I’d agree, but that’s mainly because I’m a shameless N.T. Wright fanboy. He did say he’d give his thoughts on Wright, I suppose, rather than a proper response. I think Lutherans sometimes miss that much of Wright’s critique of “Lutheranism” is geared more toward the Reformed and 20th century Liberal Lutheran understandings of soteriology. Wright is fully comfortable saying things like justification is the forensic declaration of righteousness that is the eschatological final judgement brought forward to/inaugurated in the present. He thus rejects the position that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us in justification, but rather reads Paul as saying that it is instead in Baptism that Christ’s death and resurrection are imputed to us (hence the opposition to Wright in many Reformed circles).
Greeting from Vietnam! I am reading Jenson's theology of the trinity. But I only found 2 books: Systematic Theology Vol 1 and 2. If you don't mind, can you send me some Robert W. Jenson's articles and books? Many thanks!!!
(2 of 2) C&GJ interviewer: "..ahh, what would you say about the conversation you've had with Dr Boogly Boogins Fphblart…?" Jenson's Answer: "well, y'know, in the book that made him famous,...and in essays shorter thereafter...he praised me as some kind of a marvel but insisted that at the key moment i was exactly wrong. The middle of the history of western theology, according to david, is Hegel. And he called my treating of the futurity of God to be true Hegelian. Now I always protested that isn't the case… There's a very [hy-truant can(??)] to answer flippantly: Post-Hegel, can anybody in western theology be running with anything but a fragment of Hegel and the answer to that--No probably. So, am I an Hegelian ---- Yeah. So what. "Also, I don't think that david finally comes out much differently than Karl Barth. He would be the last person on earth to agree with that. But I'm a [l' a li-thoothist to thanswer it]." It is a SERIOUSLY incredible interview, as the man's body and mind are crumbling away.... i believe he died only weeks or months later.... and the still rattling wisdom and brilliance screaming out of him.... aaaaany who ....... SO INTENSELY INTENNNNSELY glad i've found this channel and your podcast and please continue to Rock Onwards!
dag nabbit ... looks like i posted so long it got screwed up .... so since i'm feeling so proud of myself im going to post again in parts ... rrgh ... sorry...... here goes....
@@Mr.Truxton I think he's Anglican. Anyway, I have heard him say that many people get his justification theology wrong, thinking that he denies penal substitution and faith-based salvation, which he says he doesn't.
@@atanas-nikolov Well you can say that, but that's what they always say. Everyone is always just misunderstood they say. But I'd like to see where he said that.
@@Mr.Truxton I have heard many sermons and lectures by him. There is one specifically on making Christus Victor and the penal substitution views compatible.
@@atanas-nikolov I find him very evasive and ambiguous. He never seems to say anything very clearly. So I'd stay away from him. I think a teacher of the Word should be clear in their speech. But if you want to listen to him, go ahead.
*Luther's Small Catechism, Apostle's Creed, Third Article.* _Of Sanctification._ I believe in the Holy Ghost; one holy Christian Church, the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen. _What does this mean?_ --Answer. I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Ghost has called me by the Gospel, enlightened me with His gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith; even as He calls, gathers, enlightens, and sanctifies the whole Christian Church on earth, and keeps it with Jesus Christ in the one true faith; in which Christian Church He forgives daily and richly all sins to me and all believers, and at the last day will raise up me and all the dead, and will give to me and to all believers in Christ everlasting life. This is most certainly true.
@@justinmayfield6579 How is that relevant to the argument? My argument is if one does seem to know so much about analytical philosophy they shouldn't be making poor philosophical arguments like Jordan B Cooper made. Would you care to address that? As for me I don't know I'm NOT a philosopher, yet I do despite that somehow seem to find so many of these so called highbrow "philosophers" making some really bad arguments at times. There are some good christian philosophers though such as WLC and Alvin platinga and they have been a great asset to Christianity I think. So what is your point exactly?
Mr Liver - Alive in Christ You mentioned those philosophers being pagan and I assumed you were highlighting that as a difference between them and analytical philosophy. Just pointing out they are the same on that point. As far as Dr. Cooper’a statement about Plantigna’s theology, I’m not familiar with his theology, but I felt his point was that his theology seems to be a weak point for him and he speculated it was because of his foundation of analytical philosophy. There are a lot of examples of this kind of thing where someone is brilliant in one area of study but weak in theology. Wright is another he mentioned. Richard Dawkins is another extreme example. Any way, that’s as far as my thoughts go on this subject. I’m afraid I don’t have much to add.
p.s. Dr. Cooper has a related videos dealing with classical theology vs theological personalism. I think he mentions Plantigna. Probably would be a little more helpful. Elsewhere he discusses Aristotle and Plato as a basis for forming theological categories. It’s helpful to understand those thinker’s influence on modern systems of thinking.
@@justinmayfield6579 Oh sorry yes I should have elaborated that by pagan I meant Aristotle. It seems even Aquinas accepted Aristotle and Maimonides (although not pagan but definitely not Christian), over St John of Damascus etc and it feels like Jordan is all too willing to do the same sort of thing where we have to maintain Aristotle's philosophy, yet modern day philosophers like WLC (who have pointed out some of the flaws in the logic with things like the version of ADS that has been produced from it), don't seem to get much merit from Cooper.
(1 of 2 ... uff da, sorry...) so, since discovering you, i've been afraid to check out this clip.... as i deeply, DEEPLY loved the man, Jenson, and deeeeply cherish his work .... i was in Jenson's last class at st olafs [sic. (cuz i believe that institution no longer deserves to be taken seriously or even called by its correct name)] .... and YES, bbbbBOY was he weird. good call there. and bbbbBOY was he brilliant. good call again. (and i know that you know this) but BOYYYY u can't just nutshell him and give a hot take and then presume to've gotten him "right" ... AT all ... my favorite analytical philosopher (again, SO UTTERLY AND TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU about the oil-and-water nature of Analytic Philosophy and Good Theological speaking, and boy is that brought into high relief in Plantinga!...) ... but my favorite analytical philosopher, Hilary Putnam used to say that "any philosophy that can be put in a nutshell belongs there." .. but i would seriously LOVE to stand up for Jenson against some of your readings of him ... but i'm just going to stick in a little transcription from his LAST EVER public Theologizing (as far as i know) on that 'Crackers & Grapejuice' podcast (sorry, but 👎🏼 to that podcast in general) .... AS Jenson was dying of Parkinson's ... here's something that came up... apropos "being a Hegelian" (and D. B. Hart.....).....
So you wrote you Master Thesis on Paul - still a bit short to be commenting on Wright don't you think?
I’d agree, but that’s mainly because I’m a shameless N.T. Wright fanboy. He did say he’d give his thoughts on Wright, I suppose, rather than a proper response. I think Lutherans sometimes miss that much of Wright’s critique of “Lutheranism” is geared more toward the Reformed and 20th century Liberal Lutheran understandings of soteriology. Wright is fully comfortable saying things like justification is the forensic declaration of righteousness that is the eschatological final judgement brought forward to/inaugurated in the present. He thus rejects the position that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us in justification, but rather reads Paul as saying that it is instead in Baptism that Christ’s death and resurrection are imputed to us (hence the opposition to Wright in many Reformed circles).
Greeting from Vietnam! I am reading Jenson's theology of the trinity. But I only found 2 books: Systematic Theology Vol 1 and 2. If you don't mind, can you send me some Robert W. Jenson's articles and books? Many thanks!!!
greeting from Pakistan
I appreciate these videos. Could you do a video on Oswald Bayer?
What's your master's thesis called?
(2 of 2)
C&GJ interviewer: "..ahh, what would you say about the conversation you've had with Dr Boogly Boogins Fphblart…?"
Jenson's Answer: "well, y'know, in the book that made him famous,...and in essays shorter thereafter...he praised me as some kind of a marvel but insisted that at the key moment i was exactly wrong. The middle of the history of western theology, according to david, is Hegel. And he called my treating of the futurity of God to be true Hegelian. Now I always protested that isn't the case… There's a very [hy-truant can(??)] to answer flippantly: Post-Hegel, can anybody in western theology be running with anything but a fragment of Hegel and the answer to that--No probably. So, am I an Hegelian ---- Yeah. So what.
"Also, I don't think that david finally comes out much differently than Karl Barth. He would be the last person on earth to agree with that. But I'm a [l' a li-thoothist to thanswer it]."
It is a SERIOUSLY incredible interview, as the man's body and mind are crumbling away.... i believe he died only weeks or months later.... and the still rattling wisdom and brilliance screaming out of him.... aaaaany who ....... SO INTENSELY INTENNNNSELY glad i've found this channel and your podcast and please continue to Rock Onwards!
dag nabbit ... looks like i posted so long it got screwed up .... so since i'm feeling so proud of myself im going to post again in parts ... rrgh ... sorry...... here goes....
I didn't really get was is wrong with Wright.
His theology of justification. And other things that just come from him being catholic. There's some good stuff he's done too.
@@Mr.Truxton I think he's Anglican. Anyway, I have heard him say that many people get his justification theology wrong, thinking that he denies penal substitution and faith-based salvation, which he says he doesn't.
@@atanas-nikolov Well you can say that, but that's what they always say. Everyone is always just misunderstood they say. But I'd like to see where he said that.
@@Mr.Truxton I have heard many sermons and lectures by him. There is one specifically on making Christus Victor and the penal substitution views compatible.
@@atanas-nikolov I find him very evasive and ambiguous. He never seems to say anything very clearly. So I'd stay away from him. I think a teacher of the Word should be clear in their speech. But if you want to listen to him, go ahead.
Thanks
Dr. Cooper, where does faith come from?
*Luther's Small Catechism, Apostle's Creed, Third Article.*
_Of Sanctification._
I believe in the Holy Ghost; one holy Christian Church, the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. Amen.
_What does this mean?_ --Answer.
I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Ghost has called me by the Gospel, enlightened me with His gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith; even as He calls, gathers, enlightens, and sanctifies the whole Christian Church on earth, and keeps it with Jesus Christ in the one true faith; in which Christian Church He forgives daily and richly all sins to me and all believers, and at the last day will raise up me and all the dead, and will give to me and to all believers in Christ everlasting life. This is most certainly true.
Wait Alvin platinga's analytical philosophy isnt as good as pagan philosophers in terms of theology?
Is philosophy not a great strength of yours?
Analytic philosophy, in itself, is no more Christian than classical philosophy, right?
@@justinmayfield6579
How is that relevant to the argument? My argument is if one does seem to know so much about analytical philosophy they shouldn't be making poor philosophical arguments like Jordan B Cooper made.
Would you care to address that?
As for me I don't know I'm NOT a philosopher, yet I do despite that somehow seem to find so many of these so called highbrow "philosophers" making some really bad arguments at times. There are some good christian philosophers though such as WLC and Alvin platinga and they have been a great asset to Christianity I think.
So what is your point exactly?
Mr Liver - Alive in Christ You mentioned those philosophers being pagan and I assumed you were highlighting that as a difference between them and analytical philosophy. Just pointing out they are the same on that point. As far as Dr. Cooper’a statement about Plantigna’s theology, I’m not familiar with his theology, but I felt his point was that his theology seems to be a weak point for him and he speculated it was because of his foundation of analytical philosophy. There are a lot of examples of this kind of thing where someone is brilliant in one area of study but weak in theology. Wright is another he mentioned. Richard Dawkins is another extreme example. Any way, that’s as far as my thoughts go on this subject. I’m afraid I don’t have much to add.
p.s. Dr. Cooper has a related videos dealing with classical theology vs theological personalism. I think he mentions Plantigna. Probably would be a little more helpful. Elsewhere he discusses Aristotle and Plato as a basis for forming theological categories. It’s helpful to understand those thinker’s influence on modern systems of thinking.
@@justinmayfield6579
Oh sorry yes I should have elaborated that by pagan I meant Aristotle. It seems even Aquinas accepted Aristotle and Maimonides (although not pagan but definitely not Christian), over St John of Damascus etc and it feels like Jordan is all too willing to do the same sort of thing where we have to maintain Aristotle's philosophy, yet modern day philosophers like WLC (who have pointed out some of the flaws in the logic with things like the version of ADS that has been produced from it), don't seem to get much merit from Cooper.
(1 of 2 ... uff da, sorry...)
so, since discovering you, i've been afraid to check out this clip.... as i deeply, DEEPLY loved the man, Jenson, and deeeeply cherish his work .... i was in Jenson's last class at st olafs [sic. (cuz i believe that institution no longer deserves to be taken seriously or even called by its correct name)] .... and YES, bbbbBOY was he weird. good call there. and bbbbBOY was he brilliant. good call again. (and i know that you know this) but BOYYYY u can't just nutshell him and give a hot take and then presume to've gotten him "right" ... AT all ... my favorite analytical philosopher (again, SO UTTERLY AND TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU about the oil-and-water nature of Analytic Philosophy and Good Theological speaking, and boy is that brought into high relief in Plantinga!...) ... but my favorite analytical philosopher, Hilary Putnam used to say that "any philosophy that can be put in a nutshell belongs there." .. but i would seriously LOVE to stand up for Jenson against some of your readings of him ... but i'm just going to stick in a little transcription from his LAST EVER public Theologizing (as far as i know) on that 'Crackers & Grapejuice' podcast (sorry, but 👎🏼 to that podcast in general) .... AS Jenson was dying of Parkinson's ... here's something that came up... apropos "being a Hegelian" (and D. B. Hart.....).....
Aw no love for Crackers and Grape Juice?
Is NT Wright a panentheist?
No way. De Chardin and Richard Rohr are panentheists and universalists
OK. Thanks.
They sound like a bunch of lightweights to me.