I think I understood 10% of the book, but I hope it was the right 10%. Using Abraham as the father of faith, and his test with the sacrifice of his b...moreI think I understood 10% of the book, but I hope it was the right 10%. Using Abraham as the father of faith, and his test with the sacrifice of his beloved son Isaac, Kierkegaard describes faith in the face of the absurd. Kierkegaard will not let the reader of this text (Gen 22) off the hook, demonstrating the absurdity of what God asked him to do. There is nothing in our universal ethical norms that would justify it. Faith, however, he argues transcends the ethical. The man or woman of faith is brought into an existential relationship with God. Faith cannot rest in the rational or the ethical. It is, rather, a radical trust. It cannot be understood from the outside. In the moment, it can hardly be admired. (less)
This is a good book to read if you want an introduction to some of the historical and rational claims of Christianity. Kreeft addresses many of the h...moreThis is a good book to read if you want an introduction to some of the historical and rational claims of Christianity. Kreeft addresses many of the historical and philosophical challenges to Christianity through a fictional dialogue that takes place when the ancient philosopher, Socrates, wakes up on the campus of a modern, liberal divinity school. As the pre-Christian philosopher attends courses such as comparative religions and Christology, he uses his "Socratic Method" to challenge the beliefs and assumptions of modern scholarship. The fictional conversations make this an easy and engaging read unlike others that may handle the same questions more technically.
I would recommend this book for any Christian, interested seeker, or skeptic wanting an engaging and interesting introduction the basic issues concerning the validity of the Christian faith.(less)
This book is the collection of email correspondence between James Sire (Christian) and Carl Peraino (Atheist) on the worldviews that divide them. As ...moreThis book is the collection of email correspondence between James Sire (Christian) and Carl Peraino (Atheist) on the worldviews that divide them. As such, it is easy and informal reading for the most part. You do not get the highly technical and nuanced argumentation for either side that you might expect if you were reading a monograph. However, you do get the reasons for belief and unbelief from two capable minds. I think this is a great book to go through with somebody, using it as a springboard for good conversation.(less)
This work contains (divided into three parts) Barth’s lectures on the relationship of the Holy Spirit to the Christian life. He does this under the f...moreThis work contains (divided into three parts) Barth’s lectures on the relationship of the Holy Spirit to the Christian life. He does this under the framework of Holy Spirit as Creator, Reconciler, and Redeemer. Under Holy Spirit as Creator his main thesis is that the image of God is the free work of God upon man through the Holy Spirit, and thus is not the possession of man apart from the creative act of God. The Christian Life is that life, which occurs after God’ s word has been revealed to man by the Holy Spirit.
Under Holy Spirit as Reconciler, his thesis is that the Holy Spirit strives against the spirit of man as the spirit of grace. Sin is man’s attempt to justify himself by works; that is, that man rejects God’s lordship and lives independent of faith. The Christian Life is man’s life in the Holy Spirit.
Under Holy Spirit as Redeemer, his thesis is that the Holy Spirit is present for man as the spirit of promise. The Holy Spirit reveals man’s finality and futurity—new creation. Thus, the Christian life is a life of Hope begotten by the Holy Spirit.
His definition of sin is a great one: “And this is our rebellion: the fact that we want everything, all that is noble, helpful, and good, if so it must be; but not this thing, namely to allow ourselves to be made open, prepared and made fit for God by God. Grace is God’s sovereign realm. But our enmity toward God—which is to be seen in our hearty goodwill toward any self-discovered theory about God, or toward this or that religious, ethical view of the universe that is not excluded—the evil that we do: this precisely is our hostility toward Grace. Put in Luther’s vigorous speech, it is our enmity toward “him!”, “the passion against deity” (concupiscentia divinitatis), “we cannot abide diety.” (pp. 19-20)(less)
Good introduction to the cohesive story of Scripture. If you struggle with how the whole thing fits together, this is a really good read. If you hav...moreGood introduction to the cohesive story of Scripture. If you struggle with how the whole thing fits together, this is a really good read. If you have already been introduced, and are looking for some deeper insights, it might not be as revolutionary. But it is still a solid book.
Wright begins with Revelation and the scene in chapter 7 when men and women from every tribe, tongue, and nation cry out, "Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb." Treating this as the consummation of one central story, he works backward to demonstrate how the who Scripture from Genesis 1 are working toward that still future reality.(less)
Again, never disappointed. He has been called "The Apostle of Common Sense" and "The Prince of Paradox" - and rightfully so. Wha...moreAgain, never disappointed. He has been called "The Apostle of Common Sense" and "The Prince of Paradox" - and rightfully so. What may be maddening for some is that Chesterton does not give a straightforward argument from science or reason. His style is the argument from fairy tales. He draws on things that ring true and smell right.
In this book, he takes on the problems with liberalism and conservatism. Essentially, he argues the problem with both of them is that they lack an "ideal." Without an ideal there is nothing to progress towards, and neither is there anything to conserve.
In the scope of this book, Chesterton takes the ideal of the happy and healthy family, and demonstrates how the collectivism of the liberals and the oppression of the conservatives both work against and undermine the sustainability of the family. But if I continue to try and describe his argument, I will fail miserably because I will describe it with such inferiority that you will lose your motivation to actually read him.
I will only attempt to describe for what he is arguing. It is distributionism. Unlike socialists, he believes in property. He believes in each family working, possessing, and caring their own family and their own property. Unlike the so-called "Capitalists" - and I say so-called because he argues that they are actually the enemies of capitalism - he believes in the distribution of wealth (not state ownership but that each person would be given land and a house to own). He argues that there is no other way to make progress toward this ideal than to redistribute wealth because the poor families will not be able to attain to the ideal under the current inequalities of wealth.
The book is written in 1910 but is still very relevant for today. However, you quickly notice that he lives on the other side of such movements as woman's suffrage and politically correctness. So, you may find a few things uncomfortable, but you need to take him in his context.(less)
I was motivated to read this book after listening to a disturbing interview on the ethics of human enhancement from an Oxford Philosopher (Download at...moreI was motivated to read this book after listening to a disturbing interview on the ethics of human enhancement from an Oxford Philosopher (Download at iTunes U - http://deimos3.apple.com/WebObjects/Core... ). I was disturbed not only by the reasoning of this philosopher but by what kind of things are already being done in genetic engineering, cloning, performance enhancement, etc.
This book is a cautionary tale set in the late 19th and early 20th Century debates over vivisection, addressing the dangers of unbridled scientific curiosity. Wells is considered on of the fathers of Science Fiction. It is an OK story, but I am no literary critic. Chapter 14, however, is a very interesting explanation of Moreau's philosophy and ethic. What is pictured is an ambitious scientist, who has rationalized in his mind all kinds deplorable procedures in the name of scientific progress. Pain, evolution, and human nature are all touched upon. Also, touched on is a rather evolutionary view of religion and ethics, as the animal creatures were indoctrinated with what is referred to as "The Law", which was instated as a way of suppressing and controlling the primal animal instincts.
(I listened to an audiobook from Librivox.org. There were several different volunteer readers. Some were definitely better than others, so consider yourself warned.)(less)
Probably a book that I should have read in high school, but I wasn't much of a reader then. I am still not a huge science fiction guy, but I do find ...moreProbably a book that I should have read in high school, but I wasn't much of a reader then. I am still not a huge science fiction guy, but I do find the ethical problems they raise very interesting. In the Invisible Man, the problem of man's moral nature is explored. Griffin, a brilliant physicist, discovers the secret to invisibility. With great expectations of what he can do with this - as he says, "An invisible man is very powerful" - Griffin discovers there are many problems that face a person who is invisible. His ambition and selfishness send him spiraling into great paranoia and violence.
The story is OK. I was hoping for more, but I am intrigued with the moral questions raised. What if you were invisible? What would you do? If and when we are asked this, to a person, we conjure up devious and mostly illegal ideas. Has anyone ever answered this with acts of charity or altruism? Take away the threat of exposure and judgment, and we run head first into selfish, illegal, and lustful activity. And yet we are not willing to admit the essentially sinful nature of mankind. We are not willing to admit our own sinful nature. We are like the landlord who closes the story reading the invisible man's journals dreaming of what he would do if he could unlock their secrets. “I wouldn’t do what he did; I’d just—well!”
(I listened to the Librivox.org recording. I love listening to English lit. with British accents.)(less)
Dostoyevsky attacks what he saw as "imported" Enlightenment philosophy threatening Russian culture by illustrating an individual who lived i...moreDostoyevsky attacks what he saw as "imported" Enlightenment philosophy threatening Russian culture by illustrating an individual who lived it out to the full. The picture is an isolated individual who is at war with himself and at war with everyone around him. He is a man who lives in a world of ideas unable to really "live life". (less)
This is a play by the literary giant George Bernard Shaw. Shaw was of course a advocate of liberal and socialist thought. He was also a good friend ...moreThis is a play by the literary giant George Bernard Shaw. Shaw was of course a advocate of liberal and socialist thought. He was also a good friend and sparring partner with one of my favorites, G.K. Chesterton. This play is about a doctor who has recently been knighted for his development of a cure of Tuberculosis. He has only enough time and resources to take on one more patient, and he is faced with the decision to cure a good but poor medical colleague or a talented artist who is a bit of a con-artist.
The play is comic and demonstrates his humor (or humour since he's British) and wit, but touches on very serious themes of morality, medical ethics, and socialized health care. Basically, what is pictured in this play are doctor's who are driven, not by patient care but by self-interest and profitability. Thus, it is a kind of indictment against capitalistic health-care systems. And for that reason, it feels as if it is as relevant today as it was originally in 1906.
I think you will enjoy it, even if ultimately you don't subscribe to its worldview.
(I listed to this as an audiobook performed by the L.A. Theater Co. I recommend it.)(less)
This is Wright's third of what will be 5 (at least for now) volumes in his "Christian Origins and the Question of God" series. When I see t...moreThis is Wright's third of what will be 5 (at least for now) volumes in his "Christian Origins and the Question of God" series. When I see the size of these things, I get an overwhelming sense of stupidity and laziness. I don't think I can even thoughtfully read as much as he has written.
This volume tackles the doctrine of resurrection, and does so extensively. Wright analyzes the Christian belief about resurrection in the context of ancient Pagan and Jewish beliefs, and he attacks the notion that resurrection is equal to life after death. As he demonstrates, "resurrection is the life after life after death." It is the belief that the dead would be raised bodily - though transformed - from the dead. This life is continuous with but a transformed condition of our present bodily existence. He also shows that the early Christian belief was central to the early Christian faith, and was based on their belief that Jesus had himself been raised from the dead. He shows how the Christian belief in resurrection is continuous with the Jewish beliefs of the second Temple period, but were radically redefined. This continuity and discontinuity he claims is best explained by their belief that he was indeed raised and that their belief that he was raised is best explained by the possibility that he actually was.
This resurrection is the only way to explain how they maintained a belief in him as the Jewish Messiah in the face of his crucifixion and as the world's one true Lord. (less)
I am sucker for letters as a genre in the first place, but I am especially intrigued by war time letters. War will always be controversial. Even whe...moreI am sucker for letters as a genre in the first place, but I am especially intrigued by war time letters. War will always be controversial. Even when two people believe war justifiable, there is still the question over whether a given war fits into that category. War and its various aspects can easily be studied and analyzed with a certain amount of detachment, but letters touch on the humanity, heroism, and tragedy of war in a way that no philosophical or historical study can. This is a great collection of letters stretching from the American Revolution to the present-day conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq.
(I listened to this as an audiobook and recommend it!)(less)
This is one of George Bernard Shaw's most celebrated plays. This play earned him both a Nobel Prize and an Oscar. It was also adapted into the film ...moreThis is one of George Bernard Shaw's most celebrated plays. This play earned him both a Nobel Prize and an Oscar. It was also adapted into the film "My Fair Lady." It is funny, but cuts at a serious theme, conflict between the classes. This is perhaps why Shaw was so effective; he was able to use satire to make serious ideas palatable. Ultimately an attack on social morality and the advocation for socialism are at the center of this play.
I think you will enjoy it and be challenged by it, even if ultimately you reject his worldview.
(I listened to an audiobook performed by the L.A. Theater Co. I recommend it.)(less)
Exegetes and expositors no doubt wish that Lewis would have been a more precise interpreter. Rationalists no doubt wish he would stick with explaining...moreExegetes and expositors no doubt wish that Lewis would have been a more precise interpreter. Rationalists no doubt wish he would stick with explaining what is real. But I think Lewis' brilliance is his ability to use fantasy and mythology to speak of things more real than could properly be exposited or explained.
To read this book for facts about heaven and hell would be a mistake. To read this as an exposition of the afterlife, I think, would be a mistake. This book, I believe, is an exposition of the great truth: "He who loses his life, finds it." Lewis is illustrating real life, real love, and real happiness. And the key is "self-forgetfulness." Everyone who fails to enter heaven is the one who cannot help but be consumed with themselves - their ambition, their suffering, their rights, and so on. Everyone who enters, who becomes more real and experiences life more real than they could imagine, are those who come into the light to have their shame painfully exposed and lose themselves in the love for God and others.
Put down your self-help books! Your misery comes not because you have failed to consider yourselves. Your misery is not because you haven't attended properly to your own happiness. Your misery is because you have not lost yourself. You have not yet forgotten yourself.(less)
I have not been disappointed yet with this guy. This is a detective story, but it is actually a series of mysteries rather than one. This one delves...moreI have not been disappointed yet with this guy. This is a detective story, but it is actually a series of mysteries rather than one. This one delves in the corruption of British officials, but reads like it is about contemporary politics in America. The man who knew too much was the man who knew the truth about human nature.
***
In awe of Fisher’s grasp of the facts, one character tells him, “Fisher, I should say that what you don’t know isn’t worth knowing.”
“You are wrong,” replies Fisher with a very unusual abruptness and even bitterness. “It’s what I do know that isn’t worth knowing.” (less)
This book will mess you up, and you will be better for it - at least it should. Bonhoeffer combats what he coins "cheap grace" (i.e., grace...moreThis book will mess you up, and you will be better for it - at least it should. Bonhoeffer combats what he coins "cheap grace" (i.e., grace with no demand, no cost, no cross). He demonstrates that the life of discipleship is the life of crucifixion. But this is not from some pussified metrosexual pastor, wearing his tight button-down, throwing around terms like "imitatio christi." No, this is from a man who did it, who faithfully followed and bore witness to Christ until the end when he was hung naked with thin wire.
....
I just read this quote from the camp doctor who witnessed his death: “I saw Pastor Bonhoeffer ... kneeling on the floor praying fervently to God. I was most deeply moved by the way this lovable man prayed, so devout and so certain that God heard his prayer. At the place of execution, he again said a short prayer and then climbed the few steps to the gallows, brave and composed. His death ensued after a few seconds. In the almost fifty years that I worked as a doctor, I have hardly ever seen a man die so entirely submissive to the will of God.”(less)
Loading...
