Decided to read this after watching the Leonardo DiCaprio movie (2013) in May 2014.
Nick Carraway describes Gatsby as someone who had a "Platonic conce...moreDecided to read this after watching the Leonardo DiCaprio movie (2013) in May 2014.
Nick Carraway describes Gatsby as someone who had a "Platonic conception of himself" (beginning of chapter 6). There's an ideal that Gatsby shoots for, and unfortunately he is unable to actualize his conception. The advertisement of the eyes of Doctor T.J. Eckleburg are kind of disturbing, especially when George Wilson talks as if they're the eyes of God (end of chapter 8). The concluding sentence is classic: "So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past." Gatsby frequently talked of repeating the past.
I own a different copy than the one I listened to on CD.(less)
At times, the philosophical jargon exceeded my ability to understand, but overall it was a very helpful discussion. It did seem that the participants...moreAt times, the philosophical jargon exceeded my ability to understand, but overall it was a very helpful discussion. It did seem that the participants were talking past each other; one recurring example is when the Arminians insisted that even a soft determinism mutually excluded any meaningful/significant freedom of agents.
John Feinberg (who argues that "God ordains all things" position) was the most philosophically careful/precise. I agree with Feinberg more than with any of the other contributors, and I'd like to read his argument again.
Pages 10-14 outline the four positions. Each contributor writes about 20 pages, and then the other three respond in about 3-5 pages. Each participant seems to have a high view of Scripture, so as much as they disagree with each other, there seems to be a certain amount of trust between them, since at least they're all trying to be faithful to the text.
John Feinberg (God ordains all things): 24: comapatibilism / soft determinism (causal determinism, but non-constraining sufficient conditions) 27: contra-causal sense of "can" (Feinberg disagrees with this) 33-34: middle knowledge and counterfactuals 34-35: without some form of determinism, there's no predictive prophecy, no inspiration, and no eternal security (Pinnock admits most of this) 35-36: Feinberg relies a lot on Jonathan Edwards's Freedom of the Will 36: indeterminism has problems with moral responsibility too (according to Edwards, people make choices based on their strongest desires; but choosing according to desires is a form of causality, and contra-causal freedom denies that there are any sufficient causes for human decision-making; if there's no sufficient cause for our choices, then our choices are random/arbitrary, and we're not morally responsible for our actions)
Norman Geisler (God knows all things): 68-69: Geisler resists "strong Calvinists" (66), who believe in irresistible grace 70-71: God's foreknowledge is simultaneous with His forechoosing
Bruce Reichenbach (God limits his power): 106: God is not a divine novelist (111 too) 117: God works through persuasion; His plans/purposes are sometimes thwarted 116 (and n9): God doesn't want to disrupt the "natural order" 118: somehow God can guarantee His ultimate purposes (Feinberg questions how) 138 (Pinnock's response): consistent Arminians can't affirm God's omniscience or omnipotence 139 (Pinnock's response): Pinnock actually calls his own unorthodox position "faintly heretical," because it's out of the mainstream
Clark Pinnock (God limits his knowledge): 144: admits to being an open theist 147: he's sympathetic to parts of process theology, but unsympathetic to other parts (see n6) 155-56: Pinnock rejects, in some sense, God's immutability, impassibility, timelessness, and omniscience 156-57: for Pinnock, foreknowledge eliminates freedom (the future must be open and not closed/fixed) 158: "We need to read the Bible more literally" 158: God can bend things toward His ultimate objectives without violating its own integrity (a quote that he affirms) 165 (Feinberg's response): Scripture never says that God limits His power 166 (Feinberg's response): with contra-causal freedom, there's no way for God to guarantee His general or specific/ultimate plans/objectives 166-68 (Feinberg's response): Feinberg answers Pinnock's denial of God's foreknowledge (in connection to predictive prophecy)(less)
There's an irony in books titled "X needs no justification" that then proceed to justify X. But Rookmaaker's point is that Art has not always been in...moreThere's an irony in books titled "X needs no justification" that then proceed to justify X. But Rookmaaker's point is that Art has not always been in the hands of the elite geniuses. In fact, it wasn't until the 18th century that arts and crafts became distinguishable. (Jerram Barrs mentions 4 consequences of separating "arts" and "crafts" in Echoes of Eden, pp. 34-36.) Art is an expression of creativity, and as a means of exercising mastery over God's creation, it needs no more justification than medical work.
Blog post here. The book covers history up to about 1971, although Hendrik died in 1944 (relatives updated it).
moderation: 58-60, 64, 68, 69 75: Persia...moreBlog post here. The book covers history up to about 1971, although Hendrik died in 1944 (relatives updated it).
moderation: 58-60, 64, 68, 69 75: Persian messengers thrown int oa Greek well for "earth and water" 96: res publica = commonwealth 103: Hannibal poisoned himself 113: Mithridates poisoned himself 113: Catiline/Cicero 123/131: social gospel 163: Iskander = Alexander the Great 184-90: popular sovereignty 201: Medici = medics 208: republic of letters; Erasmus 210: Abelard 211: Dante 213: Petrarch 217: Savonarola 219: Thomas a Kempis and Brethren of the Common Life 220: Huss and Wycliffe 223: printers (Gutenberg, Aldus, Etienne, Froben) 251/255: Reformation 256: Erasmus 262: religious warfare 264: Calvin and Servetus 272: Grotius vs. John Selden 279: English revolution 294: Sophie --> George I 483: author changes 556: odd view of the creation mandate(less)