Highly Imaginative Title - Nate Strum
"XXIX. That all who are known as clergy sin when they do not protect themselves by marriage after they have become conscious that God has not enabled them to remain chaste."
I wonder if Zwingli is literally saying that it is impossible to remain chaste. Is this an actual predictive statement, i.e., would he renounce this belief if somebody proved him wrong by, say, locking a monk up for his whole life?
"XLIX. Greater offence I know not than that one does not allow priests to have wives, but permits them to hire prostitutes. Out upon the shame!" It's laughable if this was actually going on.
"LV. Whoever remits any sin only for the sake of money is the companion of Simon and Balaam, and the real messenger of the devil personified." This reminds me. "The love of money is the root of all evil" is open to misinterpretation. It's not actually about money. Besides coin collectors, most people only value money because you can buy consumer goods with it. Money is only a medium of exchange; it's not valued at an end in itself. The thing that affects people's behavior is the desire for consumer goods, which is what they want and use money to get.
"LXV. Those who do not wish to confess, God will probably take care of. Hence no force shall be used against their body, unless it be that they behave so criminally that one cannot do without that." How very modern of you, Zwingli.
While we're on the topic of Calvin, let me pose one of my favorite challenges to free will. What is free will? The ability to act differently than you actually did? Meaning, you could done something else? Okay, since you probably don't mean you could have done *something humorously impossible*, let's operationalize a bit. Time for a thought experiment: in a situation S, you are given the options of choice A and choice B at time T, and you choose A. Now I use a time machine to go back to S at T and watch you choose again. Remember, I've gone back in time. I haven't changed S. All the atoms are in the same position, and your mind is in the same state. Will you choose differently? Why would you? Everything is identical to the way it was before. Any factors you invoked in your decision are equally present the second go round. So, if we were able to run an experiment where you did the same thing every time, in what sense could you have acted differently?
Owen and Josh
I wonder if Zwingli is literally saying that it is impossible to remain chaste. Is this an actual predictive statement, i.e., would he renounce this belief if somebody proved him wrong by, say, locking a monk up for his whole life?
"XLIX. Greater offence I know not than that one does not allow priests to have wives, but permits them to hire prostitutes. Out upon the shame!" It's laughable if this was actually going on.
"LV. Whoever remits any sin only for the sake of money is the companion of Simon and Balaam, and the real messenger of the devil personified." This reminds me. "The love of money is the root of all evil" is open to misinterpretation. It's not actually about money. Besides coin collectors, most people only value money because you can buy consumer goods with it. Money is only a medium of exchange; it's not valued at an end in itself. The thing that affects people's behavior is the desire for consumer goods, which is what they want and use money to get.
"LXV. Those who do not wish to confess, God will probably take care of. Hence no force shall be used against their body, unless it be that they behave so criminally that one cannot do without that." How very modern of you, Zwingli.
While we're on the topic of Calvin, let me pose one of my favorite challenges to free will. What is free will? The ability to act differently than you actually did? Meaning, you could done something else? Okay, since you probably don't mean you could have done *something humorously impossible*, let's operationalize a bit. Time for a thought experiment: in a situation S, you are given the options of choice A and choice B at time T, and you choose A. Now I use a time machine to go back to S at T and watch you choose again. Remember, I've gone back in time. I haven't changed S. All the atoms are in the same position, and your mind is in the same state. Will you choose differently? Why would you? Everything is identical to the way it was before. Any factors you invoked in your decision are equally present the second go round. So, if we were able to run an experiment where you did the same thing every time, in what sense could you have acted differently?
Owen and Josh
Comments
Post a Comment