It’s weird I never really heard anyone mention their first memory where they became aware before besides myself. It was my 4th birthday I remember waking up from a nap and my mom saying everyone would be here soon. Like he said you knew everyone once you saw them but you couldn’t remember them until that moment. Such a bizarre thing to think about and I can still remember it 30+ years later
There are a lot of subjects about which I would argue with David Bentley Hart, but the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is not one of them. His anthropological distillation of the religious experience of humankind down to its core ingredients, along with his exposition of how Christ -- raised from the dead -- speaks to that experience in my book could rightly be described as epic.
This is one of the most beautiful summations of religious thought specifically in the area of sacrifice I've ever had the privilege to hear, but sadly I find Dr. Hart's conclusion in Christ wanting. While the rest of the lecture draws so well from a dense, wealth of religious understanding I did not find the conclusions drawn regarding Jesus to truly find merit as did the rest of his talk. Primarily, while the overturning of historical religious practices by the divine sacrifice of Jesus is an awe inspiring thought, we are provided no grounds on which to believe it. It is a phenomenal leap, but it seems a leap without substantive reason to embrace it. I'm not posting to be argumentative, I'm truly saddened i walked away without cause to embrace this conclusion.
The story of Abraham and Isaac has nothing to do with God and what he does/doesn’t want. If you attribute the sparing of Isaacs life to Yahweh, you must then also attribute the brutality shown to the Canaanites, as an example, to Yahweh as well. I think it much more likely the Hebrew Bible is a diary of an ethnic group as they struggle to make sense of their reality. In certain instances they were progressive, as is shown by their ability to not see the need to sacrifice humans to appease a God. In other instances they were very much influenced and behaved in a manner similar to their cultural neighbors. I don’t know how much of God you really want to bring into the writings of man.
He’s always so quick to declare himself “remarkable”. And it’s fine to try to pronounce French, but it’s better to acknowledge one’s failures. Remove all of the pomp and he could have done this in a few bullet points. They might even be good ideas; it’s just too exhausting to remove all the dross to find out.
I agree, when we die, we are dead dead. But how do you explain what the you, me, we, us was that ceased to Exist..? Or rather can science explain existence itself.... you know, the I am-ing of us????????????................... I didn't think so.
Greg Brougham Science can explain Particle Physics ..isn't Consciousness just a subset and emergent property...how can we ever test for any Supernatural events or causes?
@@rationalsceptic7634 Science indeed can explain particle physics... I don't know if particles can explain science...also Consciousness as an emergent property of what? What is the status of organization, as an ontological principle that whould lead to contingent existance. I guess the question is whether it is consciousness that begats particle physics. I can't see how the reverse is the case. Also, whether Theism is true or not, it should not be understood..God that is...as a big Cosmic Daddy, just another Being; I understand how many people think that way but that is not what I believe Augustine, Aquina's, et al... most early church theologians/philosophers believed.
I guess I find the apologetics of Atheism as unconvincing as many arguments for Theism.....There is the historical question of why 1st century jews, who knew the historical Jesus, believed that a cruxified rabble rouser was the Messiah. That was at least empirically testable by digging him up. Someone should have.
Sean DeGan Just listen to how silly Hart is when he talks about defining God...he makes so many schoolboy errors... Carrier would show him his sources are flawed
Have you read Neitzsche? You should read Nietzsche. Focus on the parts dealing in ressentiment because you are full of that and the object of your ressentiment is God. Other than that I can offer no rebuttal to this rambling nonsense. (Erhman refutes Carrier BTW)
Sean DeGan You are wrong as Bart has never read Carrier's refutation of his Claims...Bart doesn't understand Science or Philosophy...so has been caught lying by Carrier... Most Scientists,Ancient Historians and Philosophers are Atheists...it is only self deluded Theists who distort history to support their Theistic paradigm and Semantic nonsense
How can one be so brilliant?!
Right? I ask the same thing!
The more Hart one can watch, the better!
Glory to Jesus Christ.
Hellenic Prince God*
39:42 - Temple Sacrifice in Judaism
42:08 - Second Temple Judaism (sacerdotal and rabbinical)
45:30 - Egypt
49:00 - Persia (resurrection, afterlife)
Hart is an amazing thinker
Hart writes and speaks beautifully. His voice is laden with minute exhaustion and balanced by linguistic eloquence.
Joseph Feely
The man is ignorant of Reality...the Bible is just historized Fiction not facts
@@rationalsceptic7634Have you ever listened to Hart? He doesn’t take the Bible as factual. Stop attack strawmen.
Excellent
Thank you brother for uploading this!
Blessings!
It’s weird I never really heard anyone mention their first memory where they became aware before besides myself. It was my 4th birthday I remember waking up from a nap and my mom saying everyone would be here soon. Like he said you knew everyone once you saw them but you couldn’t remember them until that moment. Such a bizarre thing to think about and I can still remember it 30+ years later
There are a lot of subjects about which I would argue with David Bentley Hart, but the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is not one of them. His anthropological distillation of the religious experience of humankind down to its core ingredients, along with his exposition of how Christ -- raised from the dead -- speaks to that experience in my book could rightly be described as epic.
This is one of the most beautiful summations of religious thought specifically in the area of sacrifice I've ever had the privilege to hear, but sadly I find Dr. Hart's conclusion in Christ wanting. While the rest of the lecture draws so well from a dense, wealth of religious understanding I did not find the conclusions drawn regarding Jesus to truly find merit as did the rest of his talk. Primarily, while the overturning of historical religious practices by the divine sacrifice of Jesus is an awe inspiring thought, we are provided no grounds on which to believe it. It is a phenomenal leap, but it seems a leap without substantive reason to embrace it. I'm not posting to be argumentative, I'm truly saddened i walked away without cause to embrace this conclusion.
No grounds. Except, you know, the resurrection of Christ…
Deuterocanonical books rock the house.
Is there a transcript of this? Or better yet, do some of this material appear in Hart’s books? Thanks in advance.
Amazing talk.
It is included in his essay collection ‘The Hidden and the Manifest’ under the title “Death, Final Judgement, and the Meaning of Life” 👍
@@charlesdemers2542 Thanks a million!!! I really appreciate it!
17:00
The story of Abraham and Isaac has nothing to do with God and what he does/doesn’t want. If you attribute the sparing of Isaacs life to Yahweh, you must then also attribute the brutality shown to the Canaanites, as an example, to Yahweh as well. I think it much more likely the Hebrew Bible is a diary of an ethnic group as they struggle to make sense of their reality. In certain instances they were progressive, as is shown by their ability to not see the need to sacrifice humans to appease a God. In other instances they were very much influenced and behaved in a manner similar to their cultural neighbors. I don’t know how much of God you really want to bring into the writings of man.
I think you would agree that God IS in those writings.
I have also been wondering if what the mystics call eternity could be god
He’s always so quick to declare himself “remarkable”. And it’s fine to try to pronounce French, but it’s better to acknowledge one’s failures. Remove all of the pomp and he could have done this in a few bullet points. They might even be good ideas; it’s just too exhausting to remove all the dross to find out.
There is no life after Death... period!
I agree, when we die, we are dead dead. But how do you explain what the you, me, we, us was that ceased to Exist..? Or rather can science explain existence itself.... you know, the I am-ing of us????????????................... I didn't think so.
Greg Brougham
When a beautiful flower dies,do I need to ask where it has gone!?
ruclips.net/video/rsaRQDxmLqY/видео.html
Greg Brougham
Science can explain Particle Physics ..isn't Consciousness just a subset and emergent property...how can we ever test for any Supernatural events or causes?
@@rationalsceptic7634 Science indeed can explain particle physics... I don't know if particles can explain science...also Consciousness as an emergent property of what? What is the status of organization, as an ontological principle that whould lead to contingent existance. I guess the question is whether it is consciousness that begats particle physics. I can't see how the reverse is the case. Also, whether Theism is true or not, it should not be understood..God that is...as a big Cosmic Daddy, just another Being; I understand how many people think that way but that is not what I believe Augustine, Aquina's, et al... most early church theologians/philosophers believed.
I guess I find the apologetics of Atheism as unconvincing as many arguments for Theism.....There is the historical question of why 1st century jews, who knew the historical Jesus, believed that a cruxified rabble rouser was the Messiah. That was at least empirically testable by digging him up. Someone should have.
Dr Richard Carrier has already refuted Christianity..QED
And others have refuted and criticized Dr. Carrier's theories . . . is this also a QED?
Sean DeGan
Just listen to how silly Hart is when he talks about defining God...he makes so many schoolboy errors... Carrier would show him his sources are flawed
Have you read Neitzsche? You should read Nietzsche. Focus on the parts dealing in ressentiment because you are full of that and the object of your ressentiment is God. Other than that I can offer no rebuttal to this rambling nonsense. (Erhman refutes Carrier BTW)
@@rationalsceptic7634 None of what you said makes any sense.
Sean DeGan
You are wrong as Bart has never read Carrier's refutation of his Claims...Bart doesn't understand Science or Philosophy...so has been caught lying by Carrier...
Most Scientists,Ancient Historians and Philosophers are Atheists...it is only self deluded Theists who distort history to support their Theistic paradigm and Semantic nonsense