To any and all: Byron Borger's fantastic article in Comment is a bookworm's alluring insight into how to love reading well.

Currently Reading

I'm currently reading The World is Flat by Thomas Friedman.

It's a fascinating review of the forces of globalism. A little on the long side perhaps, but filled with personally anecdotes of experiences of the effects of globalism.

Amazon.ca: Crunchy Cons: How Birkenstocked Burkeans, Gun-Loving Organic Gardeners, Evangelical Free-Range Farmers, Hip Homeschooling Mamas, Right-Wing Nature Lovers, and Their Diverse: Books

Another book worth reading, just for the title.

HT

American Vertigo: Traveling America in the Footsteps of Tocqueville - The New York Times Book Review

If I could read French, then I could read this. Sounds good for a laugh.

Another look at Abraham - and God

In Playing With Knives: God the Dangerous Douglas Wilson offers some more thoughts on Abraham, Isaac, Moriah, knives, killing, ethics, niceness, and God.

teleological suspension of the ethical?

This past weekend I was blessed to hear nova m'gwa's thoughts on Problem Two in Fear and Trembling. Attempting to state the situation simply, in Problem Two Kierkegaard attempts to explain both the horror and the inexplicable paradox of what seems to be Abraham's succumbing to ethical sin in intending to sacrifice Isaac; despite the fact that fully intending to kill one's son is murderous and wrong, somehow this intent is exhibition of faith in this particular situation. How can this be? In some way, Abraham's responsibility to the norm, to the universal ethic, is superceded by his action of faith. S.K.'s point is that this is cannot be 'mediated', or understood.

Nova's frustration with S.K. stemmed from this problem: how can -- or should -- faith supercede the ethical? Is it not a grotesque copout to say that faith can just break all the rules, and does not need the governance of reason? Furthermore, does faith require that the ethical be 'teleologically suspended', or is it possible to have faith without that?

I'm not sure what the answer is. However, it may be helpful to note that Kierkegaard wrote in a time and place where the concern was not between faiths of different religions; the issue which he was addressing was a lack of vibrant and passionate faith. Rather than wrestling with the peculiarities of fear and trembling before the will of an Almighty God, people ho-hummed as they left to sleep through the afternoon service of their once-per-week 'Lord's Day'.

Kierkegaard may have had little or no concern that his words could be taken to mean that all instances of faith, no matter which religion, were excused or even required to suspend the ethical. And this may be his failing.

My own resolution of Abraham's predicament still tends toward rational explanation; I like the voluntaristic explanation of the late medieval period: God's will determines the ethical, and his absolute power means that he can -- but does not -- make anything ethical; the idea of ethical norm does, however, retain meaning through the ordained power of God, by which he upholds the standards for life.

Kierkegaardian Faith

I find it interesting that all of SK's discussion of such matters takes place in the context of a pre-determined ethical base. Not only that, but SK also acknowledges that this ethical base is completely accessible without Scripture.

The only thing that separates the pagan Greeks from the "Christian" world is SK's conception of faith; but even here SK talks about Plato praising the "divine madness" and seems to understand that to refer to faith as well.

It is no wonder that existentialists following him make light of his Christian commitment. Though he uses examples of faith from Scripture, it is unclear whether belief in the God of Abraham is a necessary prerequisite for SK's faith at all.

My Confession

Hey Group.
It is with much shame that I must confess that I will not have time in the next couple of weeks to comment on (let alone read) the book that I suggested for our little book club. I am begging your pardon, counting on your abundant mercy.

Also, I have noticed that we have had many visitors interested in our little discussion group. Some of these visitors feel as though they are intruding on an inclusive club. Richie, perhaps you could put something at the top of our sidebar indicating that we love to have visitors read along and submit any comments to our discussion.

Cheers all, and I will check in a couple of weeks from now.

By the way Richie, good comments so far. It is good that someone in our group is taking this seriously.

Finite vs. Infinite

A charge commonly levelled at Kierkegaard is that he places an impassible divide between the spiritual and the earthly, the infinite and the finite. This seems to be false, to me.

For rather than severing these two, Kierkegaard simply recognizes the incommensurability of the infinite and the finite. They are utterly immiscible. But he goes on to stress the mind-paralyzing paradox of how they do -- inevitably -- come together in the life of faith. Nowhere is this paradox more heart-warmingly clear than in his example of the Knight of Faith, who

takes delight in everything, and whenever one sees him taking part in a particular pleasure, he does it with the persistence which is the mark of the earthly man whose soul is absorbed in such things . . . He lounges at an open window and looks out on the square on which he lives; he is interested in everything that goes on , in arat which slips under the curb, in the children's play, and this with the nonchalance of a girl of sixteen. And yet he is no genius, for in vain I have sought in him the incommensurability of genius. ("Problemata: Preliminary Expectoration", Fear and Trembling)

Kierkegaard's man of faith is supremely this-worldly, by virtue of his other-worldliness.

What is education?

"What is education? I should suppose that education was the curriculum one had to run through in order to catch up with oneself, and he who will not pass through this curriculum is helped very little by the fact that he was born in the most enlightened age."
- Soren Kierkegaard

A pair of gut reflexions

In the ‘Prelude’ Kierkegaard allows us to peek in on the horror of the man whose faith demands that he kill his own child. But the ‘Pangyric upon Abraham’ wrung me through the wash; what monstrous command could tear away the beloved of Abraham’s weathered years? The clarity of Abraham’s faith never shone so brightly before me as it does now.

"Yet Abraham believed, and believed for this life"(Emphasis mine). S.K. subtly makes a powerful point: it takes a firmer sort of faith to believe in these broken days than in the starry brightness of an other-worldly science-fiction future. I have to swallow hard and lower my gaze to the ground when I think of how even my 'this-worldly faith’ likes to look off beyond the corners, to pretend it has little to do with what goes on within these walls.

Johannes de Silentio

As I read the first bits of Fear and Trembling, I hear the voice of Craig reminding me of the significance of S.K.'s pseudonym. "Listen for the silence."

Has anyone else been struck by the silence in the retellings of Abraham's trial? Again and again, Abraham spends four days with his son in silence as they approach the mount of doom. As Kierkegaard doubtless intended, that silence is most terrifying and unsettling -- but how would one fill it?

Commence operation Kierkegaard

Welcome aboard Maria, it's good to have you with us! Now we have our own resident philosopher. I was thinking about our little group and this really is an interdisciplinary group. In addition to being our only real artist--he has a pseudonym!--Jay, is into English (and theology I believe), Richie and Steve are extreme biology nerdlings (although Richie's saving grace is his double major in Religion/theology). I am a history buff as well as an aspiring biblical theologian. A well rounded group I'd say. It should make for good discussion.

Anyway, everyone seems to have Fear and Trembling so I think we should begin reading/discussing. Don't forget Richie's strict rules.

Peace

The Kierkgaard Agenda

Growing up, I only knew of Kierkegaard as the father of a romantic existential movement in philosophy. Many are learning to understand him in a new way, however.

Kierkegaard, it appears, was actually a fervent and troubled Christian who was overwhelmingly appalled by the nominal belief of his countrymen; Denmark had been Lutheran for years, and took its membership in Christendom for granted. However, the vital, dynamic, individual and communal, relationship with God the Father Almighty, through the horrible sacrificial death of the Son and the ministering of the Spirit -- that was what S.K. wanted to see reinstated, valued as the pearl of the Kingdom it is.

The House Church Central site has a blurb on the agenda driving Kierkegaard's literary soul-searching.

New Book

Hey guys. I talked with Richie and he asked me to suggest our next reading. I would like to read Fear and Trembling by Soren Kierkegaard, but I want the group's input on this. I know Richie has read it and perhaps others of you have too. If that is the case I will suggest another one. Perhaps those who have read it would welcome the opportunity to read it again with the benefit of discussion.
The book, as far as I know, is S.K.s struggle to understand Genesis 22 (the binding of Isaac) and ultimately to understand a God who would require this test of his beloved. This book fits the criteria of being easily accessible, a classic, and fairly cheap (chapters.ca for about $15) and I think it will stimulate our minds and generate a good discussion.
Let me know what you think about this pick and if it is not agreeable to everyone I will go back to the drawing board.

ps Congrats to those who graduated on Saturday. I'm sure it was as much a blessing for you as it was for me.