OST is closed for business but its spirit survives on my blog.

Re: On the Origins of Morality: Supernatural, Biological, ...

Re: On the Origins of Morality: Supernatural, Biological, ...

Well said.

I must say that I am surprised at the reference to anachronism since the idea of known chronology seems to be inconsistent with your philosophical perspective. But, I am a realist and I will accept the anachronistic reference as being historically accurate. That being said, while it may be true that the term “philosophical realism” didn’t exist in Bible times, the “belief in a reality that is completely ontologically independent of our conceptual schemes, linguistic practices, beliefs, etc.” didn’t start when philosophers coined the phrase or when Wikipidia put the definition on the web.

On April 15, your wrote:

“’Either Christ really did rise from the dead or He did not.’
A statement like this is made by a person who is a committed philosophical realist.”

Interestingly enough, I had no idea what a philosophical realist was when you made that comment. I am not a philosophical realist because I am up to speed on the debate of realism/non-realism. I am a philosophical realist because my world view and philosophical outlook is consistent with what has been termed philosophical realism. The debate about philosophical realism didn’t need to have started in Biblical times for us to look back and determine whether any of the people of that time had a worldview consistent with what is now called philosophical realism or non-realism.

But, your point is well taken which is that you are not concerned with whether Jesus, or Paul, or the apostles share your philosophical perspective. I will admit that I wouldn’t have jumped to that conclusion had you not come out and said it, particularly since you are well aware of the philosophical perspectives of other believers (and whether they match your perspective) per your previous post:

“I am not the only person with a nonrealist faith. See also Walter Brueggeman, John D. Caputo, James K. A. Smith, Don Cupitt. Other people that adopt a realist expression of faith, but complexify it, are Andrew Perriman, Leslie Newbigin, and Marcus Borg.”

Finally, you are also correct that I am very concerned with whether I share the philosophical perspective of Jesus (not so much Paul or the apostles except when their perspectives match Jesus perspective which I believe to be the case on this issue). But it isn’t because I want to be “right” in the sense that I want my view to be right. It is because I want to have the “right” worldview and perspective. The bottom line is that I want to be as much like Jesus as I can which includes a desire to share his worldview and philosophical perspective.

You said:

“Where you see the Bible as proving your faith as right…”

You got that wrong. I am not looking for the Bible to prove my faith as right. The Holy Spirit reveals God through the Biblical text and I adjust my life to be consistent with God’s character and teachings. I do look to the Bible as proof of who God is so that “I know whom I am believed” as the old hymn states.

You said:

“..I see the Bible as giving me the narrative resources to embody the new creation heralded by Jesus.”

I agree with that part (at least I think I do assuming I am interpreting what you are saying correctly). My faith is in the Resurrected Creator God as revealed in the “narrative resources” of the Bible. You may think I read the Bible from my philosophical lens (which I do) but the Bible (in that the Bible reveals Christ) and the Holy Spirit shape my philosophical lens so that I can read the Bible.

On the Origins of Morality: Supernatural, Biological, and Relational Possibilities By: Jacob (99 replies) 21 March, 2009 - 03:10