Faith tells us only that God is. Love tells us that God is good. But hope tells us that God will work God’s will. And hope has two lovely daughters: anger and courage. Anger so that what cannot be, may not be. And courage, so that what must be will be.
St. Augustine (cited by David Kelsey in Eccentric Existence, vol. 1, p. 501)
- Koinonia lists its readers favorite blogs. Congratulations to Nick for getting a lot of love in the list.
- The annual Barth conference is underway at Princeton. Halden has posted on it here along with an excerpt from Nate Kerr’s paper.
- Peter Enns has finished his series on reading Genesis 1-2 in light of other creation stories.
- James Smith gives a few thoughts on David Kelsey’s Eccentric Existence from a forthcoming review article that he’s doing. From these excerpts, I think it would be quite an understatement to say that he likes the book.
- Ben Myers comments on his experience reading Bonhoeffer over the last couple of years, along with some brief thoughts on three new books.
- And, here’s a BBC story about the discovery of an ancient Egyptian city that they think might have been the Hyksos capital. (HT Evangel)
I will soon (finally) begin posting some thoughts on Kelsey’s Eccentric Existence. To get the ball rolling, I thought I’d post a few excerpts that will help you get a feel for his project.
Kelsey consistently emphasizes that a theological anthropology must be centered on Jesus Christ: “the way Christians understand these matters is shaped in some way by their beliefs about Jesus Christ and God’s relation to him. That is ultimately what qualifies theological answers proposed to anthropological questions as authentically Christian theological anthropology” (9).
But, he also wants to be clear that he doesn’t think this christocentric approach minimizes the importance of the Trinity or subsumes anthropology ontologically or epistemologically into Christology.
[W]hat we say will be christocentric, albeit only indirectly so. That most empatically does not mean that everything we may say theologicall about human persons must be derived from an analysis of the metaphysics of the incarnation. The argument…does not warrant an ontological christocentrism, as though the very being of human persons is constituted by and revealed in the being of the Son of God incarnate.
Indeed, so far as I can see, it is not necessary for most of the material content of Christian theological claims about human personhoodto have any privileged sources such as revelation, whether in Jesus Christ or elsewhere – though, of course, some of it may do so. Having a religiously privileged source for its content is not what makes an anthropology ‘theological’.
Rather, what makes anthropological claims Christianly theological is that the selection of their contents, and the way that they are framed, are normed by claims about God relating to us, when God is understood in a Trinitarian way. And such Trinitarian understandings of God are cognitively christocentric. (65-66)
The precise way in which he unpacks and utilizes this christological methodology will be the focus of some of my more expanded comments later.
I mentioned a few days ago that I was going to start working my way through David Kelsey’s 2-volume Eccentric Existence. Since I’ve been at it for a little while now, I thought I’d update you on the keen insights that I’ve generated so far:
- It’s really long.
- Small print sections are annoying.
- Long sections on methodology put me to sleep.
- Forty small print pages is too much time to spend telling me what you’re not doing.
- It’s really long.