David Bentley Hart on the New Atheist Myth of "Secular Progress" (p1)

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 9 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 39

  • @bayreuth79
    @bayreuth79 10 років тому +38

    It makes no difference whether God exists? That is arguably the most risible thing I have ever heard! If God exists it makes not just a difference- but an infinite difference!

  • @gor764
    @gor764 7 років тому +17

    I can't explain how presumptuous and philosophically unsound Terry Sanderson presents himself in this discussion. Assertions are not arguments.

  • @ChuckyChuckster
    @ChuckyChuckster 12 років тому +4

    His essay on "Jung's Therapeutic Gnosticism" in First Things magazine is very good.

  • @jkovert
    @jkovert 12 років тому +2

    He went to Cambridge, so he may have picked up a slight inflection. He also taught at Providence, and I definitely hear a pronounced New England influence.

  • @ChuckyChuckster
    @ChuckyChuckster 12 років тому +4

    My opinion is that he doesn't believe in the literal Adam/Eve/serpent.

  • @jkovert
    @jkovert 12 років тому +3

    I prefer reading Hart than listening to him, only because his voice doesn't project very well.

  • @aragon123ist
    @aragon123ist  13 років тому +1

    @finchy633 I believe a "Please do not feed the trolls" admonition would be felicitous here.

  • @ChuckyChuckster
    @ChuckyChuckster 12 років тому +2

    Do you think human rights as recognized in US Constitution are an agreement in the self-interest of people who see the rights as inherent or simply an arrangement between ego-bound nihilists trying to get the best deal possible?
    If rights are inherent in our nature, how so? If not, then why not?

  • @RomTankin
    @RomTankin 13 років тому +1

    @marcus3379 No, he speaks like he's from Maryland.

  • @TNZNXS
    @TNZNXS 10 років тому +1

    DBH claiming that Christianity has exclusive magisterium on certain inalienable rights is something akin to Newton trying to erase Liebnitz as a co- inventor calculus.

    • @studyinsteel5186
      @studyinsteel5186 10 років тому +1

      Does that mean it has no authority on the subject if it doesn't have "magisterium" for specifically certain inalienable rights? Also isn't magisterium exclusive to the Roman Catholics?

  • @sandwoodbt
    @sandwoodbt 12 років тому

    Nothing very interesting in this so far

  • @duryeajm2
    @duryeajm2 12 років тому +2

    David Bentley Hart: partisan of the mud man, the rib woman, and the
    walking-talking snake.
    Whoever is resolved to believe in miracles, needs them.

  • @EliosMoonElios
    @EliosMoonElios 10 років тому +1

    Let see:
    There was a time when religion rules entire Europe and that time was called The Dark Age and that time murder burning hanging torturing for nothing end when secular laws(constitutions) was imposed above religious laws.
    ·
    Conclution: Religious laws give grotesque and sadic times, secular laws give progressive laws, human rights, Vienna convention, rights to opreced minorities(including women vote, and black freedom)... Yeah, really good times without religion in laws.

    • @BehaviorModification
      @BehaviorModification 10 років тому +14

      And what about that direct result of Enlightenment thought known as the French Revolution? No blood shed there I suppose.

    • @EliosMoonElios
      @EliosMoonElios 10 років тому +2

      BehaviorModification A single french psycho dictator for few years an then is killed and the horror end, is NOT equivalent to an institution than kill thousand of millions of innocent people all around the world for 5,000 years.

    • @humanrays
      @humanrays 9 років тому +2

      The abolitionists weren't buddhists.

    • @EliosMoonElios
      @EliosMoonElios 9 років тому

      accidentalprotégé
      Exactly, abolitionist use reasoning, human dignity and empathy not bible:
      ·
      www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm

    • @aescoto1523
      @aescoto1523 9 років тому +11

      EliosMoonElios Nonsense, you are willfully unaware that the history of abolitionism is replete with Christian dogma and doctrines. You original statement is completely untrue

  • @TNZNXS
    @TNZNXS 10 років тому +1

    The rights DBH claims magisterium over are all inherent, inalienable, natural.
    They preceded any human concept of god and or religion.
    Religion certainly helped cultivate and enrich those rights as they became more apparent, but religion continues to suppress and marginalize too many.
    It wasn't that long ago that possessing or reading scripture was the exclusive provenance of the priestly. Reading is now ubiquitous - so we have that:-)