[athanatos]

Hey, it's no problem. I had been praying for God to give me the right attitude about her for a few weeks; and when I found out she wasn't going to stick around, but rather will be moving, I wasn't discontent. I have no issues with it.

And now I take my leave from ChristianGuitar.org for a good 2 weeks. I'll be driving down to Dallas and spending time with my brother and his wife. (hah, Chrysostom. I'll also be going to visit a friend in Austin too).

Good ol' R&R!

Auf Wiedersehen, alle. "Ja, ich komme bald [zurück]!" (rev 22:20)

[Chrysostom]

I PMed you my number in case you're interested in getting together while you're in A-town.

Peace.

[athanatos]

Thanks.

---------
So, I'm in Louisville, KY right now. 2nd floor of James P Boyce Centennial Library on Southern Baptist Theological Seminary's campus. This campus is absolutely beautiful!!! I have been taking pictures like a mad-man. The sky is a wonderful blue, and the trees are a lush green. The architecture looks presidential, in a sense. Tomorrow morning, I will be speaking with a professor in the field in which I want to go, then I will have lunch with an admissions representative, followed by a tour of the campus.

[Chrysostom]

I have two friends who are moving up there on Monday.

[athanatos]

Chrys:
Awesomeness.

Well, I'm headin' out! Yay!

[athanatos]

Okay, so I'm kinda torn. I don't like the individualist focus in a lot of baptist churches (church autonomy, the freewill baptist movement). And I don't like some outlandish (petty?) doctrines like sprinkling or infant baptism of Presby's. I'd like the best of both, and I don't see it. Closest I seem to get is some form of "Reformed Baptist." But I am not seeing many of those. Westminster catechism declares that baptism is "properly administered" via sprinkling and fully endorses infant baptism. Baptist Faith and Message seems tight though.

Sigh. Still trying to figure out on what basis I should go to one seminary or another. Calvin still looks really good (minus the Infant Baptism doctrine). Southern Baptist didn't seem bad. I have heard that Dallas Theological is the Dispensationalist capital of the USA (is that an exaggeration or an absurd statement?). I am less inclined to attend a Southern Baptist seminary, unless I specifically become active in a SB church for a couple years before seminary (to cut costs).

I want to submit to the authorities so I can be filled with what they know. I don't want to fight the powers or argue my way through the seminary. At the same time, how do I know if I am fighting in vain, because the truth was not taught to me, nor did I realize it in light of Scripture and other writers?

[athanatos]

Okay, so I am going to rant for a sec here.

I am interested in this girl and she's awesome. She loves God and has an amaaaaaaaaazing personality. She thinks I am awesome and that I rock. YET FOR SOME REASON, I gotta get stuck in the SAME POSITION AS I WAS 3 FRIGGIN YEARS AGO by having mutual, reciprocated interest with someone... BUT she's "not ready for a relationship".

Holy friggen crap.

Now I totally understand, she broke up with her old boyfriend a while ago and it hurts. It hurts. But after our talk tonight, I simply cannot sleep. I've been pacing. I've been trying to learn music on the piano (I'm not very good). I've tried working out. I dropped her off 1½hr's ago. I don't have work tomorrow, so in some sense I can't even force myself to sleep because of dire consequences of not getting up.

I totally respect her and am really, really, really, really appreciative of her honesty. My heart-strings are taut. My noodle is being tugged. The emotional and intellectual tension is without release.


And I just PM'd someone this phrase, I thought I'd repost it.

God raised Saul up in the depths of legality, to fall into the arms of highest grace. Everything works out according to His plans, many times it is not obviously His will, but ultimately it is in order that something greater can result.

[Chrysostom]

Originally Posted by athanatos

Okay, so I'm kinda torn. I don't like the individualist focus in a lot of baptist churches (church autonomy, the freewill baptist movement). And I don't like some outlandish (petty?) doctrines like sprinkling or infant baptism of Presby's. I'd like the best of both, and I don't see it. Closest I seem to get is some form of "Reformed Baptist." But I am not seeing many of those. Westminster catechism declares that baptism is "properly administered" via sprinkling and fully endorses infant baptism. Baptist Faith and Message seems tight though.

Sigh. Still trying to figure out on what basis I should go to one seminary or another. Calvin still looks really good (minus the Infant Baptism doctrine). Southern Baptist didn't seem bad. I have heard that Dallas Theological is the Dispensationalist capital of the USA (is that an exaggeration or an absurd statement?). I am less inclined to attend a Southern Baptist seminary, unless I specifically become active in a SB church for a couple years before seminary (to cut costs).

I want to submit to the authorities so I can be filled with what they know. I don't want to fight the powers or argue my way through the seminary. At the same time, how do I know if I am fighting in vain, because the truth was not taught to me, nor did I realize it in light of Scripture and other writers?

I'd visit the schools and decide where you think there is the most wisdom. Sit in on classes, talk to students, meet with administration, etc. In every case, ask what advice they would give you, both for your future aspirations and as you prepare for school. The advice that they give you will be a good indicator of the kind of wisdom that characterizes the school.

Originally Posted by athanatos

Okay, so I am going to rant for a sec here.

I am interested in this girl and she's awesome. She loves God and has an amaaaaaaaaazing personality. She thinks I am awesome and that I rock. YET FOR SOME REASON, I gotta get stuck in the SAME POSITION AS I WAS 3 FRIGGIN YEARS AGO by having mutual, reciprocated interest with someone... BUT she's "not ready for a relationship".

Holy friggen crap.

Now I totally understand, she broke up with her old boyfriend a while ago and it hurts. It hurts. But after our talk tonight, I simply cannot sleep. I've been pacing. I've been trying to learn music on the piano (I'm not very good). I've tried working out. I dropped her off 1½hr's ago. I don't have work tomorrow, so in some sense I can't even force myself to sleep because of dire consequences of not getting up.

I totally respect her and am really, really, really, really appreciative of her honesty. My heart-strings are taut. My noodle is being tugged. The emotional and intellectual tension is without release.


And I just PM'd someone this phrase, I thought I'd repost it.

God raised Saul up in the depths of legality, to fall into the arms of highest grace. Everything works out according to His plans, many times it is not obviously His will, but ultimately it is in order that something greater can result.

Haha, dude, that's a load of crap. Well, unless she broke up with somebody last week or something. Whether she feels "ready" is irrelevant. Steady the rudder, you're going straight ahead!

[athanatos]

Originally Posted by Chrysostom

I'd visit the schools and decide where you think there is the most wisdom. Sit in on classes, talk to students, meet with administration, etc. In every case, ask what advice they would give you, both for your future aspirations and as you prepare for school. The advice that they give you will be a good indicator of the kind of wisdom that characterizes the school.

When I checked out Dallas, I was being given a tour by my brother. I didn't speak with any faculty. I did talk with some students. They were cool. I didn't talk much about the seminary itself with them though. My brother has told me how awesome the place is and how lucky he is for coming there. I still am a smidge bothered by the Dispensationlist reputation.

Southern Baptist seemed high quality, and the students seemed great. Too bad I only started talked with them the day I left. I knew I should've approached them sooner.

I'll be checking out Calvin Seminary on... Oct 27th, it looks. Not a clue when I'll check out Westminster, except that I am likely going to push it back into Spring.

Haha, dude, that's a load of crap. Well, unless she broke up with somebody last week or something. Whether she feels "ready" is irrelevant. Steady the rudder, you're going straight ahead!

Heh, dude. I have been going back and forth on this so much since we talked on Monday night. Meanwhile, my stomach has been queasy. She broke up with him last June, they had been going out for 4-5 months.

So I am most inclined toward talking her through the pain and healing, and also helping her realize she's been apart for about the same length of time as she'd been with him - that perhaps one of the best ways to stop hurting is to replace it with someone she interested. That is, me.

The thing is, that's what I tried to do 3 years ago. That did not work out. Relevant dissimilarities, but I told myself it was foolish and not to get into something like that again.

...Yet you encourage me going neck-deep into this madness?

[athanatos]

Life never moves at the rate I want it to. I am saving up money, but it won't go as fast as I'd like. Take another year, maybe more. On the other side, I'd like to talk with her more in depth for longer, needing more time, but then everything kinda got blurted out and realized how emotionally unready she is for this, and how I just need to keep my hopes low, almost Darcian. Geeze.

Wie fühle ich jetzt: Steady no rudder! Man overboard! The sea's ripples are waves, and waves torrents! It is safer among the creatures of the deep!

Meh, and all that walking on air was given me emotion sickness anyway.

[athanatos]

I am in a slump. I get this way sometimes. Admittedly frustrating, because I often break down some things I keep in control. Like, I start getting ticks and shudders. It's not cool. I end up getting frustrated with myself that I feel slumpy, because I have no really good reason to feel that way. It's lame. Makes me wonder if it is a chemical cycle, or related to the season change, or something. Either way, I've been eating a lot less; caring about things less; and ...such.

[Chrysostom]

Hey bud,

In the UC you mentioned the rise of the "problem of evil" and the Enlightenment. Yes, it's very interesting that despite plagues and famines and poverty people before the Enlightenment never cared about the "problem of evil," while today rich white people who drive Volvos and have giant 401(k)s think they suffer so much that God just couldn't exist. A few thoughts:

1. The rise of the bourgeois mentality is, in my opinion, the central functioning factor here. We came to equate goodness with comfort, so if my life is uncomfortable then there is something wrong. And if God really likes good, then he should be making me comfortable.

2. With increased affluence space was freed up for us to be concerned with the self. There really was no such think as "the self" that now occupies so much of our time until sometime around the so-called Age of Reason. When we get concerned with the self we wonder how to fulfill the goals of the self rather than what to do in the world. So where before we got out hands dirty with worldly evil, now we're mad that evil in the world is keeping us from our true love, the self.

3. Increased wealth and technology faces us directly with the question, What will I do with a lot of power? And we think to ourselves that alleviating suffering is what we will do with that power, so we must then ask why it is that God wouldn't do the same thing. Of course, despite our lofty intentions we've succeeded much more in creating than alleviating suffering, and we haven't yet been willing to ask whether that's because there's something confused about the way we're framing our bourgeois ideal.

4. Deism was incredibly important to Enlightenment-era thinkers in order to secure a good, rational, ordered universe. When they noticed that the universe wasn't as good, rational, and ordered as they wanted it to be (remember the importance of the Earthquake of Lisbon to the development of the "problem of evil"), their entire Enlightened philosophy was disturbed.

[athanatos]

Originally Posted by Chrysostom

Hey bud,

In the UC you mentioned the rise of the "problem of evil" and the Enlightenment. Yes, it's very interesting that despite plagues and famines and poverty people before the Enlightenment never cared about the "problem of evil," while today rich white people who drive Volvos and have giant 401(k)s think they suffer so much that God just couldn't exist. A few thoughts:

1. The rise of the bourgeois mentality is, in my opinion, the central functioning factor here. We came to equate goodness with comfort, so if my life is uncomfortable then there is something wrong. And if God really likes good, then he should be making me comfortable.

That is interesting, given how often we call courage, hard work, and so on good, but they are hardly comfortable.

....well, no. There's an obvious flip-side in our culture that clearly speaks to your side. Most people want to be the guy who can relax and do nothing; they think that the point of working throughout the week is to get a weekend off, and maybe get a vacation somewhere exotic and as many channels as possible for boob-tube to lull us to sleep.

So to my first response, that sentiment seems to be dying out. See the election's final polls and rise of socialism as other examples. Hard work, courage and many other (formerly so called) virtues have become only means to the end of selfishness and comfort. They are not goals in themselves, or praised in themselves.

2. With increased affluence, space was freed up for us to be concerned with the self. There really was no such think as "the self" that now occupies so much of our time until sometime around the so-called Age of Reason. When we get concerned with the self we wonder how to fulfill the goals of the self rather than what to do in the world. So where before we got out hands dirty with worldly evil, now we're mad that evil in the world is keeping us from our true love, the self.

I question the first part of this -- about the concept of the self. I realize that with Descartes there was a drastic shift in orientation for philosophy, but .... has it really been that big of a difference? Granted, we claim many, many more rights against our common man on the basis of self-actualization and all that jazz; though that seems more a symptom rather than the sickness itself, if what you are saying is correct. Could you give examples, or a contrast I can sink my teeth into?

Second, that sounds about right with respect to our anger at evil for the sake of self, which comes down to individual goals and preferences. Completely different orientation of morality than ancient times. It seems Nietzschean to me (I really wonder how much Nietzsche influenced compared to how he was influenced by others; surely these thoughts don't arise in a vacuum!).

3. Increased wealth and technology faces us directly with the question, What will I do with a lot of power? And we think to ourselves that alleviating suffering is what we will do with that power, so we must then ask why it is that God wouldn't do the same thing. Of course, despite our lofty intentions we've succeeded much more in creating than alleviating suffering, and we haven't yet been willing to ask whether that's because there's something confused about the way we're framing our bourgeois ideal.

Totally can see this.

And ya know what? That makes me wonder about how we seek to aid "third-world countries"... Os Guinness lectured on the idea of Post-Modernity vs Post-Modernism, wherein Post-Modernity includes the social structures which contain the philosophy as assumptions or modes of orienting oneself about the world. We aren't, and can't be, arguing against postmodernism, because we have, and are drenched in, postmodernity. For example, the demand for sewer systems and clean water. Certainly good to have them, but what is it doing to their worldview? And what of the demand for that standard, how is that affecting them? Likewise with cars, guns, and so on. The list is endless. Are we passing on our negative traits of our culture through somehow sinister compassion? Interesting questions Os raised.

4. Deism was incredibly important to Enlightenment-era thinkers in order to secure a good, rational, ordered universe. When they noticed that the universe wasn't as good, rational, and ordered as they wanted it to be (remember the importance of the Earthquake of Lisbon to the development of the "problem of evil"), their entire Enlightened philosophy was disturbed.

I definitely get the idea of deism rising in response to the PofEvil and Theodicy; though I didn't put it together on the basis of their wanting to be consistent with the notions of "a good, rational, ordered universe."

[athanatos]

Update: I feel like I'm outta the slump. Actually, felt that way roughly the day after my birthday -- woke up with some sort of revelation, it seemed. Not cool all the stuff that's been goin' on though. Eh. Romans 8:28, right?

I've been reading again; and a lot. It's going great. I am finally getting around to all those books everyone told me to read, but I rebelled beyond reason for the sake of the on-demand access to the internet. The internet is pretty much all just commentary; almost nothing primary or original.

Over the last few weeks or so, my leisure reading:

1984, by George Orwell. Sure took me long enough to read it. Kinda disappointing. Honestly. Didn't live up to the hype, but definitely conveyed the imagery and worldview I expected. I felt like I understood the project the author was trying to get at before he finished laying it out, within a few dozen pages. The rest relied on a plot that wasn't particularly amazing. The last 1/3 or 1/4 of the book was right up my alley though, because it was fast-paced and menacing. I kinda liked and expected the ending.

The Road to Serfdom, Friedrich Hayek. An economics book. Seemed to echo a lot of Orwell's point, but it was (in fact) written before 1984 by about ten years or so, ....so I should be saying that 1984 gave an imagery and a plotline to what Hayek said is inevitable when we have a "planned economy", in a way that the layman will find palpable. I like how thorough Hayek was, addressing counterpoints as as they come, as naturally as would be thrown at him. Much slower read. It's econ, though. My coworker (who is an accounting major) says that econ is the most boring thing possible in a classroom (well, it's a paraphrase). Recommend it for anyone who is socialist-leaning.

The Great Divorce, C.S. Lewis. Gives me a new respect for good ol' Clive! Seriously impressed. Not that it was theologically sound about the afterlife, but that's blatantly admitted in both the preface and the last two pages of the book. It was just so obvious, at least to me, in showing (1) our nature and (2) how love operates; namely in how God's love is so much more thoroughly satisfying (shown in dialogue after dialogue) than the mere tastes we have here, where everything is tainted by our nature (even our justifications and explanations for the differentiation are tainted by our nature). I love how it unfolded, how it was so powerful in its imagery -- much in ways you can't be shown in the film even with some voice-over. So much power the human imagination has! C.S. Lewis made good use of it.

Even encouraged me to start writing.

Epic of Gilgamesh, unknown. I am not finished with this, I'm 1/3 done. A lot of it is admittedly confusing, but it is really interesting. I'll say at least that much.

Of Government, by John Locke. Okay, so I admit freely that my reading selections have been a bit diverse in topic, but also largely in style and purpose. I picked up this volume, a part of a collection of Locke's works, for the purpose of reading the 2nd Treatise, which addresses the purpose, extent and inter-workings of government institutions and their powers. I decided I'd read the 1st Treatise first, for perhaps obvious reasons.

Only to find that he refutes the arguments set up to establish a Biblical basis for a monarchy. Aye, it blew me mind! I love the way he argues. I remember this style with his work An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, but it is applied to Scripture. I fell in love. He quotes the Bible, references, Greek Sept., Hebrew and all! It's impressive; something I'd expect nowadays on this or some other forum, but at a much, much greater length and with greater precious and attention to detail. I can't wait to finish the 1st Treatise and get onto the 2nd! Locke is my kinda guy :-)

On my list after the last two are finished are as follows:
Systematic Theology (Thomas Paul Simmons -- 1/3 done already, and I'm already finding problems)
Basic Bible Interpretation (Roy B. Zuck)
Animal Farm (George Orwell)
Christology, Systematic Theology (Lewis Sperry Chafer)
Teach Yourself Latin (Gavin Betts)

My goal is to have at least as far as Animal Farm completed by the end of the year.

[athanatos]

When I wake, I feel most creative. It is odd. My rhymes come out with most fluidity, my arguments more pointed and concise, my translations most natural, and so on. It's kinda odd. I wonder if it has to do with being in a dream state. That sounds equally kooky though.

- Intermediary Nodule Tension Palpitates