 |
| (Cancun) |
 |
| (Ancient war helmets, Detroit Institute of Art Looks like someone took a spear in the forehead.) |
 |
| (Detroit) |
 |
| (Bolles Harbor, Michigan) |
I have a Bachelor's degree in philosophy (Northern Illinois University), and a PhD in philosophical theology (Northwestern University). I was Adjunct Professor of Philosophy at Monroe County Community College for eighteen years. I have taught courses in theology at several seminaries since 1977. I recently taught, again, at Faith Bible Seminary in NYC, and will teach, again, at Payne Theological Seminary in Wilberforce, Ohio (Feb. 28-March 3).
Philosophers study morality and ethics. Here, e.g., is a book I read last summer on metaethics - The Morality Wars: The Ongoing Debate Over the Origin of Human Goodness. Theologians do the same. Here is a famous book on biblical and theological ethics, which I read several years ago - The Moral Vision of the New Testament: Community, Cross, New Creation, A Contemporary Introduction to New Testament Ethics.
Philosophers and theologians study morality and ethical systems without reference to political outcomes. Then, they often state the implications of certain moral judgments for human existence, some of which concern how to govern the polis. (See, e.g., Plato's Republic; or Hobbes's Leviathan; et. al. ad infinitum.)
Occasionally, someone accuses me of being political when I speak out against abortion. My response to them is to explain the distinction between moral matters and political matters. Yes, moral beliefs can influence certain political outcomes, But many, to include myself, have long believed abortion to be immoral and unrighteous, regardless of whether a vote is involved.
Philosophers mostly use logic to formulate and evaluate moral claims. Christian theologians use Scripture, and logic, to formulate and evaluate moral claims. All this kind of discussion precedes political application, and can be done without spinning political implications into the discussion. (An exception to this might be utilitarianism.)
The statement It is morally wrong to kill innocent, defenseless human beings requires no support from political thinking. Moral judgments, such as Abortion is wrong, stand independently of political implications.
I have, and will continue, to write against abortion because I believe it is wrong to kill innocent, defenseless human beings. Anyone who thinks such a philosophical and theological position is "political" simply does not understand the distinction.
***
|
| (Bolles Harbor, Michigan) |
If you don't like this, take it up with evolutionary biologist and atheist Richard Dawkins. He can handle it.
He likes to discuss. And, he knows more about genetics than you do. ( For Dawkins and theistic geneticist Francis Collins in dialogue, go here.)
Dawkins is still the world's most famous intellectual atheist. And, his book The Selfish Gene has been used in university biology classes.
Dawkins was interviewed yesterday by Piers Morgan. The full interview is here. I find it interesting.
Here's a snippet, on sex and gender.
Piers: They (woke-ists) want to de-gender and neutralise language, but they're doing it from a completely false pretext that you can somehow pretend biology doesn't exist, particularly when it comes to someone's sex. A small group of people have been successful in reshaping swathes of the way society talks and is allowed to talk.
Richard: It's bullying. We've seen the way JK Rowling has been bullied, Kathleen stock has been bullied. They've stood up to it, but it's very upsetting the way this tiny minority of people has managed to capture the discourse to talk errant nonsense.
Piers: What's the answer?
Richard: Science. There are two sexes. You could talk about gender, if you wish and that's a subjective.
Piers: But when people say there are 100 genders?
Richard: I'm not interested in that. As as a biologist, there are two sexes and that's all there is to it.
Piers: Why have we lost that ability to actually have an open and frank debate?
Richard: There are people for whom the word discuss doesn't mean discuss, it means you've taken a position.
Again, If you don't like what Richard Dawkins is saying here, I recommend you take it up with him. I simply report this to you.
You've had people persecute you, right? Some person has come against you, in sinful ways.
I don't mean people who disagree with you. I've had people (in my own family!) disagree with me on something, without a hint of persecution.
I am thinking now of someone who, decades ago, verbally persecuted me. In that particular instance I could not understand what, if anything, I had done to hurt them.
When that kind of thing happens, my mind is quickly reoriented from a desire for vengeance to Jesus' call for compassion. I remember that Jesus has instructed me to pray for people who persecute me. I am to love my enemies. (Matt. 5:44) This is so hard! I am still too much conformed to the low standards of this world.
What hope is there for me? It lies in conformation to the character of Christ. (Rom. 12:1-2; Gal. 4:19) I am promised that there is a way to live that transcends our culture's hate/vengeance reactions. It is found in living an abiding-in-Christ life. Henri Nouwen expresses it this way.
"You are called to live out of a new place, beyond your emotions, passions, and feelings. As long as you live amid your emotions, passions, and feelings, you will continue to experience loneliness, jealousy, anger, resentment, and even rage, because those are the most obvious responses to rejection and abandonment." (Nouwen, The Inner Voice of Love, p. 14)
 |
| (Our kitchen - I tool the photo of the damselfly) |
One author I keep coming back to is Dallas Willard. He was a brilliant philosopher (U. of Southern California), a passionate follower of Jesus, who lived a life of a perpetual student who balanced the academic and the experiential. And, what a writer, and what a teacher!
A few months before his death he met with theistic philosopher J. P. Moreland and shared the four key concerns that drove him in life. Here they are. (From Gary Moon, Becoming Dallas Willard: The Formation of a Philosopher, Teacher, and Christ Follower.)
#1 - Metaphysical realism.
Willard "believed there is one mind-independent world “out there,” and it and the entities within it are what they are independent of our thinking about them. That means that invisible things such as soul, spirit, the Trinity, and the kingdom of God are as much a part of reality as apples, chairs, and snowflakes. This idea formed much of the background to his book The Divine Conspiracy." (Moon)
#2 - Epistemic realism.
For Willard, "the intentionality of the mind places it in direct contact with its various objects of attention. Nothing stands between the knowing subject and items of knowledge in cases of direct awareness. Which means that it is possible to interact with realities such as the Holy Trinity in such a way that knowledge can be obtained and new habit patterns established. This truth stands behind Dallas’s books The Spirit of the Disciplines and Hearing God." (Ib.)
#3 - Human Nature; Personhood.
Moon writes that Willard "was committed to the idea that our view of the nature and practice of formative beliefs and exercises should flow as naturally as possible from our view of the human person. He deeply believed in the need for the development of comprehensive, sophisticated, integrative models of the person. In other words, human beings are uniquely designed to experience God. His best work in this area is fleshed out in his book Renovation of the Heart."
#4 - Spiritual Disciplines; Spiritual Formation.
"Finally, Dallas believed that spiritually formative Christian practices produce results that are objectively testable. He was deeply concerned to establish Christian spiritual formation and its practices as items of genuine knowledge. In short, spiritual formation could—and should—be measurable and have a place in the university alongside other domains of public knowledge. His book that begins to address this concern is Knowing Christ Today."
Moon says "a case can be made that all of Dallas’s Christian writing is built around these four critical concepts—concepts that meant so much to Dallas that he felt it imperative to pass them on—and that each of his Christian books is an attempt to elucidate one or more of those core ideas." (Moon, pp. 193-194)
