Peter J. LeithartRezensionen
Autor von A House for My Name: A Survey of the Old Testament
Rezensionen
"Care of the hopeless is a work of the whole congregation. When we deny or minimize our neediness and dependency, we cruelly reinforce the despair of the mentally ill. They think their neediness is sub-human and feel they can't be members of the human race until they learn to help themselves. Maybe then, God will help them. That gets everything backwards. We the hopeful need to learn our need for help. We become sane when we freely admit our dependence. And we help to heal the hopeless when we welcome them into the community of the needy that is the human and Christian family."
As one who struggles to righteously hope out of a long history of failing to hope from fear of a sick heart full of dashed hopes - Leithart did an excellent job of training the reader to hope rightly - to place our hope where it can never be dashed. He understands the perspective of age. I'm 62, but "My future isn't just 20-30 years. I've got ages and ages ahead of me." We forget this. Thanks for the reminder, Peter.
I originally chose the book, despite it's being a little bit "textbooky" because I was intrigued to see what the author had to say on the question of Jane Austen's true personal faith. You see, I just finished reading Cassandra and Jane by Jill Pitkeathley --- a fictional story in a biographical style that imagines the character of Jane as being much harsher than she is usually made out to be by real biographers. The author insinuates that Jane's faith was not genuine but was, instead, put on for the sake of the times and her family's situation. Other writers who have tried to make her out to be the ultimate Feminist have suggested the same. I would find it very refreshing to be assured that my favorite can be cynical, silly, sarcastic, and an authentic believer all at the same time---much as I am, myself!
From tiny irritations like claiming Austen's was the world of "hoop skirts" (out of fashion decades earlier unless you were visiting the Royals) to really sweeping generalizations (detailed below), I was immediately turned off by the author's lack of education. Big words does not a scholar make.
Leithart makes grand and arguable generalizations and assumptions about characters and plots, as well as the character of Austen herself, that I very much disagree with. A little thing is I think he's got the characters of Darcy and Elizabeth wrong---they both struggled with pride and prejudice, but I see Lizzie being the more prideful one and Darcy being the more prejudiced. A big thing is his view on what it means to be an effeminate male in the Austen era.
He says Edward Ferrars is "more than a little effeminate" because he is "painfully silent". WHAT?? And Tilney, as well, because he knows so much about fabrics? Does this man not realize who were the primary sellers of fabrics, designers of clothing, and clothiers of the day? MEN!
He was also way off on his understanding of the characters of Sense and Sensibility, Marianne and especially Willoughby's motives. The annoyances just go on and on ad nauseam to conclude with---no conclusion! Literally, the book just stops.
Please don't waste your time. A knowledgeable Janeite will be perturbed and a new one will be misled.
So many conflicting thoughts on this one. First, you should know--according to the copyright page--that these three [long] essays [or articles] were all previously published. So there is always the chance that you might have previously come across these in another publication. Second, each essay is united in that they provide commentary and 'insight' about an essential, historic, traditional Christian document. (Most catechisms, creeds, confessions, statements of faith, etc. use the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer, and the Apostle's Creed as foundational structure (or skeleton)). However, they are all authored by different authors AND approach these historic essential pieces VERY differently. In other words, theologically the authors are all over the place. The strongest essay/article is Peter J. Leithart's coverage/commentary on the Ten Commandments. The other two essays were hit or miss--depending on the paragraph. By far the weakest essay was the last. Wesley Hill's essay was a mess. In my opinion. Granted you might not think it is a mess. And VERY TRUE it is far from the worst I've ever read or heard. Nothing that would make me shudder. It's just I don't know that I could honestly recommend this essay as being helpful or beneficial.
The last section of the book might just be the most practical. But it also might prove hit or miss with readers. I think some will absolutely love it. Others perhaps might not put it into use or practice depending on if you are the type of person who likes to read prayers out of books.
So the last section, shares prayers--"collects," if you will--structured around all the broken down pieces of the Ten Commandments, Apostles Creed, Lord's Prayer. Each of the three is broken down into bite-size fragments/sections/sentences. There's a prayer for each. So there's a prayer for the first of the ten commandments, etc. So if you REALLY were looking to study these three historic, essentials of the Christian faith, then this prayer section might prove just the thing. It could be incredibly impactful and useful. On the other hand, some folks really just don't get much out of praying a scripted prayer.
I liked the beginning and the end. I wasn't as thrilled with the middle.
On a ſecond readiŋ, for tranſlation, loſes a bit of it ſtrengþ due to me haviŋ already read Carſon’s duo ‘Chriſt & culture reviſited’ & ‘Ðe intolerance of tolerance’, which ſeriouſly deflate Poſtmoderniſm.
Anselm posed the question, "Cur Deus Homo?" or "why the God Man?" Peter J. Leithart thinks the more significant question that must be asked is, "How can the death and resurrection of a Jewish rabbi of the first century...be the decisive event in the history of humanity, the hinge and crux and crossroads for everything?"
Leithart's big question leads to a sweeping exploration of pagan and secular culture, Levitical foundations, and Pauline teaching. This is not a book for the faint of heart or one narrowly focused on atonement theories, but rather one that attempts to explain how our understanding of the atonement makes sense of everything and addresses not only the individual but our social and political structures.
Leithart begins with exploring what he calls the "physics of the old creation." We are creatures of flesh, originally good but bent in the fall. Every society subsequently creates "elemental" or stoicheic systems (cf. Galatians 4:1-10) recognizing the pollution of human flesh and creating systems of "do not taste, do not touch" rules that lead to striving for purity. Leithart does an imaginative tour by a Jew of various ancient civilizations describing how these work, whether focused around the fear of death, around phallic displays and fertility, or around violence, honor, and vengeance. These resulted in classes, political structures, and injustices.
God chose Israel for something different. Beginning with Abraham, the cutting of circumcision was an anti-flesh campaign that expanded with Torah and served as a teacher or pedagogue of how to approach God. Yet Torah was co-opted in using purity rules to reinforce ideas of racial superiority over Gentiles and divisions between elite and "sinner" Jews. It became yet another stoicheic system.
Leithart understands that it is the full life of Jesus enacting all that Torah intended, the unjust death in the flesh in which judgment is passed upon human flesh in Christ (Leithart here argues for a carefully defined version of penal substitution), and the bodily resurrection of Jesus by the Father in the Spirit, that together constitute atonement and justification. Leithart elaborates justification as God's "delivering verdict" or "deliverdict" liberating not only from sin and the flesh, but the elemental, stoicheic principles of the world, whether those of other religious systems, Torah, or what Leithart sees as the post-stoicheic systems of secularism which are a kind of relapse from the Christian era's understanding of a Spirit indwelt life. Those united with Christ by faith enter a new epoch, a new humanity breaking down the sociopolitical divisions of the old order, and live according to a new animating principle.
I've offered here only a bare bones summary of a breathtakingly rich argument. I believe he makes several important contributions to our understanding of the work of Christ. One is his discussion of stoicheic elements as a social theory elaborating the ways various societies attempt to deal with the flesh, and the sociopolitical consequences of these systems. While carefully arguing for penal substitution, a doctrine that has fallen out of favor, he contends for a broader understanding of atonement and justification that encompasses the life, death and resurrection of Jesus and centers justification in the objective "delivering verdict" of these events rather than our subjective experience. Along with N.T. Wright, he argues that we are justified by the faith of Jesus, in whom we trust, but he also draws out further what this new status means in terms of a new Spirit-empowered life in the flesh and a new social order contrary to stoicheic systems that has radical implications for Christian mission that crosses social barriers and breaks them down. His analysis of modernity in "Galatian Church, Galatian Age" serves as a rich complement to Charles Taylor's A Secular Age.
Leithart's book covers familiar territory but forces you out of familiar patterns of thinking. I'm still weighing how well "stoicheic systems" can serve as a kind of "social theory of everything." I'm challenged by how often we separate the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and how Leithart brings these together as a seamless whole. The idea of a "delivering verdict," that performs what it declares and powerfully transfers us into a Spirit empowered community speaks of the power of the gospel to effect what it promises. This book stays on my shelves, worthy of further reflection and re-reading.
I was interested in this book for three reasons:
1. Dostoevsky is one of the best and most profound novelists whoever lived. Crime and Punishment is incisive in its critique of 19th century European philosophy and insightful on the complexity of the human heart, illuminating both its darkness and its goodness. is a classic of Western literature. But what about the man? Before reading this book, my only exploration of what sort of man Dostoevsky was, was Wikipedia and a chapter from a Yancey Book. So I was eager to read more.
2. Peter Leithart is an excellent author and has published books in several genres (theology, historical theology, sermons, literary criticism, cultural criticsm, commentaries and other books about the Bible). He also blogs, A LOT at www.Leithart.com and has published numerous articles. To use the adjective prolific, may be an understatement. And while I haven't read everything he's written and know it can't all be good, generally he has keen insight and is worth listening to.
3. I fancy myself a history buff and Russian history is incredibly interesting. Dostoevsky lived in 19th Century Russia, a period fraught with growing political unrest and conservative entrenchment. Anything focusing on Dostoevsky and needs to explore these dimensions.
In this thin volume, Leithart gives us an intimate portrait of Dostoevsky, the lover of Russian and lover of Christ. This is not a work of hagiography, Dostoevsky is too real to allow himself be sainted. He drinks to much, he is arrogant and full of rage, he is a gambler and a poor money manager, he is a scoundrel who has a mistress while his first wife is on her deathbed. But he is also somebody who sees with clarity the bankruptcy of European philosophy on Russian soil and that the only hope for his beloved country is Christ.
Leithart's book is copiously researched as his end notes attest. Though his biography is written in narrative form, many of Dostoevsky's words come from various of his correspondence and writings.
Having not read another biography on Dostoevsky, this sufficed for my purposes; however I imagine that a better book than this could have been written. This is relatively a brief treatment and while Leithart is fair, this is not him at his most creative or insightful.
But I do recommend it as a short, engaging treatment of a great novelist.
Still an interesting and sympathetic read of Austen. I am no expert on her novels or life, but I did find it informative.
His chapter on Intertextuality is entitled 'The Text is a Joke.' By explaining the anatomy of a joke he shows how proper understanding of a 'joke' comes from understanding from outside sources and the ability to discover which information is relevant to 'get it.' His chapter on structure argues that like music, texts can be constructed with multiple structures and themes. In his final chapter, Leithart asserts that Scripture is about Christ, both as head (Jesus) and body (ecclesia). This means that passages point typologically to both Christ and his church and by extension, everything else.
This text grew out of Leithart's defense of the quadriga- the medieval belief in the literal, anagogical, allegorical and tropological senses of scripture. But Leithart isn't so much engaging patristics and medieval texts; rather he is trying to show that the quadriga itself is a good hermeneutic. Thus he attends to making sure we are reading the Bible with a literary sensitivity, thoughtfulness and an expansive imagination about all that the text is saying.
In criticism, I think sometimes Leithart is a little unfair in his critique of his opponents. Also, throughout this book, he uses John 9 and the story of Jesus' healing of the man born blind to show how this works out. In one sense this is smart, but it is also the easy route. John's gospel is ripe with poetic overtones, allusions, theologizing, symbolism. Any student of John's gospel is going to pay attention to what John is hinting at, not merely what the action is. I found myself wondering at different points, what Leithart would do with a non-narrative text which wasn't so expansive in its allusions. Still I substantially agreed and really liked some of the ways he opened up John 9 to me.
2 
Jamichuk | May 22, 2017 |
Jamichuk | May 22, 2017 | 
Leithart picks up on the tradition of looking for vestiga Trinitatis--traces of the Trinity--clues to the Triune life, the imprint of perichoresis (vii). He is not trying to argue compelling evidence for the Christian concept of God apart from special revelation. Leithart takes special revelation as his starting point, affirming that the God revealed in scripture is revealed as Trinity. He then works backwards, and seeks to trace God's presence in His creation.
The themes of perichoresis and mutual interpenetration runs straight through this book. In chapter one, Leithart picks up on the Cartesian distinction between the Self and the outside world and shows how though these realms are distinct, they overlap and penetrate one another (i.e. our bodies are outside our mind but part of the self, we need to consume matter and eliminate to remain alive in ourself, etc). Chapter two describes the individual and her relationship to society. As with Cartesian dualism, Leithart affirms the distinction between individuals and society but shows how each domain contributes to and defines the other. Chapter three discusses the visceral interpenetration of sex and the accompanying physical, spiritual and psychological intermingling. Chapter four examines the way the past and the future inhabit the present (the past through memory, through structures and culture making, the future through possibility and the telos of things). The inter-textual nature of words and languages also evidences an interplay between shared language and individual expression (chapter five), as does music (chapter six). Chapter seven implies an ethic of hospitality--making room for the other--which underlies human community and chapter eight probes concepts, logic and relationship further. Chapter nine is where Leithart speaks specifically about Trinity and also the perechoretic unity in the thing called church.
This brief summary points at the breadth of Leithart's survey (all within about 150 pages) but the beauty of this book is in the details:
The world is not patterned by mutually opposing things that need to be kept in "balance." Things are much more intricately interlaced. The world is designed according to a pattern I've called "mutual indwelling" "reciprocal habitation" "interpenetration." I've used words like "intertwining" and "interleaving" and "twists" and "swirls, whirls, curves and curls." I've written of how things circle back on themselves, of Mõbius strip and Celtic knots. I claim to see the pattern everywhere--in physical reality, in language, sounds, sex, personal relations, ethics, and the concepts we form to understand the world. (129).
This romp through philosophy, politics, culture, music, sex and ethics highlights the interconnection between the alleged poles. This is poetic theology and an enjoyable read. Leithart is at times concrete and in other places abstract, which makes this book somewhat complex in its execution, but it is tightly argued and well thought through. It is worth tracing Leithart's argument all the way through.
Leithart is careful to call these instances of perichoresis 'traces.' Leithart's project doesn't appear to be another Thomist attempt at 'analogy of being' (at least how I understand it). This seems far less ambitious than that. Leithart starts with the Divine life (as described in the Bible and the theological tradition) and argues that the inter-relationship between Father, Son and Spirit gives us a window into the nature of creation. That creation images God is discernible only to those who know the God whom they seek. I give this book four-and-a-half-stars and recommend it for anyone interested in the nature of revelation.
Notice of material connection, I received this book from Brazos Press in exchange for my honest review.
Leithart sets forth his understanding of the history of Christianity in the West over the past 500 years, his conviction regarding the impending end of denominationalism as we know it, and his desire for what he calls "reformational Catholicism."
Leithart has previously written and spoken regarding the "end of Protestantism" as the Mainline declines and Evangelicalism follows soon after; he affirms the central emphases of the Reformation but would like to see further rapprochement with Rome (as long as Rome also recognizes what he deems valid in the Reformation). He also has written much about the perichoretic relational unity within the Trinity and how such is the model for unity among believers in John 17:20-23.
It is refreshing to see a robust voice among Protestants crying out regarding the difficulties, problems, and outright sin manifest in the denominationalism inherent in Christendom. It is great to see a Protestant recognize the importance of the unity of the church according to the truth. It is good to hear a Protestant recognize the hollow emptiness of what has passed for the ecumenical movement in the past century. It is wonderful to have a Protestant recognize the importance of returning to weekly communion. He even recognizes that "faith alone" is only mentioned once in Scripture, in james 2, and is denied, and that attempts to suppress James betrays a not-so-"Sola Scriptura" ideology.
And yet I find the work ultimately quite disappointing because Leithart blithely assumes throughout the basis of current ecumenism. To Leithart the disagreements regarding practice and doctrine which has gripped Christendom for 500 years ultimately proves intractable; for some reason, insistence remains on agreement with the first millennium creeds, but disagreements about church practice and doctrines among various Protestant churches can remain "safely" in the "disputables" camp. Thus, throughout, he assumes that the true unity of the church can only happen when Catholics, Protestants, and the Orthodox come together to be one.
His almost complete silence regarding the Restoration Movement is therefore quite telling. There have been plenty of Christians for over 200 years proclaiming that denominationalism is wrong, that the Church of Christ must be one, and calling for everyone to set aside the creeds and denominationalism according to the traditions of men in order to become simply Christians and seek to do Bible things as the Bible teaches. This group has been derided as sectarian by those who wish to continue to adhere to various doctrines not taught in Scripture and who uphold all of these denominational structures; and yet, if we are to be one as God is one in Himself, that unity cannot just brush all sorts of real and substantive disagreements under the table as if they are not really that important in the end.
It is great, therefore, for Leithart to see the light regarding denominationalism and unity among the people of God. Unfortunately, he will not find it in "reformational Catholicism," words unfamiliar to the New Testament. But he could find it in a return to pure apostolic Christianity as set forth in the Scriptures and within the association of those who seek to follow God according to what is made known in Scripture and eschewing all the organizations and organizational trappings of mankind.
**--galley received as part of early review program
Two things I will mention here:
One: Maybe it’s the serious portrait that remains of her that made me think of her character was more like the timid and serious Anne in [Persuasion] or Fanny in [Mansfield Park], but this biography show how “playful” she was, even late in her live like a giddy schoolgirl making a lot of fun with people - the pleasure she took in dances and playing with her nieces.
Two: Her formalized Anglican faith that served as a guide to the Christian morality in her novels. That she wrote prayers for the family evening devotion, the hope she could draw from her faith when family members died and she herself became very sick and died.
Peter Leithart did a great job of emphasising these sides of her character. Leithart does not use a lot of time discussing her novels as such (for this focus see his book [Miniatures and Morals], but he quotes extensively from her letters and I appreciated this.
2 ctpress | 6 weitere Rezensionen | Jul 3, 2016 |
ctpress | 6 weitere Rezensionen | Jul 3, 2016 | 
Rooted in John 17:20-21, Romans 1:18-20, etc., Leithart considers human relationships, the intimacy of marriage, the use of language, the dynamics of music,
In general I found Leithart's explorations and analysis compelling. For some time I have spoken of various truths expressed in Scripture as held in tension or in balance; I was not necessarily happy with that designation but could not think of any better way of expressing what seems to be contradictory on the surface but expressing a reality greater and deeper than our own. Leithart's understanding of mutual interpenetration and looking at the present creation perichoretically explains the same reality but in a more coherent, less dichotomous way, and I am indebted to him for such.
A great resource for looking at this creation in a theological, Trinitarian basis.
**--book received as part of early review program
After reading this book I feel I may read Pride & Prejudice again or even another of her works and maybe I will see it in a different light. I was also surprised at how many movies are a reworking of Austen’s work such as the movie Clueless was based on the novel Emma.
Really happy I read this and would like to read more from the Christian Encounters Series.
Christian Encounter Series
Peter Leithart © 2011
Thomas Nelson Publishers
ISBN 978-1-59555-034-7
175 pp. plus bibliography and Notes (ppbk)
This brief biography brings Dostoevsky alive through his experiences, speeches and relationships. Wrongly accused of being a political dissident he was imprisoned for four years in Siberia. There he says he fully found Christ and developed his personal philosophy of life--that every person in every nation deserves respect because some of Christ can be found in almost everyone.
. He loved Russia deeply and was dismayed by atheistic voices leading young Russians astray. He also spoke against divisions between individuals and nations.
He became one of Russia’s most loved novelists, often portraying characters who learned, often through great trials and wrong choices, that following Christ was the way to live. His writing and conversations became his methods of teaching about God.
Although a Christian he sometimes failed woefully to follow the Lord and finally decided that was only possible when we reached heaven. He was never afraid to speak about the importance of living for Christ even when ridiculed.
This great Russian writer suffered from poor health most of his life but wrote diligently, often all night.
An interesting book although some of Dostoevsky’s speeches that are quoted were several pages long. The speeches do reveal this man’s heart. His reputation is still outstanding in our present age.
That being said, I think it should be noted that the reader needs to get passed the first portion of the book without putting it down before they can really enjoy it. I found the first portion to be very trying and I hate the images of Dostoevsky that the writer created in my head at the beginning. I found him to grate on my nerves (Dostoevsky, not the author). Of course, that's probably how Dostoevsky really was, so it's not the author's fault. That being said, once you get past that portion and you get into the story, you begin to learn why he is the way that he is and you begin to accept Dostoevsky as a flawed and brilliant man. This knowledge makes him a little less grating and a little more likeable (but not by much). Regardless, it was a great book!
Diese Seite verwendet Cookies für unsere Dienste, zur Verbesserung unserer Leistungen, für Analytik und (falls Sie nicht eingeloggt sind) für Werbung. Indem Sie LibraryThing nutzen, erklären Sie dass Sie unsere Nutzungsbedingungen und Datenschutzrichtlinie gelesen und verstanden haben. Die Nutzung unserer Webseite und Dienste unterliegt diesen Richtlinien und Geschäftsbedingungen.
The challenge of this book for the person without a background in philosophy is to get past the first three chapters which explore questions of God’s being, self-existence, and simplicity, and what may be said of God, wrestling with the challenge of apophaticism, in which we can only say what God is not. There are questions of how God relates to the physical world and how God can be an unmoved mover and yet retain God’s simplicity. Along the way, Peter J. Leithart invokes Aquinas and Aristotle, Plato and Plotinus, Augustine and Bulgakov, among others. It’s challenging reading, and important for its exploration of discussions of the being and nature of God.
It also sets us up for the radical turn in the second half from the reasonings of pagan and Christian philosophers to the revelation of Genesis 1. We find here no discussions of the Absolute, the One, or Being. The first thing we learn of God is that God is almighty Creator. Scripture does not know of a God “without interplay with creatures, without a created playground” (p. 150). Creation reflects who God is from eternity. God’s transcendence is over creation, never apart from it. Unlike Greek philosophy, there is no God unrelated to creation.
Furthermore, Leithart asserts, against those who propose that the “we” of Genesis 1 is a heavenly council, that Genesis 1 reveals a Triune Creator. There is a harmonious unity, creating, calling by Word, and forming or hovering–Father, Son, and Spirit. In this, the life of God is revealed as “justice, holiness, wisdom, power, goodness, and truth, all actualized in the infinitely mobile, infinitely lively, inexhaustibly energetic life of triune love, a;; actualized in relation to a contingent creation” (p. 209).
What then do we say of God’s being, the question of ontology. We often speak of God as “I am” as one who is self sufficient, but utterly other. Yet a Triune Creator is both utterly sufficient, but also utterly related to creation, which reveals the self-giving love of the Triune loving Creator.
Genesis 1 reveals a God who speaks and sees. Leithart notes: “All created action, all moments and periods and bodies of time, all created experience is suspended between God’s saying and his seeing.” A staggering thought indeed–that all of our existence is encompassed and sustained and directed by God’s saying and seeing.
My experience of this book was to move from exasperation with my efforts to follow philosophical arguments to exultation in worship of the Triune Creator who speaks and sees all creation–and that so much may be found in Genesis 1 that is not mere polemical ammunition in origins debates.
____________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.