Good video. Once additional thought or comment. Post Liberal Theology seems to up us (individually, collectively, and culturally) at the center of the universe. Is there room for God in such a system?
Yes, right on. This is why the switch from a correspondence theory of truth (our words pointing to God) to a coherence theory of truth (our lives must be consistent with the claims we make about God). Thanks for the good insights. ~Kevin
Lindbeck and Bruce Marshall are explicit that coherence has to do with the *justification* of truth-claims, not the essence of truth itself. Hauerwas is also in print agreeing with that crucial distiction. Besides, you don't get postliberalism without Barth, and he has zero tolerance for anything but the Lord at the center of our universe. Think again.
You cannot have the feeling of God consciousness, unless you have language to put words to that feeling? So, you cannot experience the awe related to meeting God in a sunset, unless you have the proper vocabulary? That seems like it is putting the cart before the horse, since it seems quite likely that the sense of numina that one experiences in these moments would predate human speech. The Truth that we are seeking is external, but it is bigger than us, even collectively. Therefore, it is bigger than culture, or a culture's Wittgenstein-like language games.
Thanks for the insight. Yes, a key issue! I think PL's would say that the "numina" cannot be definite (i.e. experience "of God") unless we have a language meaning system for God. The experience is meaningless unless we have language for it ("awe," "sunset," "God," etc.). ~~Kevin
Good video. Once additional thought or comment. Post Liberal Theology seems to up us (individually, collectively, and culturally) at the center of the universe. Is there room for God in such a system?
Yes, right on. This is why the switch from a correspondence theory of truth (our words pointing to God) to a coherence theory of truth (our lives must be consistent with the claims we make about God). Thanks for the good insights. ~Kevin
Lindbeck and Bruce Marshall are explicit that coherence has to do with the *justification* of truth-claims, not the essence of truth itself. Hauerwas is also in print agreeing with that crucial distiction. Besides, you don't get postliberalism without Barth, and he has zero tolerance for anything but the Lord at the center of our universe. Think again.
You cannot have the feeling of God consciousness, unless you have language to put words to that feeling? So, you cannot experience the awe related to meeting God in a sunset, unless you have the proper vocabulary? That seems like it is putting the cart before the horse, since it seems quite likely that the sense of numina that one experiences in these moments would predate human speech. The Truth that we are seeking is external, but it is bigger than us, even collectively. Therefore, it is bigger than culture, or a culture's Wittgenstein-like language games.
Thanks for the insight. Yes, a key issue! I think PL's would say that the "numina" cannot be definite (i.e. experience "of God") unless we have a language meaning system for God. The experience is meaningless unless we have language for it ("awe," "sunset," "God," etc.). ~~Kevin
Read Bruce D. Marshall, Trinity and Truth (Cambridge UP, 2000). You seem to be hearing things postliberals aren't saying.