[CS-FSLUG] TD: Any Theology recomendations?
Timothy Butler
tbutler at ofb.biz
Sat Nov 8 00:51:02 CST 2008
>
> 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
More information about the Christiansource
mailing list