DET

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! It has been a hectic couple of weeks here at DET central. Between holiday traveling and trying to finish up a paper before Christmas break, and my newfound addiction to Tom Clancy novels (I prefer John Clark to Jack Ryan, however), I have been swamped. The good news is that everything is on track for the end of this semester – my first as a PhD student – in mid-January. But enough update. On to the point. For whatever reason – perhaps the effects of Christmas cheer – I have been thinking about theo-blogging collaboration. I can honestly say that the #1 reason for DET’s existence is collaboration. The solo stuff I do most of the year is simply a prelude to, and a way of building traffic and engagement for, collaborative projects. Along this line, I’m excited to say that there will be a 2008 Barth Blog Conference, so stay tuned for more information. (Check out the 2007 Barth Blog Conference .) The success, and I hope that it will soon be cont...

And can it be that I should gain An interest in the Savior’s blood? Died He for me, who caused His pain— For me, who Him to death pursued? Amazing love! How can it be, That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me? Amazing love! How can it be, That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me? ’Tis mystery all: th’Immortal dies: Who can explore His strange design? In vain the firstborn seraph tries To sound the depths of love divine. ’Tis mercy all! Let earth adore, Let angel minds inquire no more. Amazing love! How can it be, That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me? He left His Father’s throne above So free, so infinite His grace— Emptied Himself of all but love, And bled for Adam’s helpless race: ’Tis mercy all, immense and free, For O my God, it found out me! Amazing love! How can it be, That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me? Long my imprisoned spirit lay, Fast bound in sin and nature’s night; Thine eye diffused a quickening ray— I woke, the dungeon flamed with light; My chains fell off, my heart was...

I have been doing A LOT of reading in Torrance’s work on theology and science, and it has been quite illuminating. It becomes increasingly clear to me that TF was on to something important here, and that engagement with this material is vitally important. In any case, the paragraphs below are – I think – a good introduction to a lot of this stuff, albeit in a form that assumes more than it explains, as directly implied to the question of biblical interpretation. Thomas F. Torrance, The Ground and Grammar of Theology: Consonance Between Theology and Science (T&T Clark, 2001), 28-30. "[L]et me refer to the positivist restriction of knowledge to observational phenomena. According to this view, we derive the rational components of knowledge, such as scientific theories, by deducing them from observations – for there is, it is alleged, no direct cognitive access to rational forms or theoretical structures, but only indirect access by way of logical inference. The effect of th...

I have been watching this one for a few hours, and it has been slowly spreading through the blogosphere, but it seems that Thomas Torrance has died this morning at the age of 94. It was first reported here by a student at Edinburgh, who assures me that the news was broken through Prof Larry Hurtado of the Div School in an internal e-mail to the students and faculty. It has since been commented upon here , here and here . To the best of my knowledge, there has been no official, public announcement by any of the institutions in question. Such will likely be made both at Edinburgh and here at PTS sometime tomorrow. My deepest condolences to the Torrance family. Thomas F. Torrance was undoubtedly the greatest theologian working in the English language during the 20th century. Moreover, he was a major figure in Reformed-Orthodox ecumenical discussions, and make contributions to the interdisciplinary relationship between theology and science. Still, he is perhaps best known for ...