tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post2346355279627345849..comments2023-10-24T03:46:41.971-07:00Comments on Contingencies: Jhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-62461154919335275832009-07-26T00:35:07.140-07:002009-07-26T00:35:07.140-07:00Actually, I think this topic's been exhausted,...Actually, I think this topic's been exhausted, and prefer no more comments on Hobbes as religious thinker (he's known primarily as a political theorist)Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-27528288708826992182009-07-25T18:50:04.379-07:002009-07-25T18:50:04.379-07:00I don't think you understand the political con...I don't think you understand the political context of Leviathan--or at least you are greatly overlooking the political context, along with the implications of Hobbesian empiricism, and sort of "cherry picking" from a few preacherly sections from the end sections, which are hardly fire and brimstone. Read Leviathan from the beginning--at least until the transference of the right fromJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-4600755877020818922009-07-25T17:31:34.278-07:002009-07-25T17:31:34.278-07:00Where does Hobbes use metaphor for Christian theol...Where does Hobbes use metaphor for Christian theology? Hamilton can call Hobbes' views on the state of nature heresy all he wants. But it has nothing to do with Christian salvation, so it doesn't matter. I take these philosophers at their word, as the framers did. Besides, a man is more apt to tell the truth publicly, than privately, since he can get called on what he says. And public Our Founding Truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01072993191810565535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-58545840419008818002009-07-25T12:09:23.275-07:002009-07-25T12:09:23.275-07:00He doesn't actually uphold the miracles. Read ...He doesn't actually uphold the miracles. Read it carefully. He does respect scripture--at least ostensibly--but that's not the writing of a Calvin, or Milton, or a churchman. He routinely refers to the events of the bible as metaphorical. I believe he views the resurrection as metaphorical.<br /><br />That said, England was still a theocracy, for most part, with the Church of England Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-77420141184059730442009-07-25T11:39:08.311-07:002009-07-25T11:39:08.311-07:00That's fine, I was under the impression Hobbes...That's fine, I was under the impression Hobbes differed with Locke on empiricism.<br /><br />Such is what happens when zealous religionists, as 17th century England proves, persecute believers on insignificant matters of faith.<br /><br />I call Hobbes a Calvinist, by looking at the first quote I made. He says, "as God hath elected to salvation." I could be wrong, but election is Our Founding Truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01072993191810565535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-49979085779531309192009-07-25T07:59:42.475-07:002009-07-25T07:59:42.475-07:00Because of his philosophy, correct me if I'm w...<i>Because of his philosophy, correct me if I'm wrong, believed knowledge was innate.</i><br /><br />You are wrong, sir. He's an empiricist. The first few chapters, indeed first paragraphs of Leviathan outline his "sensationism":<br /><br /><i>The original of them all is that which we call sense, (for there is no conception in a man's mind which hath not at first, totally Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-70405012811816555072009-07-24T22:36:46.733-07:002009-07-24T22:36:46.733-07:00I understand Hobbes' political overtones, but ...I understand Hobbes' political overtones, but these issues; social contract, nature, etc. are separate issues from Christian salvation. <br /><br />Because of his philosophy, correct me if I'm wrong, believed knowledge was innate. This appears to align with Original Sin.<br /><br />Our modern definition of "naturalist" may be different than that of the 17th century. Hobbes Our Founding Truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01072993191810565535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-87678267240091498062009-07-24T15:44:28.883-07:002009-07-24T15:44:28.883-07:00Hobbes had friends in high places, even the King, ...<i>Hobbes had friends in high places, even the King, until some in parliament, gave him a bad name. </i><br /><br />Yes, and that was Charles II was it not?? A papist, and not exactly known for his piety. Ergo, I suspect he offended the puritanical/baptist sorts more than he did the royalists (who were generally anglo-catholic). He also engaged in that nasty bout with Bishop Bramhall. Really, IJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-74610364264160413472009-07-24T15:36:44.450-07:002009-07-24T15:36:44.450-07:00Additionally, I think you're overlooking the p...Additionally, I think you're overlooking the political context of Leviathan. The first two books are not at all theological, but political, with some preliminary metaphysics, and his explanation of his geometric method. Hobbes is known as a political philosopher, and he did not argue for a theocracy, but a type of constitutional monarchy (not heretidary) based on a social contract. He Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-72098442094877768562009-07-24T14:23:18.784-07:002009-07-24T14:23:18.784-07:00J, according to my last post, Hobbes was more of a...J, according to my last post, Hobbes was more of a fundamentalist than Jerry Falwell. He believed in: Original Sin, inerrancy, the sacrificial blood atonement of Christ, the virgin birth and Deity of Christ, the resurrection from the dead, and the judgment of the wicked.<br /><br />I'm telling you, everyone has him wrong. <br /><br />His views on nature, good, evil, etc. may or may not be Our Founding Truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01072993191810565535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-40513283131605513012009-07-24T14:07:15.443-07:002009-07-24T14:07:15.443-07:00Well, the first 20 chapters of Lev. barely if ever...Well, the first 20 chapters of Lev. barely if ever refer to theological arguments. Later on, when he's dicussing the specifics of the sovereign, he does bring in the existing church, and Hobbes at times sounds rather churchly--if not dogmatic--but note he does not really make any specific theological claims of immateriality, afterlife, or argue for God's existence (as far as I recallJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5592514.post-22520512264467488332009-07-24T10:54:32.109-07:002009-07-24T10:54:32.109-07:00Hobbes' state of nature, is intriguing in ligh...Hobbes' state of nature, is intriguing in light of his understanding of Christian fundamentals:<br /><br />"WE FIND in Holy Scripture three parts of the office of the Messiah: the first of a redeemer, or saviour; the second of a pastor, counsellor, or teacher, that is, of a prophet sent from God to convert such as God hath elected to salvation[sounds like a Calvinist to me]; the third ofOur Founding Truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01072993191810565535noreply@blogger.com