"... it appears that if men were taught only by nature, they would hold to nothing certain or solid or clear-cut, but would be so tied to confused principles as to worship an unknown god."
In this Calvin anticipates Barth. I think there is significant merit to this quote.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It seems this is an attempt to spiritualize truth claims by Calvin and his understanding of God, through a text alone. As one cannot "prove" supernaturalism, as it is a matter of faith, then how is one to ascertain truth that is practical, while being true? And it is a choice of where one wants to identify. The question is: what type of social environment is most conducive for mental health and human flourishing? I have stated that it is in 'free environments like our nation's, as we all need to belong and have a voice. This is what the social sceinces address and it is reasonable, because it is based on research methods that scientists, whether naturalists or supernaturalists can agree..This is why attempts to prove Scripture is futile as people have understood them differently throughout the ages and in different environments, and denominations, as well as the Church Fathers.
Barth, from my understanding, based truth on Church dogma, not scientific investigation. This is where I think he doesn't fit the needed paradigm for today...as this would separate spritual truth from reality..or the real world.
The human need for companionship is a valid one that is testified in Scripture, as well as science. This is where the interface of science and religion should be..not on science alone, but neither can it be justified on "spirit" alone...Spirit does not have to be understood in supernatural terms, as all men have "spirit"9a sense of justice). This is where I think the New Covenant would come into play....but, I would argue that agnostics, as well as atheists have this innate nature, which is not in animals. And it is reason.
Although my dog can be trained to do what I think is right, he does not have the capacity for me to reason with him. This is the difference between the animal and humah...so behaviorism is out, for it determines by some "source" what is right behavior, whether through culture's religious texts, culture's authorities, or evolutionary science...But, this does not mean that behavior does not matter, as behavior is the result of our beliefs about life, ourselves, and others.
So, the interface of science and religion should be based on science's disciplines, while affirmind certain truths in spiritual texts.
Honestly, I was really hoping for some Calvin and Hobbes today. :(
(wonderful quote though...and I agree with Calvin... and you- assuming you agree with this as well, having posted it here.)
Post a Comment