Get Lost in Order to be Saved! John Caputo on Radical Theology

This is the FIRST TNT episode NOT in the Homebrewed Podcast Feed!  Subscribe HERE to the Theology Nerd Throwdown podcast so you will continue to get the goodness like this, the upcoming Philip Clayton 3-D podcast, Bo and I Nerding Out!  The iTunes subscription is below.

Jack is Back… and this time we are discussing radical theology!  John Jack Caputo is a living legend and top notch philosopher of religion.  He comes with faith of Derrida and the Catholic mystical deferral.  Today you get to experience a live 3-D event, “Christianity UnCorked.”

This episode is sponsored by Dr. Laurel Schneider.  Thank You Laurel!  We appreciate the support!  If you missed Laurel’s visit to the podcast go check it out NOW!

* SUPPORT the podcast by just getting anything on AMAZON through THIS LINK.We really appreciate your assistance in covering all the hosting fees which went up 20 bucks a month due to the growing Deaconate!

Click To Subscribe in iTunes...this SHOW is going SOLO!!!

One Click to the Homebrewed Hotline!

Both Caputo’s first,  second, and third visit rocked the podcast. Then we shared his main-stage fun from Soularize and the 3D event with Philip Clayton, Jay Bakker, and Peter Rollins.  Even more exciting are these class lectures Caputo is sharing here at HBC.  These lectures are free theological cat nip for theology nerds. Enjoy.

Here’s Elizabeth Johnson’s 1st and 2nd visit to the podcast.  She is the Catholic theologian Jack mentions as the one who got in trouble for attempting to counter the patriarchy in Classical theology.




Share
If you enjoy all the Homebrewed Christianity Podcasts then consider sending us a donation via paypal. We got bandwidth to buy & audiological goodness to dispense. We will also get a percentage of your Amazon purchase through this link OR you can send us a few and get us a pint!

10 comments
philstyle
philstyle

Then we move on to the issues of Prayer that Caputo discusses.

 

Caputo asks "what is prayer" - and then answers with a specific and narrow definition by which to disqualify Augustine's prayer vis-a-vis Derrida. Who gave Caputo the authority to define prayer such?

 

Caputo claims that the prayer to the unknown is more risky.

I disagree. It's only more risky against the lone criteria that he chooses to assess that prayer perhaps ( this criteria being that not being assured of the recipient or outcome equals more risk). Why not just choose some other measures of risk as your criteria? 

philstyle
philstyle

I can't help feeling that Caputo's language is nothing less than confusing.

 

For example,:

"When I say non-existent I mean a God who insists"

Why use the term "who" an refer to the actions/ behaviour  (insisting - it's a verb) of a non-existent?

 

To insist on something, and to carry the title "who", it seems to me that Caputo is still referring to an entity that has intentionality. That entity must have a type of existence must it not? 

 

Maybe my linguistics are porked... but I just can't make his sentances consistent in my head.

chaschap
chaschap

 @philstyle et al:  In existentialist theology a distinction is made between the existent, that which is caught in the web of time and space, and Pure Being (a la Tillich and the Ground of all Being) who transcends time and space while interacting with it and being present in it.  In these terms to say that "God exists" is to confine God to the realm of time and space and make God another Being amongst beings, as when someone says, "God is the Supreme Being."  No, God is not the Supreme Being, highest and greatest amongst many, God is Being Itself, the Ground of all Being, the existential matrix upon which everything in time and space is founded and located.  And no, God does not exist, trapped within the realm of space/time, God IS.  (Cf. Ex. 3:14) 

dmf
dmf like.author.displayName 1 Like

Travis, that's right for Caputo there is no powerful space alien called God out 'there' somewhere like a nicer version of Galactus, but not really a "force" either in a metaphysical sense not something/someone that one can literally get in touch with, but more spectral than that, your question is not a dumb one as this is truly a radical idea and not just in terms of church politics.

philstyle
philstyle

Why do we jump to "powerful space alien called God" when resounding to a question about  a conscious God? It appears to me that we are creating silly descriptions in order to poor scorn on and/or dismiss an idea.

 

I will grant, however, that as far as we can empirically test, consciousnesses is a property emergent within the universe... (so if the universe is "all that is", it's perfectly fine to describe this kind of God as an alien) . But if the universe is not all there is, then we preserve the possibility that consciousness could exist outside of it. This kind of consciousness is no longer a "space alien", but a supra or extra natural consciousness. 

 

It just seems to me like we draw cartoons and think we've done understanding other people and their idea.

Travis Mamone
Travis Mamone

Forgive me if this is the dumbest question in the world, but what did Caputo mean when he said God does not exist, God insists? Does he mean he doesn't believe God is an actual conscious being, but rather a force ("Use the Force, Luke!") guiding us? If so, I'll have to both agree and disagree. I think God is both a conscious being AND a force that is guiding us all.

dmf
dmf

hey TF, any response to JaCa on the limits of process/metaphysics? I know some process minded physicists/cosmologists who wish that Keller and all would stop using science "poetically" and learn some math but I was wondering how you are trying to integrate all of this tension between your idols.

Tripp Fuller
Tripp Fuller

@Miam Nope, we get a percentage of every sale we refer. So whatever is purchased after the click supports the podcast.

Maim
Maim

Is there a mistake with the Amazon link?

Trackbacks