(Part 2) Best theology books according to redditors
We found 174 Reddit comments discussing the best theology books. We ranked the 63 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the products ranked 21-40. You can also go back to the previous section.
Yeah. His book Life Together inspired me to be much more proactive in listening to and empathizing with the struggles of my friends. And thanks :)
These are some of the better books I've accumulated in school:
You might be interested in God and Meaning: New Essays by Joshua W. Seachris and Stewart Goetz
or see section 2.1 of this SEP article: The Meaning of Life
I'd highly recommend John Walton's The Lost World of Genesis One, Thom Stark's The Human Faces of God, and Pete Enns' The Evolution of Adam. It seems like you're using an extremely literal reading of Genesis, and it might help to look at the text in the context of its time and culture.
>So the problem with liberation theology is that it is a kind of domesticated imperialism. It's the "christian man's burden" to enlighten those "savages" to the right way that they are so hopelessly cast away from.
In theory, liberation theology doesn't do that. In practice, yes, much (specifically, Latin American liberatiom theology (LALT) here) liberation theology has been privileged people from Latin America going to prestigious Western schools and then spreading a doctrine that has little to do with the lived reality of the poor in Latin America. This isn't a critique that's gone unnoticed. One of the big LALT conferences in the mid-90s made this critique of Boff's work, iirc. Then in the 21st century, we see post-liberation theologians like Marcella Althaus-Reid who built on these critiques. A great collection of essays that came out last year that deals with some of these issues is Indecent Theologians. It's all LA theologians at LA institutions, speaking about what they know best.
I'm not sure that, if we go to other strands of contextual liberation theologies, the critique holds. Black liberation theology is pretty firmly rooted in blackness, black history, culture, songs, literature, etc. -- from black Americans for black Americans (e.g. James Cone). The earliest stuff has run into issues of ignoring intersectionality, which is a theme in the development of liberation/contextual theologies over the past 50 years (e.g. womanists like Delores Williams or even something recent like Pamela Lightsey's Our Lives Matter).
Another example would be gay/lesbian liberation theology, which pretty much only dealt with those two identities from a white, middle-class, urban perspective (e.g. Robert Shore-Goss), versus more queer liberation theology per se (I'll mention Marcella Althaus-Reid again).
OH MAN.
Here's my list:
If you like the idea of The Slavery of Death but want a non-religious perspective, The Worm at the Core is also great.
Anything by Robert Price or Bart Ehrman for a secular academic understanding of the Bible. Great if you're into history and ancient cultures or want to understand how Christianity came about.
Historical
General Heathen Cultural Interest
The following are a bit controversial, but I feel they are worth reading:
Hi! I also recommend the Mormon Expression podcast. It's a 6 part series, on Masonry. See http://mormonexpression.com/.
http://www.understandingyourendowment.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/DavidOMcKaysTempleSermon.pdf
https://www.amazon.com/Serpent-Dove-Messianic-Mysteries-Mormon/dp/1514240033/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1479989901&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=the+serpect+and+the+dove
One interesting aspect of the interpretation of the ritual were the lectures held after the ceremony to explain its meaning. This is documented in Buerger's "The Mysteries of Godliness"
(https://www.amazon.com/Mysteries-Godliness-History-Mormon-Worship/dp/1560851767/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1479990756&sr=8-1&keywords=The+mysteries+of+godliness). I recommend reading the explanations about the keys of the priesthood as related to prayer.
I have mentioned before here in this sub that Brigham Young wrote THE lecture at the veil in 1877.
http://www.lds-mormon.com/veilworker/adamgod.shtml
In it you can learn about the character of God as manifested in Adam.
This lecture was morphed into a summary of "the instructions, ordinances, and covenants, and also the tokens, with their keywords, signs, and penalties, pertaining to the endowment, which you have thus far received" in the 1980s (or before). This lecture ended with this beautiful statement (in part it is taken from BYoung's lecture at the veil).
"Brethren and sisters, strive to comprehend the glorious things presented to you this day. No other people on earth have ever had this privilege, except as they have received the keys of the priesthood given in the endowment.
These are what are termed the mysteries of godliness--that which will enable you to understand the expression of the Savior, made just prior to his betrayal: "This is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou has sent."
May God bless you all. Amen."
What I mean by quoting all this: at first there was a lot of help to understand the meaning. The ritual had practical use in everyday life (order of prayer), and the people who designed the ritual were alive to guide in this aspect. Masonry was a stepping stone for sure. Then you arrive to the point were the deletions/etc obscured the meaning to the point that you are alone to understand what it means. In 1989 the lecture said that the "keys" received in the endowment are to understand the expression of the Savior recorded in John 17 (and D&C 132).
So, in practice this means that: (1) you have to experience the ritual, (2) study, meditate, etc (3) try to live what it means to you in order to achieve spirituality. By spirituality I mean what David O McKay once said:
"Spirituality, our true aim, is the consciousness of victory over self and of communion with the Infinite" (David O. McKay, In Conference Report, Oct. 1969, 8).
Hope this helps a bit. Cheers!
(sorry if it is long).
Wow, the more you describe, the more I see us having much in common! I would love to see the sights of Rome and medieval Europe. I'm studying Ancient Rome in university right now, and I'm planning on majoring in Medieval Studies, so that will be helpful in giving context to these old European buildings! And I hope you can continue to attend Mass and appreciate the traditions, instead of feeling resentful towards them :)
I do not believe that God is the same as the universe. To reduce some philosophical arguments extremely, God's nature is absolutely simple, not composed of parts. Because God exists necessarily (rather than depending upon anything else in order to exist), there is no way in which God's nature could change. Things that exist in a finite, limited sense (like you, me, a tree, the universe) are defined by the fact that they change, that they have the potential to become something that they are not. I don't exist necessarily, but contingently.
There are definitely a lot of implications that need to be worked out, which I definitely haven't (but I'm pretty sure other philosophers have). I'm not necessarily trying to prove God with this, I'm just giving you a rationale for why I don't think God and the universe are the same. However, I do believe that all things depend on God's existence in order to exist. Because things exist contingently, depending upon things outside of their own existence in order to be, if that is the case with everything in the universe, then nothing could ever come to exist in the first place on its own. As I understand it, there must be some source that is by definition independent of anything (that is, God) that sustains the existence (in an ontological sense) of everything that can't sustain itself. So the relationship that I see between God and the world is that all things come from God (not in the sense that a son comes from a father, in which the former does not cease to exist when the latter dies; more like the way that light comes from a flame, where the blowing out of a flame results in the end of its light), that God has set the laws of nature in motion, and even sustains those laws for all eternity, as everything ultimately depends on God's existence at all times. In this way, I see finite reality to be inherently good, because it has been created by God, and it depends upon God's existence at every moment.
So yes, I very much agree with Thomas Paine. I'm very interested in the topic of aesthetics, and I'd like to read the writings of philosophers like Hegel and Burke on the nature of the sublime that exists in nature. I find creation to be one of the clearest reflections of God's power.
The most influential book that has informed my thinking is The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss by David Bentley Hart. It's an incredible work, a bit difficult to get through at times because it gets kind of technical, but overall it is easy to follow. It's basically a 300+ page definition of God that is found in pretty much all major theistic religious traditions and philosophies. Highly recommended!
One philosopher whose work I love is an Anglican writer named Roger Scruton. He's Anglican, and defends Christianity, but he's not very dogmatic about it; in fact, as far as I know he doesn't believe in the Virgin Birth or the Resurrection. He draws more universal meditations out of Christianity that are more philosophical. He's written a lot of books, has a lot of lectures on YouTube, and is an all-around wonderful human being. My favourite that I have read is The Face of God. Another book that might be of interest is The Soul of the World, though I haven't read it, but I'm sure it's great. I hope this helps!
Political Theology is a neglected area, especially in Baptist circles. I think the data shows that, since there is a huge percentage of "Not Sure" answers on that question. Among Calvinists,Two-Kingdoms Theology and Neo-Calvinism tend to be the most popular views. So far, this claim is supported by the data in the Survey, since 22% of the responders voted for Two-Kingdoms Theology and 16.3% voted for Neo-Calvinism; these are the two most popular choices on the survey.
During the Reformation, Two Kingdoms Theology was the most popular view among Calvinists and Lutherans. Most people who hold to this view are Amillenialists.
In the late 1800's, Abraham Kuyper was very influential in reviving Calvinism in the Netherlands, promoting a view now known as Neo-Calvinism. A more extreme view of Neo-Calvinism known as Christian Reconstructionism was promoted by R.J. Rushdoony and Greg Bahnsen, which advocates for theonomy. Most Neo-Calvinists and Reconstructionists tend to hold Post-Millenial views.
Here's some books if you want to learn more:
Two Kingdoms Theology:
The Two Kingdoms: A Guide for the Perplexed by Bradford Littlejohn
Living in God's Two Kingdoms by David Vandrunen.
Neo-Calvinism:
Lectures on Calvinism by Abraham Kuyper
Contours of the Kuyperian Tradition by Craig Bartholomew
Christian Reconstructionism/ Theonomy
By This Standard: The Authority of God's Law Today - Greg Bahnsen
Neo-Calvinism & Christian Theonomy by J. Glenn Friesen
Your statement is misleading because the truth of an immortal soul is not exclusively a "Christian truth." The Catholic Magisterium has taught that the immortality of the soul can indeed be discovered without needing Divine Revelation. Moreover, Aristotle most certainly discovered that the soul is not subject to death or corruption. This is incontrovertible. He simply did not claim to know what actually happens to the immortal soul. (Although he does seem to agree with Plato's Apology that those who die in virtue are in a "better and blessed" state as opposed to those who die in vice). Dr. Burnyeat provides extensive references to Aristotle's argument that the human soul is immortal on account of the fact that it participates in divine actuality (energeia):
https://www.amazon.com/Aristotles-Divine-Intellect-AQUINAS-LECTURE/dp/0874621755
Someone downvoted you for some reason. Weird.
Thank you for your reply! She has the current Catechism, but I wanted something in a Q&A format. Also, I looked into the various catechisms you mentioned. Ripalda and Astete are available in Spanish on Amazon. I couldn't find both of Bellarmine's or the original Roman Catechism in Spanish, but I found the former's long catechism in English, available for preorder. I'm tempted to buy it for myself, lol~
it's real....?!
This is a surprisingly difficult task; however, I did find
[Pocket Gospels with psalms]
(https://www.amazon.com/Pocket-Gospels-Psalms-Sunday-Visitor/dp/1612789676/ref=sr_1_11?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1522175264&sr=1-11&keywords=Gospels)
[ Pocket Gospels and Acts of the Apostles]
(https://www.amazon.com/Gospels-Apostles-Conference-Catholic-Bishops/dp/160137481X/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_img_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=VD94W05XG38D8YRYYZAR)
[The Four Gospels: The Contemporary English Version]
(https://www.amazon.com/Four-Gospels-Contemporary-Cornerstone-Editions/dp/1585426776)
and [a luggable organized according to the revised common lectionary--actually meant to sit on a lectern]
(https://www.episcopalbookstore.com/product.aspx?productid=1656)
I found A Brief Introduction to Theology at my local library. It touches on church history, but is more focused on the history of theological thought than political stuff. It also basically ignores the East.
It is relatively thin and does defines its terms when it uses them. It also provides a timeline of events surrounding the life of each theologian (both to relate their theology to the world around them and to give you a sense of their place in history).
It's sort of dry at times, but not completely unreadable. You can generally get by with skipping one or two chapters or using it as a reference, also.
I agree with other recommendations around considering postponing the wedding, but I wouldn't break off the relationship yet... As a former agnostic myself, I used to find belief in the resurrection a bit of a stretch given how long ago it was and I felt like God had basically "been silent" for a few thousand years which didn't seem to make much sense to me. I started reading about miracles at Fatima and other Catholic Marian apparitions and doing my own independent research and realized that there was more than the material world can explain... I've attached a few books I read on my journey that were helpful but have tons more if she ends up having the interest in considering...
Miracle Detective - https://smile.amazon.com/Miracle-Detective-Randall-Sullivan-ebook/dp/B008RZKOFQ/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=miracle+detective&qid=1572978404&sr=8-1
Fatima Prophecies - https://smile.amazon.com/Fatima-Prophecies-At-Doorstep-World-ebook/dp/B00534J76G/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=The+Fatima+Prophecies%3A+At+the+Doorstep+of+the+World&qid=1572978579&sr=8-1
Resurrection- expensive and long but good- https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B005LUJDNE/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1
​
Definitely keep everything in prayer as well, but it sounds like you definitely are being called to the truth of the Catholic faith, and you need to really consider how challenging it will be to raise kids in a "mixed" religious family. We'll be praying for you.
From this recent paper of Carroll's, the problem of Boltzmann observers doesn't appear only with Liouville's measure and the entropy problem, but rather, is quite widely pervasive across a broad set of cosmological models and ontological considerations of quantum states. Carroll seems to dismiss Boltzmann Brains (BB) as 'bad', because to be a BB is somehow self-undermining in an essential sense that makes supposing that we are BBs cognitively incoherent. I think this is a mistake, which comes out of failing to take seriously the insights we gain from the relationship between mind and physical supervenience in Everettian qm. A good overview of approaches is given in Barrett's chapter 7 (Many Minds) of The Quantum Mechanics of Minds and Worlds, but in particular check out Saunders' Time, Quantum Mechanics, and Decoherence which reaps the benefits of Albert & Loewers "many-minds" theory without some of the problematic implications to do with a continuously infinite range of subjectively distinct but qualitatively identical minds. The picture of consciousness that has emerged is that minds can promiscuously branch apart, that 'faster than light' entanglement experiments indicate conscious supervenience over multiple branches at once, and that the self-location uncertainty involved in qm is similar if not identical to classical self-location uncertainty in a spatially infinite ergodic universe.
The fruit of this view is that we now have reasons to dismiss the problem of BBs, but for an entirely different reason than Carroll suggests, and for a reason that I fear only compounds the issue for Craig. It seems that the MWI suggests that the personal subjective experience of consciousness supervenes over the physical structure instantiating it wherever it appears anywhere in the universe at whatever time or place. The natural extrapolation to Tegmark's MUH is that minds (or mental states) exist in a kind of quotient space of all mathematical structures containing the mathematical structure corresponding to that unique mind (or mental state) -- that is, isomorphisms of structure relevant to consciousness signify a unified conscious experience. In one important sense, this solves the problems associated with BBs, because while BBs certainly make up a part of the quotient space, maybe even a dominant portion by some suitable measure, personal identity nonetheless tracks the continuity of far more ordered structure within the quotient space (you can limit this argument down to inflationary cosmologies if you want to be conservative). There are remaining (and very interesting) problems to do with nature of this quotient space and how this tracking works, but this perspective has the potential to be extraordinarily productive, including but not limited to potentially solving the inflationary entropy problem.
I doubt Craig would accept this solution to the problem of BBs, but I wonder if denying the existence of a multiverse is even in the interests of classical theism. To the contrary, it seems like a multiverse would go a long way towards solving the problem of evil. You may already be aware, but this is an interesting anthology on the subject.
The history of it is pretty fascinating. Currently making my way through this (the Kindle version is a steal). There is an article by the same author in Dialogue, and I highly recommend checking it out.
Also, in response to your initial comment and when you have time, track down a copy of Greg Prince's David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism to read about the 1950s to early 1970s happenings around the policy. But be warned--as my good first counselor friend, who took my recommendation to read it, said "It's true, but not always faith-promoting." A valid assessment -- it's a history, drawn from the notes of Claire Middlemiss (his secretary for 30+ years) and other contemporaneous sources, and not a hagiograph.
Your interpretation/study makes sense. Revelation could be John hallucinating while on Patmos and having dreams, etc. The Past, Present, and Future could be blurring together. A lot of religious/spiritual texts were written under duress and while in ecstasy (Christian Mysticism is an awesome book https://www.amazon.com/Christian-Mysticism-William-Ralph-Inge-ebook/dp/B0084BVN76/ref=sr_1_7?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1538402917&sr=1-7&keywords=christian+mysticism ).
The woman being a more metaphorical image of a nation or united tribe fits with Joseph's thin and fat cow interpretations. The stars as the tribes of Israel- that's a new thought. Gotta' play with it before I comment more.
Thank you.