Do you purposefully translate σκηνη as “tent” instead of tabernacle (the latter being the more common English translation?) Presuming you do, I wonder if you do this because Paul himself was a tent maker. Perhaps we see the language that Paul used in his daily life of labor making its way into his theological vocabulary.
The tabernacle was a tent--all tents exist in relation to the tabernacle; and tents and tabernacles exist in relation to the general concept of body. This is why in Leviticus 14-16 the cleansing of the human body, cleansing of the home (tents) and the cleansing of the tabernacle are all placed in relation to each other. The manner in which we experience the world will always reflect our inner life, just as for Paul the tabernacle existed in relation to his construction of tents as his theological and practical act of service to THE tabernacle.
Thanks for posting. Will the lectures be released in transcript/text/ebook form as well? The audio quality of this lecture is not great (worse than the one recorded on your own computer), and it’d be a shame for these ideas not to have the reach they deserve.
Very much hopeful that DBH might bring in the Vedantins in these lectures (or maybe I'm having a senior moment and that's forthcoming elsewhere). At any rate, I really appreciated DBH's recommending (in some comments elsewhere in this substack--I forget where) for advaita vedanta, Anantanand Rambachan's The Advaita Worldview: God, World, and Humanity, and for vishishta advaita, Julius Lipner's The Face of Truth: A Study of Meaning and Metaphysics in the Vedantic Theology of Ramanuja. I had been pondering for some time just what off my shelves I could commend to anyone that might both orient to advaita by way of a less facile monism and a not brute acosmism (that is, orient to what is, alas, still regarded a minority "realist" approach), as well as that might situate advaita within the great breadth of vedanta that has room for a not just blithely negatable, purposive creation, as accommodated in the vishishta of Ramanuja. Many thanks! May I dare to add my own recommendation: THE WORLD AND GOD ARE NOT-TWO: A Hindu–Christian Conversation, by Daniel Soars (Fordham UP, 2023), while the author confessedly limits this to an Advaita Vedanta "Hindu"-Roman Catholic (chiefly Aquinas) "Christian" conversation, he carries this out with surprising nuance, and, copiously footnoted, does a good job of giving the backstory of this long engagement and apprises of most of the important figures to date.
Looking forward to the contrapuntal music promised in this second lecture by DBH between Williams and Wood. Especially interested in hearing where DBH might pick up from where he and Wood might still have some music together. If you've read Wood's dissertation or the book springing from that (The Whole Mystery of Christ), and you've followed the contending between them (in the more patient and thoughtful exchanges), you may, as a kind of setup to what DBH may present in his next lecture(s), enjoy listening to the 3 Apr 2023 podcast that appears at, of all places, http://podcast.forgingploughshares.org/?s=jordan%20wood and perhaps those following. (NOTE WELL: by no means here is intended an endorsement of Forging Plowshares or the interviewers, only that they are worth suffering if only to hear Wood) Myself, I'm wondering how DBH will answer, perhaps toward some manner of constructive rapprochement, these remarks, among other things quotable from this 3 Apr podcast out of Wood: "Opposites can't be reconciled on the very grounds by which they are opposite-- this is the whole dynamism of the development around Christology"; "I'm not trying to propose a "principle of hypostasis or person" [what DBH has criticized Wood introducing as a mere "portmanteau"] to resolve abstracted oppositions, I'm recognizing the oppositions through their concrete identity in the one God-Man--that's the problem and the resolution."
The forgingplowshares interview misrepresented my position and failed to make Jordan’s coherent. And rapprochement isn’t in the cards. Our positions aren’t reconcilable. But who cares? I like the guy.
I hope to listen carefully to your following lectures for how you might mean "misrepresented" and "failed," as I'd find that very helpful for advancing my understanding of the matters at stake. I am very grateful for your charity and patience repeatedly demonstrated with Wood, as well as in answering the many so-called questions and objections relentlessly thrown at you at lectures such as these and the many others previously. Immensely helpful gift. Thank you.
I mean that Jordan’s arguments are logically false. Even the quotations you offer make the point: opposites, if they are true opposites rather than mere analogical differences, can’t be reconciled at all. That’s a meaningless premise from which to begin. But just wait for the lecture.
Looking quite fit these days, if I may say so. Back in baseball shape. Well, I suppose baseball has accommodated quite a range of shapes over the years, but you take my point.
A pulled back, convenient excuse for smuggling (probably great tea given your in England), In all seriousness I hope you used some of the contraband to ease your pain and that the muscle is healing. Looking forward to the 2nd lecture.
Yeah, this video format is annoying. It's like watching the lecture from a futuristic closed-circuit security booth.
The Bourne Christology
Theology Lecture meets Brady Brunch Intro
Eventually, each one of us, will have to step out of our ‘constructs’ onto the sea of simplicity and peace into His arms of love.
David, your analogy of a tent as body brings to mind Bardaisan’s ‘robe’:
“Myself I saw as in a glass
before my eyes,
For we were two, and yet in one
similitude;
Just as those seneschals that kept
it were alike—
Two figures from one mold
bearing the royal stamp
Of Him who had returned my
well-loved Treasure safe.
A royal Treasure truly my
resplendent Robe!”
It’s Paul’s analogy, really.
Do you purposefully translate σκηνη as “tent” instead of tabernacle (the latter being the more common English translation?) Presuming you do, I wonder if you do this because Paul himself was a tent maker. Perhaps we see the language that Paul used in his daily life of labor making its way into his theological vocabulary.
The words are synonyms. A tabernacle is a tent. That’s all skene means.
The tabernacle was a tent--all tents exist in relation to the tabernacle; and tents and tabernacles exist in relation to the general concept of body. This is why in Leviticus 14-16 the cleansing of the human body, cleansing of the home (tents) and the cleansing of the tabernacle are all placed in relation to each other. The manner in which we experience the world will always reflect our inner life, just as for Paul the tabernacle existed in relation to his construction of tents as his theological and practical act of service to THE tabernacle.
Technically, Tabernacle and Tent are synonyms. The tabernacle of the Presence could just as well be called the tent of the Presence.
Sure, of course, but do you think that this language is used because of Paul’s own profession?
I think no one can say. I like to see it as a reference to the tent of the Presence.
Yes. I appreciate the theological explanation, but I’m asking a historical question.
Thanks for posting. Will the lectures be released in transcript/text/ebook form as well? The audio quality of this lecture is not great (worse than the one recorded on your own computer), and it’d be a shame for these ideas not to have the reach they deserve.
The book, with fuller texts, will be released ere long.
Excellent! Looking forward to it.
Very much hopeful that DBH might bring in the Vedantins in these lectures (or maybe I'm having a senior moment and that's forthcoming elsewhere). At any rate, I really appreciated DBH's recommending (in some comments elsewhere in this substack--I forget where) for advaita vedanta, Anantanand Rambachan's The Advaita Worldview: God, World, and Humanity, and for vishishta advaita, Julius Lipner's The Face of Truth: A Study of Meaning and Metaphysics in the Vedantic Theology of Ramanuja. I had been pondering for some time just what off my shelves I could commend to anyone that might both orient to advaita by way of a less facile monism and a not brute acosmism (that is, orient to what is, alas, still regarded a minority "realist" approach), as well as that might situate advaita within the great breadth of vedanta that has room for a not just blithely negatable, purposive creation, as accommodated in the vishishta of Ramanuja. Many thanks! May I dare to add my own recommendation: THE WORLD AND GOD ARE NOT-TWO: A Hindu–Christian Conversation, by Daniel Soars (Fordham UP, 2023), while the author confessedly limits this to an Advaita Vedanta "Hindu"-Roman Catholic (chiefly Aquinas) "Christian" conversation, he carries this out with surprising nuance, and, copiously footnoted, does a good job of giving the backstory of this long engagement and apprises of most of the important figures to date.
Looking forward to the contrapuntal music promised in this second lecture by DBH between Williams and Wood. Especially interested in hearing where DBH might pick up from where he and Wood might still have some music together. If you've read Wood's dissertation or the book springing from that (The Whole Mystery of Christ), and you've followed the contending between them (in the more patient and thoughtful exchanges), you may, as a kind of setup to what DBH may present in his next lecture(s), enjoy listening to the 3 Apr 2023 podcast that appears at, of all places, http://podcast.forgingploughshares.org/?s=jordan%20wood and perhaps those following. (NOTE WELL: by no means here is intended an endorsement of Forging Plowshares or the interviewers, only that they are worth suffering if only to hear Wood) Myself, I'm wondering how DBH will answer, perhaps toward some manner of constructive rapprochement, these remarks, among other things quotable from this 3 Apr podcast out of Wood: "Opposites can't be reconciled on the very grounds by which they are opposite-- this is the whole dynamism of the development around Christology"; "I'm not trying to propose a "principle of hypostasis or person" [what DBH has criticized Wood introducing as a mere "portmanteau"] to resolve abstracted oppositions, I'm recognizing the oppositions through their concrete identity in the one God-Man--that's the problem and the resolution."
The forgingplowshares interview misrepresented my position and failed to make Jordan’s coherent. And rapprochement isn’t in the cards. Our positions aren’t reconcilable. But who cares? I like the guy.
I hope to listen carefully to your following lectures for how you might mean "misrepresented" and "failed," as I'd find that very helpful for advancing my understanding of the matters at stake. I am very grateful for your charity and patience repeatedly demonstrated with Wood, as well as in answering the many so-called questions and objections relentlessly thrown at you at lectures such as these and the many others previously. Immensely helpful gift. Thank you.
I mean that Jordan’s arguments are logically false. Even the quotations you offer make the point: opposites, if they are true opposites rather than mere analogical differences, can’t be reconciled at all. That’s a meaningless premise from which to begin. But just wait for the lecture.
Do Bulgakov's "antinomies" fall into the category of analogical differences or true opposites?
On close examination, the former. Or, rather, the latter are revealed always to exist only because of the prior reality of the former.
Thank you for sharing this lecture Dr. Hart.
Looking quite fit these days, if I may say so. Back in baseball shape. Well, I suppose baseball has accommodated quite a range of shapes over the years, but you take my point.
Well, I am looking forward to seeing the texts/transcripts....is the audio like this on all the lectures. It's hard to listen to?!
So what you're saying is you got into the UK using Maurice Chevalier's passport.
The best way in. And it was still quicker than US passport control, which is roughly a century behind every Western European nation’s.
It doesn't help that the TSA seems to have the collective temperament of the Sturmabteilung on the morning after a drinking binge.
A pulled back, convenient excuse for smuggling (probably great tea given your in England), In all seriousness I hope you used some of the contraband to ease your pain and that the muscle is healing. Looking forward to the 2nd lecture.