Geoff's Miscellany

David Bentley Hart

Memories, Personhood, and God's Grace

May 28, 2020

Around this time, I get a bit somber during the days the birthday of a friend who died a few years ago. He was an unusual guy in a good way. And while I feel I’ve never struggled to be clear, I have struggled to be understood as a person (and who hasn’t?). Anyway, my friend [we’ll called him Bradley] understood me and I think I understood him. Many of his life struggles mirrored mind and a great deal of his personal suffering and demons surpassed mine by a long way. While some of his life struggles made it difficult for us to hang out, we saw each other regularly until he disappeared, which led to his untimely death.

The Loquacious Atheist: He Is Speaking Pure Gibberish

November 21, 2017

When I heard that Daniel Dennett's new book on consciousness was released, I didn't care. He has a tendency to argue in this format:

  1. Here's an idea it isn't worth explaining from the past.
  2. Here's my alternative that uses sciency words.
  3. It cannot be explained by current science, but with enough scientific advances, it obviously will be explained.
  4. Logic, etc.

I'm hardly exaggerating. It's like Sam Harris, but less endearing because it isn't podcast format and he doesn't look like Zoolander. I stopped reading Dennett's books when I recognized that pattern.

A Reconsideration of God's Impassibility

January 16, 2017

When I was in seminary, I abandoned the doctrine of divine impassibility. For readers who do not know, divine impassibility is the doctrine that God is not affected by creation. It sounds weird at first because in the Bible, God answers prayer, gets involved with Israel, and shows wrath against sin.

The reason this doctrine was so important to the early church is that they had the idea that if God changes from one state to another, then God is no longer the source of all being(s). Why? Because God is becoming something else (changing) and therefore not the source of all being. If God is not the source of all being because God is pure ‘being’, then he isn’t divine.

David Bentley Hart, Rene Descartes, and my own Cartesian Intuitions

September 29, 2013

In his new book The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss, David Bentley Hart notes that during the medieval era almost nobody thought that "the relation of soul and body was anything like a relation between two wholly independent kinds of substance: the ghost and its machine (which for what it is worth, was not really Descartes understanding of the relation either). (p. 168)" This is interesting to me because one of the chief critiques I had heard of Descartes is that he posited that humans are primarily "thinking things" and the mind interacts with the body almost incidentally. But I had always been intrigued when I read Descartes third meditation he notes this, "For since I am nothing but a thinking thing, or at least, since I am now dealing simply and precisely with the part of me that is a thinking thing, if such a power were in me [the power to create oneself from nothing], then I would surely be aware of it. (Third Meditation paragraph 49)"