tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6130830332820181818.post325579729736379699..comments2024-03-29T03:56:08.315-04:00Comments on johnshaplin: Jesus by Terry Eagletonjohnshaplinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17618981988062495637noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6130830332820181818.post-54258833449699900092009-12-05T08:12:45.272-05:002009-12-05T08:12:45.272-05:00"Fools shout where angels fear to whisper&quo..."Fools shout where angels fear to whisper" is better. This is how Charlie Chaplin described his endeavor to answer the question "what would we do if we had the power of Mussolini to help England in her present crisis" at a dinner with Lloyd George, Ramsay MacDonald and Winston Churchill in 1931.<br /><br /> His answer was: "Reduce government. The world is suffering from too much government and the expense of it. The government should, however, own the banks and revise the banking laws and the Stock Exchange, controlling prices, interest and profit. England's colonies should be amalgamated into an economic unity. My policy would stand for internationalism, world cooperation of trade, the abolition of the gold standard and world inflation of money..I would endeavor to raise the standard of living, preferably internationally, otherwise throughout the British domain. Labour hours should be reduced and a minimum wage applied."johnshaplinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17618981988062495637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6130830332820181818.post-69492457198707957252009-12-05T03:22:39.024-05:002009-12-05T03:22:39.024-05:00Although Eagleton does not specifically address th...Although Eagleton does not specifically address the matter, there are at least a handful of Christian theologians who find it difficult to discover any reference to an immortal soul in Holy Scripture. The presumption that certain passages refer to it seems based on Greek translations of the original Aramaic or Hebrew. Such a view- that there is no immortal soul- would not be entirely inconsistent with John Calvin's notion of Pre-destination; God's judgement (eternal damnation) having been more or less delivered once and for all right from the beginning. This would help explain Calvin's fundamental reticence in discussing the issue and also his anxiety about "not lying" or misrepresenting the Gospel message in his many writings and sermons. It would be consistent with the notion that the promise of salvation in the Gospel is FOR THIS LIFE, rather than for the NEXT.<br /><br />Fools rush in where angels fear to tread!johnshaplinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17618981988062495637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6130830332820181818.post-64032234562311905732009-12-05T03:09:51.587-05:002009-12-05T03:09:51.587-05:00"It is worth adding that Jesus's attitude..."It is worth adding that Jesus's attitude to the family is one of implacable hostility. He has come to break up these cozy little conservative settlements so beloved of American advertisers in the name of his mission, settling their members at each other's throats; and he seems to have precious little time for his own family in particular. In "The God Delusion", Richard Dawkins greets this aspect of the Gospel with chilly suburban distaste. Such a cold-eye view of the family can suggest to him only the kidnapping habits of religious cults. He does not see that movements for justice can cut across traditional blood ties, as well as across ethnic, social, and national divisions. Justice is thicker than blood."johnshaplinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17618981988062495637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6130830332820181818.post-23761626018498084072009-12-01T07:44:35.018-05:002009-12-01T07:44:35.018-05:00Jesus does not seem to be any sort of liberal, whi...Jesus does not seem to be any sort of liberal, which is no doubt one grudge which Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens hold against him. He would not make a good committee man. Neither would he go down well on Wall Street, just as he did not go down well among the money changers of the Jerusalem temple.<br /><br />The account of Christian faith I have just outlined is one which I take to be thoroughly orthodox, scriptural and traditional. There is nothing fashionable or newfangled about it;, indeed, much of it goes back to Thomas Aquinas and beyond. In my view, it is a lot more realistic about humanity than the likes of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. It takes the full measure of human depravity and perversity, in contrast to the extraordinarily Pollyannaish view of human progress of "The God Delusion". At the same time, it is a good deal bolder than the liberal humanists and rationalists about the chances of this dire condition being repaired. It is more gloomy in its view of the human species than the bien-pensant liberal intelligentsia (only Freudianism or the philosophy of Arthur Schopenhauer can match it here), and certainly a good deal more skeptical than the naive upbeatness of American ideology, which tends to mistake a hubristic cult of can-do-ery for the virtue of hope. <br /><br />" Reason, Faith, and Revolution; Reflections on the God Debate" by Terry Eagleton; Yale University Press, 2009johnshaplinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17618981988062495637noreply@blogger.com