[CS-FSLUG] TD: Any Theology recomendations?

[Timothy Butler]

>
> I took the Dogmatics in outline back to the bookloft and ordered it  
> on amazon.
> I haven't been able to start reading systematic theology yet. I've  
> spent the

	Always good to save a few bucks! I think you'll like it. Barth, I  
suspect, will be one of maybe two or three twentieth century  
theologians we still read in another 100-200 years. His impact was  
absolutely huge and his mind amazing. His master work, "Church  
Dogmatics" spans 13 volumes and was incomplete upon his death. It has  
an unparalleled (in my estimation) richness, with vast amounts of  
cross references with other theologians, philosophers and important  
figures. But, despite his intellectual prowess, which in Church  
Dogmatics can be daunting, he never forgot his primary call as a  
pastor. His writings are ultimately pastoral.

	Many who disagree with his theology still praise him most notably for  
his work against the Nazi regime and that does add a very important  
dimension to his efforts. Barth was wise to see what was happening,  
primarily because he had learned the lesson well from the Great War.  
An optimistic liberal theologian prior to and during the war, the  
horror of WWI shattered his reality and threw him back to Scripture,  
to Romans in particular, much like Luther centuries before. He said he  
was like a person in a bell tower reaching for the wall to steady  
himself only to grab onto the bell. And, today, we live in the world  
that hear that bell.

	Barth is a moderate, which is part of what makes him so interesting.  
He is seen as a conservative by liberals and as a liberal by  
conservatives. Ultimately, Barth's theology is a theology very much  
aware that it is dealing with the living, loving, all powerful God and  
not a scientific subject. My signature quote is a good expression of  
that.

	If you are interested in specific topics, you know, you might also  
enjoy Thomas Aquinas. His Summa Theologica is very tightly organized  
under headings, making it easy to find what you want. It's all online  
at New Advent:

	http://www.newadvent.org/summa/


	Perhaps one of the most brilliant minds to ever do theology and  
philosophy, Thomas's theology dominated the medieval church and  
continues to provide a profound impact on Catholic theology. Many  
Reformed Protestants, like myself, are also interested in seeing his  
work be brought into the mainstream of Protestant thought. Not all of  
it is worth keeping, but a great deal of it is.

>
> better part of this week clearing out a room in my house to make  
> room my
> Wife's brother's ex girlfriend and her kids to stay here till she  
> can find
> her a place.

	Sounds complicated.
>
>> But, I think most people would be pleased (and see it great
>> progress) if we reduced abortion to only in cases of "rape, incest,  
>> or
>> physical health danger."
>
> I never thought about rape or incest. I completely overlooked that.

	Indeed. That's one of the sticking points. Most pro-life pushes  
ignore those circumstances, and that ends up getting the attempts to  
restrict abortion thrown out as unconstitutional. I'm not going to  
justify offering abortion exceptions, but I will say this: given  
mostly eliminating it or not eliminating it at all, I'd rather mostly  
eliminate it.
>>
>> 	Indeed. The most troubling part, I think to me, is that those  
>> embryos
>> are typically cloned from various genetic lines (see Somatic Cell
>> Nuclear Transfer or SCNT). But, many babies that are born are from
>> eggs fertilized in the lab as well, it should be noted, so there is
>> still basically an "abortion" that occurs.
>
> This is probably where I'm confused. I'm probably not literate  
> enough about
> the subject to make a decision, which is causing me to not come to a  
> firm
> stance.

	That comes with the changing times. I took college biology late  
enough to get some building blocks on the subject to think about. I  
researched it more afterwards, of course, but all you old guys are so  
old they didn't even have terms for the stuff yet. Too busy avoiding  
dinosaurs and stuff.
>
>>
>> 	Ironically, I supported Clinton both terms.
>
> I voted for Bush Sr. because I was young and didn't know much. Then  
> I voted
> for Clintion his 2nd term. Kerry was too far left for me, but I took  
> my
> chances with him because all I could think about in that election  
> was  "Like
> Father, Like Son", and my own personal thought was " I do read  
> lips!" LOL

	In hindsight I think you might have been right. No. 41 was a  
president who ended up losing because of forces largely outside his  
control (e.g. the economy). Much the same sort of thing that kept John  
McCain from being No. 44, alas. I think many of us saw that we were  
headed down the same road as '92 as this election season marched on.

	My hope for Obama is that he is at least as good of leader as  
President Clinton. Despite the Clinton era's excesses, it was a pretty  
good time period. I actually prefer Dubya over his predecessor, but  
neither was bad.

	-Tim


---
Timothy R. Butler | "The theologian who labors without joy is not a
Editor, OfB.biz   | theologian at all. Sulky faces, morose thoughts
tbutler at ofb.biz   | and boring ways of  speaking are intolerable in
timothybutler.us  | this field."
                                                       -- Karl Barth