Two Peas in a Pod

September 28, 2007

“Accordingly, to prove that God is almighty we must assume the existence of the universe. For if anyone would have it that certain ages, or periods of time, or whatever he cares to call them, elapsed during which the present creation did not exist, he would undoubtedly prove that in those ages or periods God was not almighty, but that he afterwards became almighty from the time when he began to have creatures over whom he could exercise power. Thus God will apparently have experienced a kind of progress, for there can be no doubt that it is better for him to be almighty than not to be so. Now how is it anything but absurd that God should at first not possess something that is appropriate to him and then should come to possess it? But if there was not time when he was not almighty, there must always have existed the things in virtue of which he is almighty; and there must always have existed things under his sway, which own him as their ruler.”

Origen, On First Principles, Bk.I C.2,10

“God has created the world for His glory; His glory is not known, unless His mercy and His justice are declared: to this end He has, as an act of sheer grace, destyined some men to eternal life, and some, by just judgment, to eternal damnation. Mercy presupposes misery, justice presupposes guilt.”

Theodore de Beze


The Many or the One?

September 25, 2007

“The Pelagian man was essentially a separate individual: the man of Augustine is always about to be engulfed in vast, mysterious solidarities.” Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo, 365


Book Deals

September 24, 2007

Here are some book deals on contemporary analytic literature on free will and determinism. While I do not agree with all of the authors, these works comprise a good dose of the literature being discussed.

 Randolph Clarke, Libertarian Accounts of Free Will

James Tomberlin, Philosophical Perspectives 14: Action and Freedom

Laura Waddell Ekstrom, Agency and Responsibility

Derek Pereboom, Living Without Free Will

Harry Frankfurt The Importance of What We Care About

Joseph Cambell ed., Freedom and Determinism


Before Their Very Eyes

September 11, 2007

“You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified.”

 Hmm. How odd. They were in Galatia but they managed to make it to the crucifixion in Jerusalem?


Citation

September 11, 2007

I am trying to track down a citation from St. Basil. I don’t know why I can’t find it but I can’t. If any of you know where it is, please let me know. The passage runs something like the following.

“Isn’t it silly to think that providence and foreknowledge are the same things?”

If you know where this is, please drop a comment and let me know.


Icons and religious pictures

September 11, 2007

The Divine Liturgy makes the whole world function in a trinitarian way. It puts the whole of nature into trinitarian action. Once man had participated in the Liturgy, he has an inner vision of the world. He observes one constant, made up of the changeable elements of this world seen in a trinitarian light. One expression of this inner vision is Orthodox iconography, a script illegible to anyone who has not participated in the Liturgy.

A religious picture is an altogether different thing from a liturgical icon. The one is the creation of someone’s artistic talent, the other the flower and reflection of liturgical life. The one is of this world. It speaks of this world and leaves you in this world. The other brings you a simple, peaceful and life-giving message, coming down from above. It speaks to you of something which has gone beyond the categories of yesterday and today, here and there, mine and thine. It addresses itself to human nature universally, to man’s thirst for something beyond. Through the icon, an everlasting and unchanging reality speaks without words; a reality which, in the clarity of silence and in tranquillity, raises up from the deepest level that which unites everything in man.

Read the rest of this entry »


St John of Damascus on Divine Names

September 10, 2007

“The following, then, are the mysteries which we have learned from the holy oracles, as the divine Dionysius the Areopagite said: that God is the cause and beginning of all: the essence of all that have essence: the life of the living: the reason of all rational beings: the intellect of all intelligent beings: the recalling and restoring of those who fall away from Him: the renovation and transformation of those that corrupt that which is natural: the holy foundation of those who are tossed in unholiness: the steadfastness of those who have stood firm: the way of those whose course is directed to Him and the hand stretched forth to guide them upwards. And I shall add He is also the Father of all His creatures (for God, Who brought us into being out of nothing, is in a stricter sense our Father than are our parents who have derived both being and begetting from Him): the shepherd of those who follow and are tended by Him: the radiance of those who are enlightened: the initiation of the initiated: the deification of the deified: the peace of those at discord: the simplicity of those who love simplicity: the unity of those who worship unity: of all beginning the beginning, super-essential because above all beginnings: and the good revelation of what is hidden, that is, of the knowledge of Him so far as that is lawful for and attainable by each. Deity being incomprehensible is also assuredly nameless. Therefore since we know not His essence, let us not seek for a name for His essence. For names are explanations of actual things. But God, Who is good and brought us out of nothing into being that we might share in His goodness, and Who gave us the faculty of knowledge, not only did not impart to us His essence, but did not even grant us the knowledge of His essence. For it is impossible for nature to understand fully the supernatural. Moreover, if knowledge is of things that are, how can there be knowledge of the super-essential? Through His unspeakable goodness, then, it pleased Him to be called by names that we could understand, that we might not be altogether cut off from the knowledge of Him but should have some notion of Him, however vague. Inasmuch, then, as He is incomprehensible, He is also unnamable. But inasmuch as He is the cause of all and contains in Himself the reasons and causes of all that is, He receives names drawn from all that is, even from opposites: for example, He is called light and darkness, water and fire: in order that we may know that these are not of His essence but that He is super-essential and unnamable: but inasmuch as He is the cause of all, He receives names from all His effects.

Read the rest of this entry »


Remember

September 6, 2007