our world, how can there be anything "good" about what this day commemorates? Do we really need yet another violent and brutal image to add to our violence-overloaded modern lives?
In a very real sense, there is nothing "good" about this day. This day marks the apex of human sinfulness, when the full fury of humanity's enmity toward God was poured out on Christ. This day reveals the incredible juxtaposition of divine love and human hatred. In the incarnation, God comes to God's people with mercy, forgiveness and salvation, holding out the hope of reconciliation, restoration and recreation.
But this day also reveals the depths of the privation of good to in which humanity perpetually devolves, as its response to the immanence of love divine is brutality and violence infinitized, the virulence of the history of human hatred quantified in the execution of very God.
So then, there is nothing inherently "good" about what happened to Jesus some 2000 years More >
Jun 17th
As anyone who reads this blog with any regularity (in spite of the inexcusable irregularity of my posts..) will know, I love subjects like cosmology, physics, quantum mechanics, etc. While I do not profess to have a working knowledge of any of these subjects (I really, really suck at math–there goes my dream of being a famous quantum physicist), I have read a fair amount of literature concerning them and have spent considerable time contemplating the relationship of discoveries in cosmology and physics to the task and meaning of theology.
This post is not about that kind of contemplation.
Rather, I really just want to talk about the issues that would, in my understanding, make time-travel incredibly difficult to conceive, much less actuate. Random, huh?
The classic conundrum of speculations about time-travel has been exhausted in literature, art, film, music, etc. Probably the most famous example is the movie Back to the Future. In this movie, Marty McFly is hurtled 30 years in the past while attempting to escape from terrorists (perhaps this could be a new Bush Administration policy). While still trying to understand what has occurred, Marty accidentally interferes with the first meeting of his then-teenage parents. Made to More >
Jun 17th
In my previous post, I briefly discussed reasons why Christian theology must necessarily affirm the ontological non-existence of sin. I concluded that if sin is assigned a substantival nature; and if God is to be spoken of as source and sustainer of all that has existence; then one must unavoidably conclude that God has not only willed–per the good pleasure and desire of the divine will–the existence of evil, but has moreover been disingenuous in either calling creation "good", or condemning sin as something damnable and other than good.
As part of this conclusion, I noted that one of the major benefits that can be seen to accrue is that one circumvents, in a philosophically honest manner, the quagmire of the relation of the divinity to sin. As was shown, if sin lacks ontological existence, it is no bit of philosophical gymnastics to affirm that God has not created sin, for how can it be said that God created that which lacks existence? Therefore, by speaking of sin not as a "thing," but rather as privation of good, it is possible to not only deny the primal origin of sin in the Godhead (which is ultimately necessitated if sin has a More >
Jun 17th
This is quite simply the most epic concert poster I have ever seen…thanks Jared!
BTW, I really am playing on March 9th (8:00 pm) at Solomon’s Porch in Wilmore, KY. If you consider me a friend, you will be in attendance. I’m just saying…
Share this:Jun 17th
My thinking has been engaged recently by a series of posts made by mofast entitled "The Myth of the Redemptive Bauer." As fellow blog-o-addicts might be aware, there was previously a series of posts (the origin of which I can no longer remember) that dealt with parallels between Bauer's vigilante-esque justice and the atonement of Christ. In his posts,
Mofast disavows any similarities between the two figures, arguing that the crux of atonement cannot be violence, as if God's response to human sinfulness would proceed along the same lines as the power and destructive quality of humanity's doppleganger nature. Mofast's comments are erudite and prophetic–I would suggest that all check them out.
But anyway, while reflecting upon Mofast's conclusions, as well as upon recent events, I have been compelled to think about the nature of "justice." So here goes.
Justice is an incredibly dense and complicated notion. To utter the word or allude to the idea is to conjure a thousand related issues that come to bear in maddeningly intricate ways upon the final notion of the original concept that is decided upon. In fact, one of the things that convulutes the meaning is the tendency to attempt to reduce the More >
Jun 17th
Well, Ive been back in the blogosphere for about a full month now following my extended leave of absence. Over this month, I have visited a lot of blogs and have had many interesting conversations with individuals of varying theological backgrounds. I would have to say that one of the most disturbing things I have seen is the tremendous ferocity with which many reject ecumenism within Christianity. This experience has corroborated other encounters I have had outside of cyberspace, as well.
To begin, I am not Roman Catholic, nor do I consider myself to be an apologist for Roman Catholocism. I say this because what I am about to say will be a bit harsh toward Protestants (which I am) and Orthodox. While I know that my personal experiences on this issue are not an exhaustive nor completely accurate rendering of all the issues involved, my experience is what I would like to talk about. Since this is my blog, here we go.
Concerning Protestantism, my experience has been that particularly in the non-mainline traditions, there is a deep-seated distrust of Roman Catholicism and a virtual ignorance about the very existence of Eastern Orthodoxy. The vitriol against RCism is, of More >