Honestly

By
Honestly, I really like this book so far. I have never read it before and I like how John Robinson includes the work of so many other philosophers and scholars in this book. I have read up to p.83 in my book, which covers all the way from the preface through the first four chapters. I am really enjoying how all of the points and questions in the book seem to carry over into the next chapters, while adding new ideas and concepts. I will be honest with you, I do not think I am always perfectly understanding everything, as philosophy is something that takes my brain a little while to figure out. I am sure though, that through discussion in class and by reading other people’s blog posts, I will understand it all a little better.
The thing I would like to talk about today is in chapter 3 “The Ground of Our Being”.
Robinson says, “To believe in God as love means that in pure personal relationship we encounter, not merely what ought to be, but what is, the deepest, veriest truth about the structure of reality.”. When I first read these words, I loved them right away. To me, these words speak a sort of personal truth about how through understanding God and His all-powerful love and mercy, and through growing a personal relationship with Him, we will attain a better understanding and judgment of the just, beautiful, and good. It is saying we must first understand Him to be able to understand all. I know that this phrase could mean different things to different people, this is just what it means to me and I think it is beautiful.


Pun of the week: What is the best catchphrase of honors when it comes to being truthful about having read? Honesty is the best policy!

P.S  I commented on Will and Sophia's!

Comments

  1. Sophia ColbertApril 8, 2018 at 10:15 PM

    I'm glad you're enjoying the read. I can't say the same for myself, but I did like the idea of God as reality. It reminds me of The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis. In this story, Heaven is so real that people look transparent compared to its realness. Everything on Earth just didn't compare to the reality of God and His kingdom.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Will BradyApril 9, 2018 at 11:16 PM

    The “God is Love” idea is also the best way to determine if you truly love something/someone… Are the ties between you and the other person/thing godly? Is it a relationship of sacrifice, or desire? If the moral attributes of God are missing from a relationship, it isn’t love. It might be one of several negative things, but not love.

    But of course that relationship with Him to determine the good and just that you mentioned has to come first.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Noah PalframanApril 9, 2018 at 11:29 PM

    God as love also holds the opposite that God is not hate. So when we feel hatred towards something, and it is inevitable that we will, where is God there? Obviously, He isn't there because by that statement, God is love, we understand that He only exists in love and when we love, we connect with God...but I think people miss the part where God can hate as well. "Noah! My God doesn't hate anything!" Of course He does, He hates sin, and because we are filled with sin, it means we are filled with hatred. So by nature and logic, we are in a love-hate relationship with the Father. He hates the sin that has corrupted us, but He love us for overcoming that sin to pursue a DEEPER love with Him.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Michael TurnerApril 11, 2018 at 7:34 PM

    I do like both God as Reality and God as love as we understand here, however I still cannot get past the "God is weak part earlier on". That statement alone is clearly against the Bible. By portraying God as weak, we essentially deny every instance of power and authority God has shown. Sophia, thank you for mentioning C.S. Lewis. In "Abolition of Man" and "The Poison of Subjectivism", he gives us the look into personal relativism as an enemy to true faith. The Bible is very clear and objective. Everything is to be pointed towards God. Yet, if we begin to make doctrine hinge on our personal feelings and experience it ceases to be effective.

    I believe that Robinson and several of the other sources he use sink into this pit fall. Instead of trying to make God come to us in time we should seek to follow Him on His terms. That has been my issue with a few of the readings this semester. With Endo, we saw acceptance of apostatizing if it was used to save others. Clearly against the teachings Christ himself. With Russell and Flew, we get the denial of God simply because evil exists and/or we cannot sense him conventionally. The list goes on.

    I am happy to see other points of view but I worry that mankind has tried to dive too deep into the abyss of intellectualism and relativism.

    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