Thursday, February 28, 2013
End of Book 1
We have completed Book One! Hoorah!
To celebrate, lets take a break and revel in some depraved, satanic, drunken, suicidal folk music.
Cry for Judas!
Take that, Clavin!
Chapter 18
To close Book 1, Calvin gives a great segue to books that are yet to come. He mentions, in chapter 18, the problem of human evil within a discussion of particular providence. If God is so particularly provident, then why are human being such evil bastards?
Calvin's answer: That's what God must have intended.
Sweet Lord. Are you kidding me?
We are going to have to deal SO much with this, apparently, in the near future, that I will only give a few quick responses here. Then, I will gladly bid farewell to Book 1.
Calvin's answer: That's what God must have intended.
Sweet Lord. Are you kidding me?
We are going to have to deal SO much with this, apparently, in the near future, that I will only give a few quick responses here. Then, I will gladly bid farewell to Book 1.
- God is more glorified by human sin, than the lack of human sin. God sounds like a sleazy politician. Whatever makes him look good, must be better!
- God is the providential overseer of the evil in our world, but not the author of it. Really? That is, essentially, the same thing as an author saying, 'I wrote the book, but the characters are so sadistic that I cannot be held responsible for their crazed wickedness.'
When Calvin gets to the Judas parts at the end of this chapter, I thought I was going to beat my head into a wall.
He sounds like he wants to have his cake and eat it, too. Just because God is provident over the destiny of mankind does not mean that God is provident over the actions. Judas is a perfect example. If God determined that Christ was to be sacrificed, betrayal was not integral. Judas, however, found himself swept up in the winds of providence and his own evil proclivities.
There, a way that God is provident without becoming the author of sin.
Calvin, however, thinks we cannot have one without the other.
Sigh.
So long, Book 1. Good riddance.
Chapter 17
In our previous chapter, we saw how Calvin thought of God as a hyperactive landlord. To Calvin, God is involved in even small aspects of our world (articular providence). But, a reliance on Providence could get us into trouble. Say, for instance, I knew God was in charge and that he was taking care of me. Couldn't I just throw myself off a tall building and rely on Providence? No, says Calvin. Providence is never an excuse to violate God's basic laws.
Then, Calvin waxes spiritual. How miserable it would be if people started to doubt God's providence! In times of hunger or toil, knowing God is in charge gets us through. We know we can depend on God because he is immutable and unrepentant.
But, wait a minute! What about all those verse about God 'repenting'?
Exodus 32:14 "And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people."
Genesis 6:6,7 "And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth . . . And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth . . . for it repenteth me that I have made him."
Jonah 3:10 ". . . and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not."
Calvin says that the repentance of God is simply an anthropomorphism. Human beings are so stupid that they cannot understand the high and holy ways of God. So, God must at times talk to us like we're drooling dimwits. Thus, the Bible says that God repented. However, we're supposed to put in a few winking emoticons so people know that God didn't really repent. So, let's do that with Exodus 32:14 -
Exodus 32:14 "And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people." ;) ;)
Please update your Bible accordingly.
I have a question, however. Calvin was, apparently, smart enough to discover God's anthropomorphism. Then, I assume he understands what lies behind the anthropomorphism. So, what is it?
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Chapter 16
Not only did God create the world, says Calvin, he also sustains the world and keeps it spinning. Now, deistic types of people, seem to think that God just wound up the planet and all its creatures and let it rip. But, Calvin thinks that God sustains every aspect of the world via his power and providence. God does not just participate in general providence, but in particular providence. He loves the details!
So, God is basically like an hyperactive landlord. He keeps everything running tip-top.
Um, there are a few problems herein:
So, God is basically like an hyperactive landlord. He keeps everything running tip-top.
Um, there are a few problems herein:
- The Earth is slowing down.
- The Earth's air conditioner is busted.
- Where did all the bees go?
- This guy.
Chapter 15 - Bonus Coverage!
One more thing about how humans are constituted. Calvin claims at the end of the chapter that Adam was culpable for his decisions because he had been given a 'governing' will. This was part of his soul and would have told him the right thing to do. He didn't do the right thing. So, he was rightly judged.
Now, hang on. That sounds a lot like trichotimism, doesn't it? I thought humans only had two parts! Where did all this 'will' stuff come from?
Now, hang on. That sounds a lot like trichotimism, doesn't it? I thought humans only had two parts! Where did all this 'will' stuff come from?
Monday, February 25, 2013
Chapter 15
Let's just establish this rule right now: Theologians aren't good at anthropology and anthropologists aren't good theology.
Generally, there are three camps on the debate over how humans are constituted.
Generally, there are three camps on the debate over how humans are constituted.
- Monists - there is one part of our being
- Dichotomists - we have a body and a soul
- Trichotomists - we have a body, soul, and a spirit\
Calvin is the poster boy Dichotomism. There is a soul and there is a body and that is it, according to Calvin.I won't try to tear apart his arguments for his position. You know that mama always said, 'if you can't say something nice, don't start a critical blog of a Reformation theologian.'
So, instead, I'll give my opinion. Which, is essentially, the whole point of this life blog.
Dichotomism fits very nicely within neo-Platonic philosophy, but it is much more difficult to fit into the Jewish perspective of the first century. Forgive a Straw Man, but behold the silliness of the following:
PLATONIC DUALISM in a NUTSHELL: God is a spirit and he like spiritual things. Physical things are gross and susceptible to further grossness. So, God sent his Law and his Son to show us how to escape from the grossness of the physical and fully embrace the purity of the spiritual.
Quick responding question to the above: If God thinks the physical is so gross, THEN WHY IN THE HELL DID HE CREATE SO DAMNED MUCH OF IT??!!??!!
Half of the Universe may be material. Why would God create half of the Universe to be poop? Even more so with humanity. The only proof that Calvin offers that there is a substantive difference between soul and body, was eschatological. He wonders how you could send a physical body to a spiritual torment. Obviosuly you cannot, so only the soul must be able to survive to the next round.
Really? My head is going to explode.
Saturday, February 23, 2013
Chapter 14
Apparently, we've switched back to general revelation.
Calvin is still describing what we know about God. In the last chapter, he wrote at sadistic length about the Trinity. Now, he is speaking of creation.
Calvin returns to a repeated theme: any idiot can look around and see God is awesome. But, wait Johnny Boy, there is something seriously screwed up about God's creation - the Devil. To Calvin the Devil is a good bad example of what is wrong with creation. satan used to be an angel and then he became a bad guy.
Side note: Calvin has been a steady proof-texter throughout Institutes. I did not see any proof texts for this whole Satan- the Fallen Angel business. I know what passages Evangelicals typically cite for this. Usually they are a mixture of vague prophecies, apocalyptic symbolism, and flat out weirdness.
I don't see it, not with the clarity that others do.
Calvin says the Devil and his impish demons are nothing but trouble, but they are not so much trouble. In fact they are another part of the revelation of God's glory and wisdom. How could Satan be a part of God's revealed glory? Well, first of all, God sets him up just to crush his head, then the whole of creation cheers 'Yay, God!' Next, God uses Satan to 'test' the faithful, so that the faithful may prove their worth.
I've always seen the scriptural Devil (as opposed to the medieval weirdness with the pitchfork) as a prosecuting attorney. The Bible calls him the 'Accuser.' A good for nothing snitch. So, I kind of like Calvin's version of things. Satan is well beneath God's power and is just another pawn in God's overall strategy.
Too many people see Satan as some sort of nemesis against Christ's heroism. The Bible describes Satan as a puny, conniving, snitch. He is a worthless scavenger surviving on the scraps whatever carrion sinners leave before their souls rot with the decay of evil.
The Devil is worth no attention at all. The Devil is irrelevant. The amount of time I have spent here, not withstanding.
Calvin is still describing what we know about God. In the last chapter, he wrote at sadistic length about the Trinity. Now, he is speaking of creation.
Calvin returns to a repeated theme: any idiot can look around and see God is awesome. But, wait Johnny Boy, there is something seriously screwed up about God's creation - the Devil. To Calvin the Devil is a good bad example of what is wrong with creation. satan used to be an angel and then he became a bad guy.
Side note: Calvin has been a steady proof-texter throughout Institutes. I did not see any proof texts for this whole Satan- the Fallen Angel business. I know what passages Evangelicals typically cite for this. Usually they are a mixture of vague prophecies, apocalyptic symbolism, and flat out weirdness.
I don't see it, not with the clarity that others do.
Calvin says the Devil and his impish demons are nothing but trouble, but they are not so much trouble. In fact they are another part of the revelation of God's glory and wisdom. How could Satan be a part of God's revealed glory? Well, first of all, God sets him up just to crush his head, then the whole of creation cheers 'Yay, God!' Next, God uses Satan to 'test' the faithful, so that the faithful may prove their worth.
I've always seen the scriptural Devil (as opposed to the medieval weirdness with the pitchfork) as a prosecuting attorney. The Bible calls him the 'Accuser.' A good for nothing snitch. So, I kind of like Calvin's version of things. Satan is well beneath God's power and is just another pawn in God's overall strategy.
Too many people see Satan as some sort of nemesis against Christ's heroism. The Bible describes Satan as a puny, conniving, snitch. He is a worthless scavenger surviving on the scraps whatever carrion sinners leave before their souls rot with the decay of evil.
The Devil is worth no attention at all. The Devil is irrelevant. The amount of time I have spent here, not withstanding.
Friday, February 22, 2013
Chapter 13
So long....
So friggin' L O N G !
In 1553, a Spanish theologian named Miguel Servetus visited the city of Geneva on his way to someplace else. John Calvin heard that his colleague was in town and gave him a warm Geneva welcome. Calvin threw his butt in jail and had him burned at the stake!
What crime had Servetus committed that deserved such a gruesome death? Servetus denied the Trinity. Thus, Servetus had to die a heretic's death.
Luckily, Calvin is dead, too. Because, I am about to risk some heresy.
I'm a Trinitarian. I always have been. I hesitate, however, to refer to it as the central doctrine of the Faith. I cannot the fact that the Trinity is a Biblical doctrine. I cannot deny that the doctrine is existentially central to the modern Church. However, I have trouble believing that it is central to the Biblical narrative. In other words, we love Trinitarian theology today, but I don't see it being all that popular among the Apostolic Church.
I won't put you through ALL of Calvin's arguments. This chapter was crazy long and pretty thick. So, let's just take pot shots at one portion.
In my opinion, the toughest of the Trinity's persons to prove as divine is the Holy Spirit. I'm not saying the Bible does not refer to the Spirit as God; I believe it does. However, you've got to be looking for it to find it. Let's see how Calvin finds it.
Calvin relies heavily on 'interchangeability.' This is a hermeneutical method where you equate two terms because they used as if one could be substituted for the other. So, for example, Calvin writes
Actually, the Torah records God as speaking the Abrahamic Covenant. So, is Scripture God? Are angels God? This Trinity is getting crowded!
Obviously, I do not think that Angels and books are part of the Godhead, they are expressions of the Godhead - communications and representations. But, I hope this shows the weak hermeneutical device that Calvin utilizes. I also hope that I can offer a word of caution about Trinitarianism.
The Trinity is a beautiful, complex, and nuanced doctrine. It was a little too fancy for one Spaniard. When Servetus looked at the Doctrine of the Trinity, he saw very little scripture and a whole lot of Greek philosophy. I can understand how he would observe that. It is a fair critique.
Perhaps when we think and teach about the Trinity, we should focus less on the philosophical nuances derived from hermeneutic implications and more on the explicit statements of Scripture. Remember, Christ and the Father are One and he prayed that we could be one in the same way. Whatever that means, we probably shouldn't be burning eachother at stakes. When we pursue the illusive Trinity of the Godhead, we should also be pursuing the even more illusive Unity of the Church.
So friggin' L O N G !
In 1553, a Spanish theologian named Miguel Servetus visited the city of Geneva on his way to someplace else. John Calvin heard that his colleague was in town and gave him a warm Geneva welcome. Calvin threw his butt in jail and had him burned at the stake!
What crime had Servetus committed that deserved such a gruesome death? Servetus denied the Trinity. Thus, Servetus had to die a heretic's death.
Luckily, Calvin is dead, too. Because, I am about to risk some heresy.
I'm a Trinitarian. I always have been. I hesitate, however, to refer to it as the central doctrine of the Faith. I cannot the fact that the Trinity is a Biblical doctrine. I cannot deny that the doctrine is existentially central to the modern Church. However, I have trouble believing that it is central to the Biblical narrative. In other words, we love Trinitarian theology today, but I don't see it being all that popular among the Apostolic Church.
I won't put you through ALL of Calvin's arguments. This chapter was crazy long and pretty thick. So, let's just take pot shots at one portion.
In my opinion, the toughest of the Trinity's persons to prove as divine is the Holy Spirit. I'm not saying the Bible does not refer to the Spirit as God; I believe it does. However, you've got to be looking for it to find it. Let's see how Calvin finds it.
Calvin relies heavily on 'interchangeability.' This is a hermeneutical method where you equate two terms because they used as if one could be substituted for the other. So, for example, Calvin writes
" Peter, when he rebuked Ananias for having lied to the Holy Spirit said, that he had not lied unto men, but unto God"Thus, God = Holy Spirit. Got it? But, is this proof of divinity? If it is, you could start making all kinds of things into God. Angels are sometimes referred to as God (especially OT). And, even Scripture is used interchangeably with God. Notice, for an example, Galatians 3:8:
Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.”
Actually, the Torah records God as speaking the Abrahamic Covenant. So, is Scripture God? Are angels God? This Trinity is getting crowded!
Obviously, I do not think that Angels and books are part of the Godhead, they are expressions of the Godhead - communications and representations. But, I hope this shows the weak hermeneutical device that Calvin utilizes. I also hope that I can offer a word of caution about Trinitarianism.
The Trinity is a beautiful, complex, and nuanced doctrine. It was a little too fancy for one Spaniard. When Servetus looked at the Doctrine of the Trinity, he saw very little scripture and a whole lot of Greek philosophy. I can understand how he would observe that. It is a fair critique.
Perhaps when we think and teach about the Trinity, we should focus less on the philosophical nuances derived from hermeneutic implications and more on the explicit statements of Scripture. Remember, Christ and the Father are One and he prayed that we could be one in the same way. Whatever that means, we probably shouldn't be burning eachother at stakes. When we pursue the illusive Trinity of the Godhead, we should also be pursuing the even more illusive Unity of the Church.
Thursday, February 21, 2013
Chapter 12
The Greek of Claix is in his element on this one.
Calvin continues ranting against the 'Papists' by tearing into the Catholic veneration tradition. Calvin feels that the Catholic Church practices the worship of human beings when they venerate saints and martyrs. Such is typical of petty idolaters, says Calvin. Idolaters replace true religion with lesser gods as a manifestation of their out of control egos.
But the Church responds by appealing to semantics. The reverence offered to God is called Latria a Latin term from the Greek word λατρεία that means reverent worship (I think). But latria is never given to saints. Instead the veneration given to saints and martyrs is doulia, a word that means service.
Here, Calvin splits with the likes of Aquinas and Augustine and calls a spade a spade. The two words in the Greek New Testament are used interchangeably with none of the nuance the Church purports, and he's right. That is shaving things too close and the results of this close shave are seen in the activities of the Catholic faithful.
Calvin continues ranting against the 'Papists' by tearing into the Catholic veneration tradition. Calvin feels that the Catholic Church practices the worship of human beings when they venerate saints and martyrs. Such is typical of petty idolaters, says Calvin. Idolaters replace true religion with lesser gods as a manifestation of their out of control egos.
But the Church responds by appealing to semantics. The reverence offered to God is called Latria a Latin term from the Greek word λατρεία that means reverent worship (I think). But latria is never given to saints. Instead the veneration given to saints and martyrs is doulia, a word that means service.
Here, Calvin splits with the likes of Aquinas and Augustine and calls a spade a spade. The two words in the Greek New Testament are used interchangeably with none of the nuance the Church purports, and he's right. That is shaving things too close and the results of this close shave are seen in the activities of the Catholic faithful.
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Chapter 11
Things that Calvin does not like:
- Idols
- Idolators
- Pictures of God
- Pictures of Saints
- Pictures of Martys
- Pictures in General
- Papists
Papist Idolators(on second thought, all Papists are idolaters)- Pictures of Naked Licentious People
- Pictures of Naked People
- Pictures of People
- Pictures
- Second Council of Nicea
Here are some examples of things that may have offended Mr. Calvin:
Chapter 10
What kind of God does Scripture reveal? The God of Scripture is as consistent in his works as he is in his Word. He is just, merciful, good, etc. There is consistency between his claims and his person. Scripture has been given to us to reveal this God, so that we could fully depend on him and trust in him for salvation.
Amen.
OK, so far so good, right?
Then, Calvin cranks on the wheel, pulls the whole damned truck off the highway, and flies off to some random two-track on a rabbit trail. It is like he was being too nice at the first part of the chapter. He starts condemning any Polytheists. Calvin says that Scripture reveals only one true God and thus condemns any other God. Polytheists all actually worshiped one true God originally, but due to their sinful vanity, they perverted him into a multiplicity of false god. Polytheism is a corruption and a revolt against God.
Thanks, random guy.
Amen.
OK, so far so good, right?
Then, Calvin cranks on the wheel, pulls the whole damned truck off the highway, and flies off to some random two-track on a rabbit trail. It is like he was being too nice at the first part of the chapter. He starts condemning any Polytheists. Calvin says that Scripture reveals only one true God and thus condemns any other God. Polytheists all actually worshiped one true God originally, but due to their sinful vanity, they perverted him into a multiplicity of false god. Polytheism is a corruption and a revolt against God.
Thanks, random guy.
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Chapter 9
I need to pick up the pace if I am going to knock this stupid book out before Easter.
Ok, so Calvin is a big fan of Scripture. But, Scripture is not the only kind of special revelation. Some people hear directly from the Holy Spirit. But, hearing from the Holy Spirit cannot replace the Scriptures. How does Calvin know this? Well, all of the Biblical authors heard directly from the Holy Spirit, but they all revered the authority of Scripture.
There is now a 'mutual connection' between Scripture and Spirit. They compliment eachother and serve the same purpose. So, people should not be tempted to separate them from eachother. It is a both/and situation, not an either/or.
Well, that was painless. Right? Not necessarily.
Apparently, the 'Fanatics' that Calvin castigates in this chapter were the worse kind of people - Anabaptists. These fanatics had from God directly and God told them that the Reformers hadn't gone far enough. So, when Calvin says that the Spirit would only testify to scripture, I am certain he has his own interpretation of that scripture in mind.
Ok, so Calvin is a big fan of Scripture. But, Scripture is not the only kind of special revelation. Some people hear directly from the Holy Spirit. But, hearing from the Holy Spirit cannot replace the Scriptures. How does Calvin know this? Well, all of the Biblical authors heard directly from the Holy Spirit, but they all revered the authority of Scripture.
There is now a 'mutual connection' between Scripture and Spirit. They compliment eachother and serve the same purpose. So, people should not be tempted to separate them from eachother. It is a both/and situation, not an either/or.
Well, that was painless. Right? Not necessarily.
Apparently, the 'Fanatics' that Calvin castigates in this chapter were the worse kind of people - Anabaptists. These fanatics had from God directly and God told them that the Reformers hadn't gone far enough. So, when Calvin says that the Spirit would only testify to scripture, I am certain he has his own interpretation of that scripture in mind.
POP QUIZ!!!
Which Calvin would you rather hang out with?
Chapter 8
I'm not sure who Calvin expected to read Institutes, but I hope he did not intend this to be an apologetic work. Chapter 8 was painful.
Calvin's is still focusing on special revelation, and specifically about scripture. In this chapter he offers proofs for the belief in scripture - rational explanations for why scripture is authoritative.
I never see Calvin cited for apologetic purposes. You are about to see why. My cat could punch holes in these arguments:
Scripture is authoritative because....
Calvin's is still focusing on special revelation, and specifically about scripture. In this chapter he offers proofs for the belief in scripture - rational explanations for why scripture is authoritative.
I never see Calvin cited for apologetic purposes. You are about to see why. My cat could punch holes in these arguments:
Scripture is authoritative because....
- The language is humble and written by non-eloquent people, but (via the holy Ghost) it is magically transformed into eloquence that exceeds anything else in the whole universe. || making an objective claim via subjective rationale - who determines 'eloquence'?
- The Bible is the oldest book in the world. || No, it is not.
- Moses represents the oldest author in the world. || Moses didn't write the Torah.
- The Egyptians think their books are older, but they are dumb enough to think that the world is more than 5,000 years old. So, we can't trust anything they say. || facepalm
- There are miracles in the Bible that had eyewitness accounts. || and we only know about these eyewitness accounts because.... wait for it .... WE READ IT IN THE BOOK CALVIN IS TRYING TO PROVE IS AUTHORITATIVE
- If the recorded miracles did not actually occur, the enemies of the Israelites would have refuted them publicly. || if something didn't happen, then why would anybody refute it?
- Predictions and prophecies in the scripture came true. || I'm pretty sure you have to be drinking the kool-aid before you believe a bunch of vague predictions actually came to pass.
- Preservation! God preserved His words through thousands of years. || He also apparently preserved a lot of other people's words. (see the second bullet point above)
- God even preserved the Hebrew language (a dead language) through scripture. || There are all kinds of dead languages that we have preserved in writings. Sumerian, Egyptian, Hittite, Aramaic, etc.
- God's 'most inveterate enemies' have been used to preserve the Word - Jews. || God's most inveterate enemies are Jews? Oh my...
This goes on and on. I have actually only listed the Old Testament 'proofs.' Now, despite these proofs being so rock solid that no one could possibly refute them (so thinks Calvin), there may be some hardened skeptics out there who are still unconvinced. NO worries. Calvin informs us that they are unconvinced because they don't have the Holy Spirit. So, there.
Monday, February 18, 2013
Chapter 7
Let's talk about the Bible. Calvin let's it be known that Scripture is the authority and it is not limited by the Church. He is very resistant to the Church having authority over scripture, seeing the fallible have authority over the infallible. Calvin rightly points out that the Church is built on the Apostles' testimony and not vice versa.
But, how can we determine what is scripture and what is not scripture? Doesn't that responsibility lie with the Church? No, says Calvin, scripture reveals itself to the world. Scripture is so holy that it sticks out like white in a sea of black. The Church does not hold the authority to determine the veracity of scripture because the Church is a conglomeration of human beings, whom Calvin has gone to great links to declare wretched.
So, what does determine the veracity of Scripture? Calvin says that Scripture displays the 'character of the Divine Speaker.' In other words, if it sounds like God, it must be God. How do we know that it sounds like God? Well, God's spirit dwells within us and that spirit will resonate with the words that it originally inspired within the Scriptures.
So, we know that Scripture is the word of God by faith - not faith in the Church or our own faculties, but faith in the Holy Spirit. Of course, if you are not housing a Holy Spirit, you won't get it. Sucks to be you, says Calvin, you wouldn't know Scripture if you saw it, so anything you say is irrelevant. God gave his Word to his children, and not to the whole 'vulgar herd of mankind.'
'Remember,' writes Calvin, 'none but those to whom it was given, have any apprehension of the mysteries of God.'
So, to summarize, we know that Scripture is God's word because we have been given the Holy Spirit which resonates with its own inspired words. Not everybody is a part of this resonance, because not everybody is chosen by God.
But, how can we determine what is scripture and what is not scripture? Doesn't that responsibility lie with the Church? No, says Calvin, scripture reveals itself to the world. Scripture is so holy that it sticks out like white in a sea of black. The Church does not hold the authority to determine the veracity of scripture because the Church is a conglomeration of human beings, whom Calvin has gone to great links to declare wretched.
So, what does determine the veracity of Scripture? Calvin says that Scripture displays the 'character of the Divine Speaker.' In other words, if it sounds like God, it must be God. How do we know that it sounds like God? Well, God's spirit dwells within us and that spirit will resonate with the words that it originally inspired within the Scriptures.
So, we know that Scripture is the word of God by faith - not faith in the Church or our own faculties, but faith in the Holy Spirit. Of course, if you are not housing a Holy Spirit, you won't get it. Sucks to be you, says Calvin, you wouldn't know Scripture if you saw it, so anything you say is irrelevant. God gave his Word to his children, and not to the whole 'vulgar herd of mankind.'
'Remember,' writes Calvin, 'none but those to whom it was given, have any apprehension of the mysteries of God.'
So, to summarize, we know that Scripture is God's word because we have been given the Holy Spirit which resonates with its own inspired words. Not everybody is a part of this resonance, because not everybody is chosen by God.
Saturday, February 16, 2013
Chapter 6
According to Calvin, God gave us the majesty of creation as an exhibition to "involve all mankind in guilt."
Oh.... so that's why we have such a beautiful universe. Now, I get it. God created so much beauty to damn me to the pits of hell. I stand in awe.
#stabmyself
Calvin has been going on about general revelation, but starry nights and human excrement are not enough to make a Christian. Scripture is necessary and singular.
But, how do we know that scripture is, well "scripture"? How do we know that God actually said what the Bible claims he said to the old timers who originally told these stories? Calvin says that it should be enough that the Patriarchs thought they were hearing from God and we should proceed accordingly.
Credit where credit is due - I love this argument. Anybody who has ever sat through a class on Documentary Hypothesis, knows the tedium and useless arguments that emanate from source criticism. Let's utilize or critique the text as we have it.
Whoa! Did I just use Calvin to make a Postmodern argument? I can hear him rolling over in his grave!
Although, I found a lot that resonated with me in this chapter, there was a generally tone that was disturbing. Please allow me to gripe a moment. One of the things that is so chafing about reading this monstrosity is how anti-human God sounds. For instance, in this chapter, Calvin claims that God "deprive[s] the ingratitude of men of every excuse." I'm not so sure that God is so insecure as to act that way. Does Paul hint at such things? Sure. But, he states it differently. I read Romans 1 to mean that heathens have been left with no excuse (via his holiness and righteousness), not that God ripped their excuses away so he had an excuse to damn them.
I know that Calvin was a creature of his time and that what he was saying was main stream. Also, I know this is kind of a pot shot considering Paul's propensities. But, if he is as authoritative as his modern groupies claim that he is for our times, maybe they should offer more caveats about his nastiness. God should sound like a jerk just because Johnny C did.
Oh.... so that's why we have such a beautiful universe. Now, I get it. God created so much beauty to damn me to the pits of hell. I stand in awe.
#stabmyself
Calvin has been going on about general revelation, but starry nights and human excrement are not enough to make a Christian. Scripture is necessary and singular.
But, how do we know that scripture is, well "scripture"? How do we know that God actually said what the Bible claims he said to the old timers who originally told these stories? Calvin says that it should be enough that the Patriarchs thought they were hearing from God and we should proceed accordingly.
Credit where credit is due - I love this argument. Anybody who has ever sat through a class on Documentary Hypothesis, knows the tedium and useless arguments that emanate from source criticism. Let's utilize or critique the text as we have it.
Whoa! Did I just use Calvin to make a Postmodern argument? I can hear him rolling over in his grave!
Although, I found a lot that resonated with me in this chapter, there was a generally tone that was disturbing. Please allow me to gripe a moment. One of the things that is so chafing about reading this monstrosity is how anti-human God sounds. For instance, in this chapter, Calvin claims that God "deprive[s] the ingratitude of men of every excuse." I'm not so sure that God is so insecure as to act that way. Does Paul hint at such things? Sure. But, he states it differently. I read Romans 1 to mean that heathens have been left with no excuse (via his holiness and righteousness), not that God ripped their excuses away so he had an excuse to damn them.
I know that Calvin was a creature of his time and that what he was saying was main stream. Also, I know this is kind of a pot shot considering Paul's propensities. But, if he is as authoritative as his modern groupies claim that he is for our times, maybe they should offer more caveats about his nastiness. God should sound like a jerk just because Johnny C did.
Friday, February 15, 2013
Chapter 5
Calvin has a great question that you may want to try at your next cocktail party:
"Can morons believe in God?"
If so much of faith is dependent on literacy and the ability to grasp intricate dogma, then how would some stupid fool ever know a thing about God?
Look around, says Calvin, there is evidence all over the place. The evidence is so obvious that he claims even the "most illiterate and stupid" person cannot "exculpate themselves by the plea of ignorance." To put it with a modern twist, "Even the cast of Jersey Shore should realize there is a God."
What are some of these obvious proofs of God?
Stars and planets, the might of nature, art and scientific advances, and of course... poop.
How could a mere collection of atoms, Calvin wonders, decide how to process food in such a way that divides some food into blood and some food into human excrement? Isn't such sorting evidence of a divine wisdom behind mankind. We should marvel at it!
Side Note: I have been joining the juicing craze (getting nutrients from straight veggy and fruit juice) and it tends to really flush you out. I can assure you, there is nothing marvelous about excrement. My faith falls into crises every time I enter the bathroom these days.
Point being, even an illiterate moron has to poop! So, those idiots ought to realize God is the boss.
After establishing the principle of General Revelation, Calvin spends a long time arguing against ways that Antiquity's philosophers explained away the apparent wisdom behind creation. Some of it is interesting and valuable, much of it is too heavy handed to do any damage. But, I want to return to the poop. Well, not really. I want to return to the subject within which he mentioned our miraculous movements.
Calvin takes issue with the notion that the soul and the body are intertwined. Calvin is pretty passionate about the fact that they are and should be separate. In doing this, Calvin clearly aligns himself with Plato and Augustine. Plato thought that our bodies were actually prisons that held souls captive and it was our job to get our souls out of our bodies. Augustine taught a Christianized version of this. Calvin falls right into line. He is scandalized by Aristotle's notion that soul and body could be so intertwined.
I read ahead and there is more to come on this later. But, for today, I was very surprised that Calvin stuck so close Augustine on this. He didn't have to. Aquinas didn't.
"Can morons believe in God?"
If so much of faith is dependent on literacy and the ability to grasp intricate dogma, then how would some stupid fool ever know a thing about God?
Look around, says Calvin, there is evidence all over the place. The evidence is so obvious that he claims even the "most illiterate and stupid" person cannot "exculpate themselves by the plea of ignorance." To put it with a modern twist, "Even the cast of Jersey Shore should realize there is a God."
What are some of these obvious proofs of God?
Stars and planets, the might of nature, art and scientific advances, and of course... poop.
How could a mere collection of atoms, Calvin wonders, decide how to process food in such a way that divides some food into blood and some food into human excrement? Isn't such sorting evidence of a divine wisdom behind mankind. We should marvel at it!
Side Note: I have been joining the juicing craze (getting nutrients from straight veggy and fruit juice) and it tends to really flush you out. I can assure you, there is nothing marvelous about excrement. My faith falls into crises every time I enter the bathroom these days.
Point being, even an illiterate moron has to poop! So, those idiots ought to realize God is the boss.
After establishing the principle of General Revelation, Calvin spends a long time arguing against ways that Antiquity's philosophers explained away the apparent wisdom behind creation. Some of it is interesting and valuable, much of it is too heavy handed to do any damage. But, I want to return to the poop. Well, not really. I want to return to the subject within which he mentioned our miraculous movements.
Calvin takes issue with the notion that the soul and the body are intertwined. Calvin is pretty passionate about the fact that they are and should be separate. In doing this, Calvin clearly aligns himself with Plato and Augustine. Plato thought that our bodies were actually prisons that held souls captive and it was our job to get our souls out of our bodies. Augustine taught a Christianized version of this. Calvin falls right into line. He is scandalized by Aristotle's notion that soul and body could be so intertwined.
I read ahead and there is more to come on this later. But, for today, I was very surprised that Calvin stuck so close Augustine on this. He didn't have to. Aquinas didn't.
Chapter 4
If we have an instinctive sense of the divine, why then do people still resist worshiping God? Here, again, we return to Calvin's theme - we're sinful. He proceeds to tell us all the ways that we cover up the knowledge of the Divine. We willfully cover ourselves in corruption, ignorance, superstition, "carnal stupidity," etc. By hiding underneath all this stupidity the innate divine knowledge is 'extinguished.'
Inevitably, our superstition and ignorance lead us to start coming up with our own ideas. One thing leads to another and boom! - we've got ourselves some full blown idolatry, folks. In fact, Calvin is fairly convinced that any divine knowledge that comes from our imagination is bound to be idolatrous.
Finally, Calvin morphs into ripping on that close cousin to idolatry - hypocrisy. Hypocrites are close to idolaters because they flee from God toward empty religious practices in order to hide from God. Those bastards.
Inevitably, our superstition and ignorance lead us to start coming up with our own ideas. One thing leads to another and boom! - we've got ourselves some full blown idolatry, folks. In fact, Calvin is fairly convinced that any divine knowledge that comes from our imagination is bound to be idolatrous.
Finally, Calvin morphs into ripping on that close cousin to idolatry - hypocrisy. Hypocrites are close to idolaters because they flee from God toward empty religious practices in order to hide from God. Those bastards.
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Chapter 3
We know about God in several different ways. In the previous chapters, Calvin claimed that we know God from his creation and from the scriptures. Also, we know about God from our own crappiness. Then, in chapter 3, Calvin claims that we're not completely crappy, because we all have within us an instinctive sense of the divine.
*Sigh*
This is just simply not true. There is no way this is provable, but it is easily falsifiable.
So, anyway, how does Calvin prove this claim?
1. Universality of Religion: Calvin claims that even the most "barbarous" and "stupid" people of the farthest reaches of the world have religion. This, he sees, as a "tacit confession."
I see it as a negative proof.
2. Even non-Believers Want to Believe: Johnny claims that even real a-holes like Caligula were tormented by their resistance to God. God gnaws on their conscience and comes to them in dreams. Thus proving that no human mind can escape the idea of God.
What in the hell is he talking about?
3. Don't Be a Brute: Anybody who has their head screwed on straight knows that the idea of the divine is imprinted in people's gray matter. When we deny God, we take on a "stupid insensibility." People who deny God are desensitizing themselves to what they know. But, if you do that you'll turn into a "brute." Why? Because worshiping God is the "only thing that renders men superior to brutes."
This whole brute craziness reminded me of a couple things. 1) Cheap Cologne 2) Thomas Hobbes
In his book, Leviathan, Hobbes uses the same sort of language in referring to man. He wonders how we avoid being animal-like barbarians in the "state of nature" and how society advances. His answer is not religion, however. Instead it is contractarian ethics as enforced by a strong, lawful government.
Sorry, John. I think Tom has you on this one. We don't act like animals because we desire a better existence for our selves. Our self-interest, not our religion moves us toward evolving.
Ok, here is the picture you've been waiting for:
*Sigh*
This is just simply not true. There is no way this is provable, but it is easily falsifiable.
So, anyway, how does Calvin prove this claim?
1. Universality of Religion: Calvin claims that even the most "barbarous" and "stupid" people of the farthest reaches of the world have religion. This, he sees, as a "tacit confession."
I see it as a negative proof.
2. Even non-Believers Want to Believe: Johnny claims that even real a-holes like Caligula were tormented by their resistance to God. God gnaws on their conscience and comes to them in dreams. Thus proving that no human mind can escape the idea of God.
What in the hell is he talking about?
3. Don't Be a Brute: Anybody who has their head screwed on straight knows that the idea of the divine is imprinted in people's gray matter. When we deny God, we take on a "stupid insensibility." People who deny God are desensitizing themselves to what they know. But, if you do that you'll turn into a "brute." Why? Because worshiping God is the "only thing that renders men superior to brutes."
This whole brute craziness reminded me of a couple things. 1) Cheap Cologne 2) Thomas Hobbes
In his book, Leviathan, Hobbes uses the same sort of language in referring to man. He wonders how we avoid being animal-like barbarians in the "state of nature" and how society advances. His answer is not religion, however. Instead it is contractarian ethics as enforced by a strong, lawful government.
Sorry, John. I think Tom has you on this one. We don't act like animals because we desire a better existence for our selves. Our self-interest, not our religion moves us toward evolving.
Ok, here is the picture you've been waiting for:
Chapter 1-2
Really, Johnny? We're starting here?
Calvin starts with epistemology. What do we know? He comes up with two things: knowledge of God and knowledge of ourselves. But, the two have to go together, Calvin says.
Why? Well, if you look in the mirror, you'd be tempted to think you are pretty awesome. I'd be tempted to agree. But, Calvin says no; in fact you're a piece of crap. How does he know that? Because he compares us to God, who is truly awesome.
Then, he says that we can also see God through ourselves. But, since we're crap, we always respond to God with horror and amazement. He doesn't compute with us because of all our sin and crappiness. So, in a sense, our depraved state helps us truly appreciate the glory of God, because we see the vastness that separates us from his holiness.
Yuck. I don't like that at all. Doesn't that look like this:
I'm sure that is not what Calvin intended to say. He writes a lot of stuff about piety, and scripture as sources of knowing God. However, all such efforts need to be filtered through a memory of my own crappiness.
Calvin starts with epistemology. What do we know? He comes up with two things: knowledge of God and knowledge of ourselves. But, the two have to go together, Calvin says.
Why? Well, if you look in the mirror, you'd be tempted to think you are pretty awesome. I'd be tempted to agree. But, Calvin says no; in fact you're a piece of crap. How does he know that? Because he compares us to God, who is truly awesome.
Then, he says that we can also see God through ourselves. But, since we're crap, we always respond to God with horror and amazement. He doesn't compute with us because of all our sin and crappiness. So, in a sense, our depraved state helps us truly appreciate the glory of God, because we see the vastness that separates us from his holiness.
Yuck. I don't like that at all. Doesn't that look like this:
More Depraved <--------------------------------------> Less Depraved
More Knowledge <------------------------------------> Less Knowledge
of God of God
I'm sure that is not what Calvin intended to say. He writes a lot of stuff about piety, and scripture as sources of knowing God. However, all such efforts need to be filtered through a memory of my own crappiness.
Stab Myself
Lent is all about self impalement. We're supposed to mourn and contemplate mortality. We're supposed to ponder our sinfulness. blah blah blah
Fasting alone isn't miserable enough for me, so I have decided to step it up this year and tackle John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion.
I may die.
First, a little bit about John Calvin. He was, apparently, a real peach of a guy. According to one critic, he was called the "Greek of Claix." His patron was from the city of Claix and he got the 'Greek' moniker for his tendency to wander around and drop bits of Greek into every conversation.
Douchebag.
Anyway, the Greek of Claix was, apparently pretty smart and ended up moving to modern day Switzerland, where he attempted to take the Reformation away from "vulgar plebs." He did this by creating a beautiful utopia of a separated municipality that would be ruled by doctrine and serve an example to the world. In other words, he was a repressive, theocratic dictator.
I bet he was cool to hang out with:
Frail, thin, short, and lightly bearded, with ruthless, penetrating eyes, he was humorless and short-tempered. The slightest criticism enraged him. Those who questioned his theology he called “pigs,” “asses,” “riffraff,” “dogs,” “idiots,” and “stinking beasts.” One morning he found a poster on his pulpit accusing him of “Gross Hypocrisy.” A suspect was arrested. No evidence was produced, but he was tortured day and night for a month till he confessed. Screaming with pain, he was lashed to a wooden stake. Penultimately, his feet were nailed to the wood; ultimately he was decapitated. (Source)Well, maybe not so cool.
Another way that Calvin took the Reformation back from the "vulgar plebs" was by theologizing. When he wasn't torturing heretics (critics), the Greek of Claix somehow found time to write a little book called the Institutes of the Christian Religion. Institutes is a careful, systematic description of Reformed theology. Calvin was very particular about theology. Just as Servetus.
Institutes has become the Talmud of Reformed Christians. I mean, people get misty-eyed when they talk about Institutes. So, I am going to see how misty-eyed I get. At the very least I plan on getting a lot of sleep this Lenten season.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)