tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post2510742753713186225..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: Abbott on Locke, Reason & RevelationBrad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-19012209979197148482009-08-08T00:55:30.417-06:002009-08-08T00:55:30.417-06:00Thats very interesting good all the best...
_____...Thats very interesting good all the best...<br /><br />___________________<br />Susana<br /><a href="http://www.paydayloancashonline.com/" rel="nofollow">No Credit Checks instant Payday Loans</a>Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12186838559949418956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-47107843399653444322009-07-27T20:24:43.992-06:002009-07-27T20:24:43.992-06:00"Its poetic that we find common ground with L..."Its poetic that we find common ground with Locke"<br /><br />I think these are the ideas that a majority rallied around philosophically regardless of their respective theological views. I think we all lose sight of that. It is a shame because it causes so much ill will today,King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-21735586375813806102009-07-27T20:19:59.411-06:002009-07-27T20:19:59.411-06:00Tom stated:
"Further, each in his own way, L...Tom stated:<br /><br />"Further, each in his own way, Luther and Calvin were as theologically dogmatic as the [Catholic] church they condemned."<br /><br />No doubt. Your second point in that comment is well put too.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-64553638319459285092009-07-27T20:15:58.901-06:002009-07-27T20:15:58.901-06:00Bpabbot stated:
"Locke seeks to teach men ho...Bpabbot stated:<br /><br />"Locke seeks to teach men how to think reasonably, not what is reasonable to think"<br /><br />I think this is well put and true. The best Church meetings I was ever part of used the socratic method and one had to ask questions not answer them. The first time I went in I could not even tell they were Christians. Numerous unbelievers came every week and participated in the open conversations. <br /><br />It was awesome until they started bringing Bible in and the goal became getting all the Christian kids back in church more than seeking truth from the ground up. While it was pure it was great. Why? It followed what you just stated:<br /><br />People were challenge to think not told what to think.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-22848500840077958232009-07-27T20:09:07.976-06:002009-07-27T20:09:07.976-06:00Well, that indeed was your core point.Well, that indeed was your core point.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-26328617479521286162009-07-27T19:59:53.499-06:002009-07-27T19:59:53.499-06:00Thanks Tom.
Its poetic that we find common ground...Thanks Tom.<br /><br />Its poetic that we find common ground with Locke.bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-48277827068352285022009-07-27T19:29:40.479-06:002009-07-27T19:29:40.479-06:00Locke seeks to teach men how to think reasonably, ...<i>Locke seeks to teach men how to think reasonably, not what is reasonable to think.</i><br /><br />Very nice work on all this, Ben. There's no question that Christianity---"religion"---was coming out of what LEH Lecky [only somewhat unfairly] blanketed as "superstition" [witch trials, demons being blamed for the work of germs].<br /><br />Further, each in his own way, Luther and Calvin were as theologically dogmatic as the [Catholic] church they condemned.<br /><br />The best argument for Protestantism in the Founding was not in the doctrines of "reformed" Protestantism, "TULIP" and the like, but in the resistance to any authority's interpretation of scripture as the Last Word. A man's reason and his religious conscience answer to only one Sovereign, and that sovereign isn't a king or a president or a government, nor a church or a preacher.<br /><br />If Locke's part in all that is to be called Enlightenment, then so be it. But as we see, at least in Locke's case [and I would argue in the Founding's as well], that such progress from superstition and authoritarianism was still within the purview of Christianity, not outside it, as Hume and Voltaire and Rousseau held themselves.<br /><br />[OK, OK, dave 2, you know what I mean. Locke argues within Christianity, not outside it. The other 3 don't.]Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-14371696468958409382009-07-27T16:02:07.081-06:002009-07-27T16:02:07.081-06:00King,
My impression is that Locke is instructing ...King,<br /><br />My impression is that Locke is instructing on how to form reasonable opinions (theological opinions, or otherwise). Locke is not instructing what those reasonable opinions should be. As such, Locke is not taking the sides, of one opinion vs another.<br /><br />Thus, when those promoting opposing, but well reasoned, world-views each understand Locke to be speaking to them is indicative (to me) that Locke has succeeded in reaching each of them. <br /><br />My comment; "[Locke's] words are the manifestation of passion for reasoned analysis, rather than passion for reasoned theology itself"; may be better expressed as; Locke seeks to teach men <i>how</i> to think reasonably, not <i>what</i> is reasonable to think.<br /><br />I should cautiously qualify that my remarks respect the context of the essay this post examined. When my spare time permits, I hope to study Locke's essay <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=LKAUAAAAQAAJ&pg=PP7" rel="nofollow">The Reasonableness of Christianity</a>, so that I may have a better informed opinion of that work.bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-48315901429028243862009-07-27T13:36:29.800-06:002009-07-27T13:36:29.800-06:00King, my comment was too quick and poorly worded. ...King, my comment was too quick and poorly worded. I'll give it the effort is deserves and respond later.bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-65754012586417709262009-07-27T12:56:41.623-06:002009-07-27T12:56:41.623-06:00Bpabbot stated:
" my impression is that his ...Bpabbot stated:<br /><br />" my impression is that his words are the manifestation of passion for reasoned analysis, rather than passion for reasoned theology itself."<br /><br />Explain this I do not understand your point.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-29688546539394452022009-07-27T12:30:20.543-06:002009-07-27T12:30:20.543-06:00In this essay, Locke discusses the provinces of re...In this essay, Locke discusses the provinces of reason and faith. As it is not a theological exercise, he abstains from the mention of his personal reasoned conclusions regrading theology, such as biblical inerrancy. I think this is wise, as Locke avoids distancing those whose reasoning reaches different conclusions than his own.<br /><br />While Locke did document what he thought to be "The Reasonableness of Christianity", my impression is that his words are the manifestation of passion for reasoned analysis, rather than passion for reasoned theology itself. Thus, I sense he is again avoiding theological conflict by focusing on what is well reasoned and avoiding counter examples.bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-24086002628724166232009-07-27T12:19:45.289-06:002009-07-27T12:19:45.289-06:00J stated:
"Locke opens the door to Jefferson...J stated:<br /><br />"Locke opens the door to Jefferson's more skeptical approach to reading the ancient text of the Bible, though I would agree that Locke never explicitly rejects biblical inerrancy--."<br /><br />Locke's approach to the Bible does open up a can of worms. But one does not have to take it as far as Jefferson did. Inerrancy is ridiculous. There are errors all over the Bible. Paul gives opinions all the time was he infallible? The other thing people do is take passages that are descriptive and make them out to be proscriptive. The same battle is going on today between the "Emerging Church" and the "Traditional Church".King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-15746332748292854172009-07-27T12:13:40.222-06:002009-07-27T12:13:40.222-06:00Bpabbot stated:
"I also recognize most of wh...Bpabbot stated:<br /><br />"I also recognize most of what we call morality was revealed to us by society." <br /><br />A society impacted a great deal by 2,000 years of Christianity. Now I am the first to say this has some good and some bad. But I think it is hard to deny the fact the the story of Jesus has not impacted the moral fiber of Western society. <br /><br />I think our battles over the Christian Nation issue and what that even really means clouds this understanding. It is at our own peril whether one believes this world view was handed down from revelation or reason.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-81550333014299223122009-07-27T12:04:03.103-06:002009-07-27T12:04:03.103-06:00J stated:
"It's also rather amusing that...J stated:<br /><br />"It's also rather amusing that some evangelicals now read Locke as a religious thinker."<br /><br />Is this unreasonable of a man who wrote a book called "The Reasonableness of Christianity", took the time to paraphrase 4 books of the New Testament, and prefaced his philosophical views on govenmnent with his First Treatise that is filled with references to the Bible? <br /><br />I stated in a comment yesterday that when the French got hold of his "Two Treatises" they only translated the first and that this is the one that made it to America. I got this from Wiki so I take it with a grain of salt until I get more information but this is telling. <br /><br />The supposed propaganda about the religious Christian hijacking the secular Locke could be the real "liars" line. At first glance, it looks more like the non-religious secularists hijacking the Christian Locke. It seems secularists want to take the philosophical ideas of Locke without the Theological underpinnings? <br /><br />The Bible says that house built on sand will fall. Look at the public schools where modern philosophy is king and tell me we as a Nation are better off because of this. We went from number one in the world to some think 30 th or 50th. I think it is worse from what I saw as a teacher compared to overseas. Problem number one? No right or wrong is being taught. Thus, the kids are out of control.King of Irelandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11793825722325763371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-87894828120808151232009-07-27T09:38:39.043-06:002009-07-27T09:38:39.043-06:00Locke was a human being, like the rest of us.
Wor...<i> Locke was a human being, like the rest of us.</i><br /><br />Working for Shaftesbury he also wrote a justification of slavery <br />in the colonies (carolinas, specifically), and an essay more or less claiming that the colonists were justified (by God's grace, more or less) in seizing the natives' lands. That's not that surprising, but Locke did at times sort of pretend to be an abolitionist. <br /><br />The ECHU is an important work, but Lockean empiricism hardly represents the pinnacle of philosophy or human thought.Locke really doesn't prove his sensationism accounts for all knowledge--he does however repeat it. Locke seems naive in a sense; the philosophy of common sense, as Bertrand Russell said. Russell also claimed, "Locke aimed at credibility, and achieved it at the expense of consistency."" <br /><br />It's also rather amusing that some evangelicals now read Locke as a religious thinker. Many intellectuals of the time--especially on the Continent-- considered empiricism as a whole the work of the devil, a forerunner to moral relativism, materialism and other social ills.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-61940369106856859162009-07-27T08:54:42.489-06:002009-07-27T08:54:42.489-06:00Locke--"any revelation to which one can also ...<i>Locke--"any revelation to which one can also give the assent of reason is the strongest-believed of all"</i><br /><br />That sounds about like Jefferson claiming that he respected those sections of Scripture--christian revelation--which he felt were compatible with Reason. Certainly Locke does suggest there is a criteria of some sort--so we might agree to say JC's morals as expressed in the Beatitudes (well, some people might), because they seem compatible with a rational ethics. On other hand, the rationalist would be hard-pressed to accept the strange mystical vision of the Book of Revelation as literally true. At the very least, Locke opens the door to Jefferson's more skeptical approach to reading the ancient text of the Bible, though I would agree that Locke never explicitly rejects biblical inerrancy--.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-74100062443944999152009-07-26T23:34:54.701-06:002009-07-26T23:34:54.701-06:00In either event, I do think it consistent with Loc...<i><br />In either event, I do think it consistent with Locke's that the strength of belief for any claim of faith / revelation is in proportion to its reasonableness.</i><br /><br />Yeah. Based on a reading of Locke's full work, not just quote-grabbing. Sometimes brute reason leaves our hearts so empty. That was the rest of what Locke says to us. Locke was a human being, like the rest of us. Most of us, anyway.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-53999273280131360452009-07-26T22:36:42.516-06:002009-07-26T22:36:42.516-06:00Regarding the comment "[...] until Locke'...Regarding the comment "[...] <i>until Locke's time---and I fear through our time as well---moral truth is often undiscoverable by reason</i>."<br /><br />I understand the discovery of moral truth to be a creative process.<br /><br />And, as such, I do recognize it as a revelation ... even if only the the metaphorical sense.<br /><br />I also recognize most of what we call morality was <i>revealed</i> to us by socieity.<br /><br />Thus, while I'm skeptical of the claim that there are moral truths that undiscoverable by reason, it is clear to me that no man is capable of applying reason to discover all the moral principles we take for granted today.<br /><br />Even so, not only do I find the words of Locke you quote to be reasonable, but I generally agree with them.bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-17264741287351184482009-07-26T21:39:16.221-06:002009-07-26T21:39:16.221-06:00Regarding your paraphrase of Locke, "any reve...Regarding your paraphrase of Locke, "<i>any revelation to which one can also give the assent of reason is the strongest-believed of all</i>", is that from the <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=LKAUAAAAQAAJ&dq=john%20locke%20the%20reasonableness%20of%20christianity&pg=PP7" rel="nofollow">The Reasonableness of Christianity As delivered in the Scriptures</a>, or do you refer to a passage from the essay I've referenced?<br /><br />In either event, I do think it consistent with Locke's that the strength of belief for any claim of faith / revelation is in proportion to its reasonableness.bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-60845015077222254542009-07-26T19:57:45.942-06:002009-07-26T19:57:45.942-06:00Very nice, Mr. Abbott, and a conscientious excerpt...Very nice, Mr. Abbott, and a conscientious excerpting.<br /><br />That Jesus was the Messiah---and Locke explicitly wrote he believed Jesus was---is "above" the province of reason. But if the earth can be shown to be not 6000 years old but billions, then a reasonable explanation must be offered, like the authors of the Bible couldn't count that high!<br /><br /><i>Thus Locke argues that reason is preferred when it is reasonable to apply it</i><br /><br />I believe Locke also writes elsewhere that any revelation to which one can also give the assent of reason is the strongest-believed of all.<br /><br /><i>An Essay Concerning Human Understanding </i> is largely designed to be a pure philosophical study of epistemology, how we know what we know. What's striking is how much the Bible was and had to be figured in, unlike today.<br /><br /><i>reason is the preferred means of discovery</i><br /><br />Unfortunately, up until Locke's time---and I fear through our time as well---moral truth is often undiscoverable by reason. The <i>Essay</i> was published in 1689, but as Locke wrote in <i>The Reasonableness of Christianity</i> in 1696:<br /><br />"And he that shall collect all the moral rules of the philosophers, and compare them with those contained in the new testament, will find them to come short of the morality delivered by Our Saviour, and taught by his apostles; a college made up, for the most part, of ignorant, but inspired fishermen."Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.com