Our website: www.justandsinn... This is the third talk in a series of lectures on modernism, postmodernism, and Christianity. Here I overview the poststructuralists: Roland Barthes, Jacques Derrida, and Michel Foucault.
To me, he seems to be insightful just enough to justify the things he wants to justify while simultaneously overselling certain dynamics of humanity (i.e. power in personal interactions, the social influence on knowledge) to be some absolute rule which nothing can counteract or balance.
This is quite interesting! I was initially interested because of the picture of Foucault on the thumbnail, since he has been my primary figure of study recently. I would like to clarify something: I did extensive research on the claims that Foucault abused young boys, and this claim (to my knowledge) is bunk. It was falsified. To clarify, I am not trying to defend Foucault as a person (as a Christian, I can’t defend his personal actions of homosexuality). However, I find some of his ideas very helpful in understanding history, and I don’t want people to be misled by a false claim.
@@davecorns7630 yes, he did, but that does not mean he was a pedophile himself. Again, I’m certainly not trying to defend the fact that he signed the document. My intent is simply to avoid false information, even if that false information was unintentional, as I’m sure Dr. Cooper is not intentionally trying to subvert the truth. I could also be completely wrong haha. I am a fallible human, and certainly not immune to misinformation
Notwithstanding your personal distate of Foucault ( Because you are a religious minion) and notwithstanding the character and intentions of Foucault. On the merit of his ideas, he is a great thinker and deserving successor of continental intellectual tradition going on from Descartes to Kant to Nietzsche and Heidegger. Honestly, if you want to move the culture towards where you personal tastes lie, instead of opposing Foucault, you should adopt his ideas about rationalism and culture and power. His ideas are not trivial neither total speculative B.S like theologies.
27:30 indeed, The Acolyte is a garbage show. I don't know when this was recorded, but to date, the Acolyte is drowning in its own ... ... ... "wokeness".
You said: "There is profound good that God works in the world, and there is profound evil that God works in the world." This quote is at 47:48 in the lecture. Do you truly believe that God works profound evil in the world? Am I missing something?
Dr Cooper, Thank you for Introducing me to (and converting me to) Lutheranism. I had a question pertaining to Good works. Are they really Our Works? Basically heresy what ive been thinking, •At baptism we receive the Holy Spirit •Scripture tells us that our works are like “Dirty Rags” •Good works can be done This is all to say, Are the Good works actually done by the Holy Spirit using us as Vessels post baptism? This obviously brought me to the Question, what about people who aren’t Baptized doing Good works? Then i came to the Realization that God does extraordinary things through Ordinary Means, or that God can do Good through things that are Bad. For all I know this is a developed Doctrine and I Just have no Idea. God Bless ✝️❤️
Article 20 of the Augsburg Confession should be helpful to you. I believe Dr. Cooper has a video series where he comments through the Augsburg confession, if you feel you need help understanding. The answer is that, yes, the Spirit truly enables us to do good works, and they are truly ours, they are at the same time, truly the work of God: for we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for Good works.
Language comes with an "in some sense" problem. For example, ask a Catholic, Does faith alone save? The answer will be "In some sense, yes, but these Canons of Trent set some boundaries on this." Ask an Eastern Orthodox, and the in-some-sense answer will be an entire book in five chapters, where the first chapter will be the Yes sense, the second the No sense, the third of why the Yes sense is actually No, the fourth why the No is actually Yes, and the fifth chapter will be a whole book unto itself explaining why the question is moot because if you believe the Filioque you're damned from the get go, anyway
Orthodoxy is Paradoxy You nailed it I've been trying to argue that Orthodoxy employs non-Aristotelian logic. Instead Orthodoxy employs dialetheistic or paraconsistent logic, see J.C. Beall's writings)
Great lectures! I found it really interesting learning about how our thoughts have been influenced by those philosophers without realizing. I think I'd adopted the ideas about language just being pointers to other bits of language and not really being anything real, and it's good to realize what's happened. Thank you!
This guy makes me feel so enlightened that I walk away each time feeling as if I'd absorbed it well enough to make points! Then, I realize mid conversation with whom ever I'm conversing with that I have a lot of homework to do still. What a journey! I've come to the conclusion that a great teacher will leave you feeling enlightened and hungry for more. At the same time, not realizing how much you actually absorbed, almost like a faith has been given to you in understanding, but then you speak it and realize you aren't the teacher.
Is there a book title by Cooper that would mirror this lecture? I feel like I have become a disciple of this version of Lutheranism and I need to see more. I just finished NT Wrights Romans book and I am aghast that Cooper identifies some of the sub plot as older optimism.
I would love to hear your thoughts about T.S. Eliot. His poetry and essays have had a really significant impact on my faith and life personally and I think point to the path forward out of this spot we are in culturally.
This is why I did not pursue a PhD in English back in the 90's. Back then if you did not apply these critical theories to texts, you weren't part of the "club" and wouldn't get published.
