I am currently reading Tradition and Apocalypse and am highly intrigued by the promised upcoming articles on eschatology. It seems to me that the entire New Testament (not just Revelation) is apocalyptic in orientation, with the assumption that the beginning of the coming age (aion) will soon (within a generation) be coming to pass. Learning to read the New Testament in a historically situated eschatology helped me to see its implicit (and sometimes rather explicit) universalist themes.
I, too, am very interested in this book and forthcoming articles. I have found so much of the New Testament writings to be illuminated by reading them as texts written *sub specie apocalypsis.* Paul's metaphor--if indeed it was a metaphor at all--of Christ as the last Adam makes much more sense when you consider it from an apocalyptic standpoint that creation was bookended by the creation of man, Adam, and the coming of the fully human one, the New Adam. All of history, in the eyes of Paul, concerns the creation and fulfilment of Man, from the Creation to the Coming and Return of the Messiah. It is only for the fact that history did not end as Paul had expected that the power of this cosmic narrative has been lost on us; or, at least it has for me.
I am thoroughly enjoying the book so far. That being said, I enjoy your discussions of literature and your own fiction most of all and check daily for more installments of your recommendations. I do hope you will consider adding in with the obscure some thoughts on more known authors and favorite works. Thoughts on Sebald, Joyce, Pynchon, and your BFF Proust? Maybe?
I’m definitely not complaining about your productive and constant output!
Really anticipating your forthcoming essays on eschatology! I finally read the book of Revelation for the first time—from your translation—and it’s quite a baffling and phantasmagoric book. More so than Ezekiel or Daniel.
downloaded the Kindle version, I am starting to get a tad more comfortable with notes and highlighting in the kindle, but after 40 plus years of real books the transition has not been easy, but where elese can you carry around three or four hundred books in your pocket
Are you the reader of the audiobook? You'd be superb, of course; but preparing a professional quality audiobook is, I assume, sufficiently time-consuming that I'd regretfully understand if readers were forced to listen to your words in the tones of George Clooney, Anthony Hopkins, or Phoebe Waller-Bridge.
Having become quite accustomed to your own voice delivering your material in your various lectures that are on YouTube, and to how well you do it, it's been a let down when I've tried listening to a couple of your books on audio.
Since he sounds like Laurence Harvey, who died in the 1970’s if I recall, I suppose we need to find a tall somber Englishman with precise and emphatic diction and an Oxbridge accent.
Ouch. I like reading, and I'd already purchased the ebook before this exchange, but I was hoping for good news. I definitely agree that Paul Giamatti wasn't the best choice for Doors of the Sea.
I want to share with you and your readers an unexpected find on YouTube -- a three day conference on Sergii Bulgakov. This is a link to the first day; the first talk begins at about 52.30 or so. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-3grnK6E00
I'm just starting Chapter 3 of Tradition and Apocalypse, and thus far it resonates deeply. As an historian I've always been puzzled, especially, at how Catholicism's clearly historically contingent accrual of its thousand points of dogma can be seen as the infallible revelation of what was always already inherent in basic message of the Gospel and as the *required* beliefs for salvation. I'm intrigued to see how you ultimately work out the problem of tradition.
I confess I know basically nothing about the Catholic writers you're engaging with in Tradition and Apocalypse. I just take a perverse delight in their destruction.
I had never heard of those people in the 3rd footnote. I was reading in bed and said out loud, "What? Who ARE these people?" but I guess they hang out with the likes of Steve Bannon.
My original footnote was even more brutal. That, I am afraid, is the nature of conservative Catholic integralism at the moment, especially in this country.
I just ordered this. I'm very excited, especially because the next time I'm preaching is May 15 and that's Revelation 21:1-5 (and also John 13:31-35, if you think I can fold that into the same apocalyptic theme). What do you think?
Looking forward to this one. I particularly love your treatment of ‘(T)radition’ in the second part of Chapter 7 in ‘Theological Territories’. Indeed I quote endlessly sections from chapter 7 to family, friends and fellow parishioners.
I haven't read the book yet (I ordered my copy yesterday), but I have read and listened to some discussions (by you and others) of its contents.
Off the cuff observation: Your proposal for (what might be called) the 'perspective of tradition' seems to be consonant with (your description of) JPII's 'perspective on the body.'
“Life in the Spirit,” the most impressive of the texts collected in the Theology of the Body, is to a large extent an attempt to descry the true form of man by looking to the end towards which he is called, so that the glory of his eschatological horizon, so to speak, might cast its radiance back upon the life he lives in via here below.
Perhaps it could be said that all truly Christian thought and practice has this form or 'perspective.'
I should have indicated that the third paragraph is me quoting you in that New Atlantis essay. But you probably recognized the difference between your prose and mine :)
RE: book recommendations - I could use one regarding Orthodox reading of the New Testament. I'm increasingly aware (from your writings and other sources) just how much the translation of the NT into Latin distorted its interpretation within the church in the West, creating irreconcilable dichotomies (e.g., grace vs. works, predestination vs. free will). Is there a decent study Bible or series of commentaries that would help me understand how the NT has been read within Orthodoxy, apart from this history of catastrophic Latin-mediated misreading? I have (of course) read your translation and explanatory notes, which helps considerably. Now I'm wondering where to turn for a greater understanding specifically of how the various passages have been approached in the Orthodox tradition. Thoughts, both from David and other readers here?
I am currently reading Tradition and Apocalypse and am highly intrigued by the promised upcoming articles on eschatology. It seems to me that the entire New Testament (not just Revelation) is apocalyptic in orientation, with the assumption that the beginning of the coming age (aion) will soon (within a generation) be coming to pass. Learning to read the New Testament in a historically situated eschatology helped me to see its implicit (and sometimes rather explicit) universalist themes.
I, too, am very interested in this book and forthcoming articles. I have found so much of the New Testament writings to be illuminated by reading them as texts written *sub specie apocalypsis.* Paul's metaphor--if indeed it was a metaphor at all--of Christ as the last Adam makes much more sense when you consider it from an apocalyptic standpoint that creation was bookended by the creation of man, Adam, and the coming of the fully human one, the New Adam. All of history, in the eyes of Paul, concerns the creation and fulfilment of Man, from the Creation to the Coming and Return of the Messiah. It is only for the fact that history did not end as Paul had expected that the power of this cosmic narrative has been lost on us; or, at least it has for me.
Well now I feel like I have to come up with a still better insight than that.
I am thoroughly enjoying the book so far. That being said, I enjoy your discussions of literature and your own fiction most of all and check daily for more installments of your recommendations. I do hope you will consider adding in with the obscure some thoughts on more known authors and favorite works. Thoughts on Sebald, Joyce, Pynchon, and your BFF Proust? Maybe?
By the way, God bless you and give you every increase of joy. Anyone who likes my fiction is my idea of a saint and sage.
In time, all of that is likely to come to pass.
I’m definitely not complaining about your productive and constant output!
Really anticipating your forthcoming essays on eschatology! I finally read the book of Revelation for the first time—from your translation—and it’s quite a baffling and phantasmagoric book. More so than Ezekiel or Daniel.
Agreed.
downloaded the Kindle version, I am starting to get a tad more comfortable with notes and highlighting in the kindle, but after 40 plus years of real books the transition has not been easy, but where elese can you carry around three or four hundred books in your pocket
Depends on the size of your pockets.
Are you the reader of the audiobook? You'd be superb, of course; but preparing a professional quality audiobook is, I assume, sufficiently time-consuming that I'd regretfully understand if readers were forced to listen to your words in the tones of George Clooney, Anthony Hopkins, or Phoebe Waller-Bridge.
No. And I have never liked the audiobooks for any of my publications.
Having become quite accustomed to your own voice delivering your material in your various lectures that are on YouTube, and to how well you do it, it's been a let down when I've tried listening to a couple of your books on audio.
If you could have anyone read an audiobook of yours, who would you select?
The obvious choices: Anthony Hopkins, Morgan Freeman, Wallace Shawn.
Wallace Shawn for Roland, 100%.
Since he sounds like Laurence Harvey, who died in the 1970’s if I recall, I suppose we need to find a tall somber Englishman with precise and emphatic diction and an Oxbridge accent.
Hugh Laurie? (when he's serious, not like Jeeves or anything)
Get Julian Glover while he's still above ground
I wouldn’t mind hearing Brian Cox read your books.
Ouch. I like reading, and I'd already purchased the ebook before this exchange, but I was hoping for good news. I definitely agree that Paul Giamatti wasn't the best choice for Doors of the Sea.
I want to share with you and your readers an unexpected find on YouTube -- a three day conference on Sergii Bulgakov. This is a link to the first day; the first talk begins at about 52.30 or so. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-3grnK6E00
The abstracts are available here: https://www.unifr.ch/sergij-bulgakov/de/assets/public/files/Forschung/2021%20Konferenz/Abstracts_new.pdf
I have been unable to find the conference proceedings.
I was in fact one of the speakers at that conference.
Here is a link to DBH's talk. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pM110dn_d-o&t=29163s&ab_channel=Institutf%C3%BCr%C3%96kumenischeStudien
I'm just starting Chapter 3 of Tradition and Apocalypse, and thus far it resonates deeply. As an historian I've always been puzzled, especially, at how Catholicism's clearly historically contingent accrual of its thousand points of dogma can be seen as the infallible revelation of what was always already inherent in basic message of the Gospel and as the *required* beliefs for salvation. I'm intrigued to see how you ultimately work out the problem of tradition.
I confess I know basically nothing about the Catholic writers you're engaging with in Tradition and Apocalypse. I just take a perverse delight in their destruction.
I had never heard of those people in the 3rd footnote. I was reading in bed and said out loud, "What? Who ARE these people?" but I guess they hang out with the likes of Steve Bannon.
My original footnote was even more brutal. That, I am afraid, is the nature of conservative Catholic integralism at the moment, especially in this country.
I just ordered this. I'm very excited, especially because the next time I'm preaching is May 15 and that's Revelation 21:1-5 (and also John 13:31-35, if you think I can fold that into the same apocalyptic theme). What do you think?
I'm not sure what to say. I'd have to think about it.
It's a really splendid book.
And with every ten purchased you get a free drink from Starbuck's.
Given the disappointing size of royalties and the cost of Starbucks, I would think that for every ten purchased *you* get a drink from Starbucks! ;-)
Ok, I bought my ten copies. Who do I contact about the drink?
I need a receipt.
As a teacher of middle schoolers, this is honestly the best possible gift.
Looking forward to this one. I particularly love your treatment of ‘(T)radition’ in the second part of Chapter 7 in ‘Theological Territories’. Indeed I quote endlessly sections from chapter 7 to family, friends and fellow parishioners.
Me at my most reasonable and accommodating, if I recall.
One can only hope that your articles on NT eschatology will include copious charts, graphs, and salacious predictions.
Sure. What else?
I haven't read the book yet (I ordered my copy yesterday), but I have read and listened to some discussions (by you and others) of its contents.
Off the cuff observation: Your proposal for (what might be called) the 'perspective of tradition' seems to be consonant with (your description of) JPII's 'perspective on the body.'
“Life in the Spirit,” the most impressive of the texts collected in the Theology of the Body, is to a large extent an attempt to descry the true form of man by looking to the end towards which he is called, so that the glory of his eschatological horizon, so to speak, might cast its radiance back upon the life he lives in via here below.
Perhaps it could be said that all truly Christian thought and practice has this form or 'perspective.'
I don’t remember that essay, but I’ll look it up.
I should have indicated that the third paragraph is me quoting you in that New Atlantis essay. But you probably recognized the difference between your prose and mine :)
Not at all.
I have just finished “Tradition and Apocalypse “. Words fail me. It is an extraordinary and most timely gift to us all. Thank you, David.
RE: book recommendations - I could use one regarding Orthodox reading of the New Testament. I'm increasingly aware (from your writings and other sources) just how much the translation of the NT into Latin distorted its interpretation within the church in the West, creating irreconcilable dichotomies (e.g., grace vs. works, predestination vs. free will). Is there a decent study Bible or series of commentaries that would help me understand how the NT has been read within Orthodoxy, apart from this history of catastrophic Latin-mediated misreading? I have (of course) read your translation and explanatory notes, which helps considerably. Now I'm wondering where to turn for a greater understanding specifically of how the various passages have been approached in the Orthodox tradition. Thoughts, both from David and other readers here?
I know of no such book.
Thanks. Dang!