12W4

We considered Thomas Aquinas’ understanding of God using secondary causes to interact with the world and compared it to Whitehead’s “Process Theology”: Notebook presentation.

Check here for further reading (Alister McGrath’s “Christian Theology”).

Today we looked at Bultmann’s demythologisation idea and its implications for hermeneutics.

Notebook presentation

A chapter from Miller and Grenz Introduction to Contemporary Theologies (Fortress Press, 1998) on Bultmann is here

The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (Word document with just the articles here) is the 1978 conservative Christian understanding of Biblical inerrancy (or infallibility):

Holy Scripture, as the inspired Word of God witnessing authoritatively to Jesus Christ, may properly be called infallible and inerrant. These negative terms have a special value, for they explicitly safeguard crucial positive truths.

lnfallible signifies the quality of neither misleading nor being misled and so safeguards in categorical terms the truth that Holy Scripture is a sure, safe, and reliable rule and guide in all matters.

Similarly, inerrant signifies the quality of being free from all falsehood or mistake and so safeguards the truth that Holy Scripture is entirely true and trustworthy in all its assertions.

We thought about the statement and its pros and cons with respect to understanding the Bible. If you decide to write about this for your essay I suggest you look at the whole shebang as there is some explanation of the ideas on the page too…

In 1983 the same people wrote the Chicago Statement on Biblical Hermeneutics which will also be helpful for your essay.

We were continuing to look at hermeneutics and today considered Schleiermacher and the concept of the hermeneutical circle. Then we looked briefly at Paul Ricoeur’s concept of the hermeneutic of suspicion.

Finally we thought about how these ideas might look when applied to the gospels, so we thought about Matthew, Luke, John and Mark, looking at ways in which their gospels might have been influenced by external factors.

The notebook presentation is here.

Notebook presentation on evolution and intelligent design can be found here.

We’ve started looking at the concept of “hermeneutics”, which is the science/art of interpretation. We started off by looking at the parable of the sower and the manner in which you all interpreted that. I’ll upload some of what you came up with soon.

The kinds of things we’ll be looking at over the coming weeks are:

• The nature of the Bible - authors, editors, books
• The idea of interpretation - is there one interpretation or are there many?
• How might we decide if an interpretation is a good one?
• How do Christians think about these questions?

Neither Miss Duffy nor I will be in the lesson this Wednesday (25th Feb). Please use the time constructively to plan your essays (due for next week, 4th March). If you can write an essay plan for me and leave it on Miss Duffy’s desk I will have a look over it and get it back to you with comments.

Remember to look at the guidance notes for advice.

Today we looked at the concept of evil as “privation” in Augustine’s thought: notebook presentation.

You created some ideas to process the concept and we had a diagram, a poem and turned out the lights to represent the difference between absence and lack.

Then we thought some more about the essay question and you came up with arguments for and against original sin. Some arguments for:

• Original sin sets a precedent for others to follow. It makes sense that once one person sins everyone follows them into sin too.
• Even good people and babies do wicked things. How else might you explain why this happens?
• People sin even after suffering the consequences - that is, even though we’ve learned by experience that doing the wrong thing is painful we continue to do it. Doesn’t this mean we’re wired to do the wrong thing in some way? In response to this it was argued that this aspect of humanity helps us to ask questions and find solutions.

Some arguments against original sin:

• Sin is a personal choice and we are personally responsible for it - how can this be inherited?
• Who decides what is wrong anyway? Evil is subjective (we don’t all agree on what’s right and wrong) so how can something that isn’t agree upon be inherited?
• We have free will - sin is our choice
• Evolutionary theory suggests that Adam and Eve never existed as actual human beings - doesn’t Augustine assume that they did?

Obviously there are lots of good arguments on either side here. Whichever side you argue for in your essay make sure that you refer to some of the arguments on the other side then explain why your side is better. If you ignore the other person’s arguments your case will look weak…

If you have any questions leave a comment.

Today we looked at Augustine’s doctrine of original sin.

Notebook presentation.

For some further (and quite hard reading) look here (from Allan Fitzgerald’s Augustine through the Ages). You’re doing well if you can make sense of this. You might also like to try some of Augustine’s City of God, particularly Book 14 Chapter 11, Chapter 12, Chapter 13 and Chapter 14

The spinning ballerina is here.

Introduction to St Augustine

The point of this lesson was to introduce St Augustine and start to think about some of his ideas on human nature. We looked at his confession about the Pear Tree and used it to think about the way he saw human nature.

Powerpoint: Introducing Augustine

Pear Tree confession: Confessions - Chapter 2

For further reading…Henry Chadwick introduction