Watch your step, Milton.

By
It's not new that Milton has been entering uncharted territories with the story line of Paradise Lost. As we mentioned briefly in discussion, he is taking some great liberties in deciding to include dialogue between God the Father and Jesus. While at first I thought this was an interesting and unique decision on his part, I am beginning to dislike it. Of course, it is risky in the first place to write as if God is speaking without divine inspiration; there have been some things Milton has included that definitely rubbed me the wrong way. For example: when God is telling Jesus about the disturbance Satan is causing, he says, "Let us advise and to this hazard draw / With speed what force is left and all employ / In our defense, lest unawares we lose / This our high place, our sanctuary, our hill" (V.729-732). To think Satan even for a second had any chance against God would be blasphemy. God is all powerful, omnipotent, and the creator of all things; He could speak one word and erase everything, including Satan and all his buddies. So the fact that Milton would put it into his character God's tongue that they could possibly lose heaven makes me rather angry. Later on in book 6, we are presented with the conversation between God and Jesus as God tells Him that He will be given the glory in defeating Satan, as the angels cannot do it on their own. Now, this conversation starts to get dicey in that Milton seems to be making it out that God has more power and authority than Jesus. In John 6:38, Jesus says, "For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me." Which might support Milton's apparent stance on the trinity. However, we also have Jesus' words in John chapter 10 when He says "I and the Father are one." Milton has thus presented God and Jesus as two separate deities, which I don't appreciate.

P.S. I commented on Sophia and Abigail's posts

Comments

  1. Ethan LafontSeptember 4, 2017 at 8:47 PM

    I feel like Milton isn't intending to show God in a light that is against his sovereign nature, although i deftly see where you are coming from. Luckily we use this text as a mere literary work and not as a theological text. This text would lead many people to some odd theologies.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nathanael C. CarrollSeptember 4, 2017 at 8:59 PM

    Welllll, I actually am with Faith on this one to a degree. Yes, Milton gives a very unscriptural rendition of God's sovereignty/omnipotence here, but I think he doesn't necessarily have to believe this of God in reality, but uses it as a literary device to provide more drama. In traditional epics, you don't get quite this amount of drama, because none of the gods seem to have anything to lose. The gods' scenes are usually quite boring. By tampering with the character of God here, Milton is not being blasphemous, but rather is pushing for a certain feel and message of the story--rebellion and betrayal/ punishment.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Michael TurnerSeptember 4, 2017 at 10:36 PM

    From the literary standpoint, Milton is simply using methods that had long been employed in the past. Even Dante went to some extremes in 'La Divinia Commedia' that bordered on the heretical. While I do agree that portraying God as even potentially having a chance of losing is pretty messed up, I am not so sure he can really be considered blasphemous. As far as Milton's actual theological views, his prose work makes it clear that he is not quite in line with what we know to be true. His tendency to use the Son as a completely separate character goes hand in hand with his anti-trinitarian views. Milton's literation in the poem is based on his own theological beliefs and studies.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

An Honest Reaction to Reading "Honest to God"

By
Originally I said in my last blog post that I liked this book, but I have sort of changed my mind. It is not that I hate it or anything, it is just weird and I don’t really agree with what John Robinson is saying most of the time. I appreciate that he is trying to write something different and new, but my problem is that some of the ideas are just a little too radical for my taste, and I disagree with him a lot. In the seventh and last chapter of the book, Robinson himself acknowledges his radicalness and writes about how he knows that this type of thought on religion is controversial. He goes on to write how all great thinkers were seen as controversial when they first started and says, “Every new religious truth comes as the destroyer of some other god”. To further prove this point, he uses the example of how Socrates was condemned as an atheist for not believing in multiple gods, and while it is true that Socrates was a great philosopher who was not seen as so when he was alive, I ...
Read more

Raphael and a man walk into Eden...

By
I'll just start off by saying Raphael is one of the three named archangels in Scripture we hear the least about, and I thoroughly enjoy just reading and seeing his name pop up. Regardless, I want to touch on Adam's recounting of his own..."birth". Take that with a grain of salt as Adam was not physically born, but rather he simply became. In truth, we should all be able to give a similar account to their first memory of consciousness and fully aware. Adam was created, but he realized he could walk, talk, and speak without first learning. Imagine being able to think clear thoughts in your native language and be a functioning individual right out of the womb. It's an incredible thought, and Adam can give a recall of this like it were yesterday...which it might have been, who knows? Aside from that, Adam could even give an account to Eve's creation. The Bible says nothing pertaining to this matter so this is where Milton does a bit of adlibbing and writes around ...
Read more

Extra blog

By
OK so, honors project! Honestly I really loved it as a whole. I said this already in the video, but I feel like I personally could've done better. I just feel like I didn't have enough time to completely process some questions and be able to give my best responses. I really enjoyed reading the O'Connor piece, which I think was everyone's favorite anyway. I love narrative stories like that, but honestly I'm glad I got to be in the Russell group. I feel like that group was the easiest to argue and answer from, honestly. As a whole, I would love to do a project like this again in later semesters. It was a lot of fun and time FLEW by.
Read more