ken wilson online

I was changed by an old book many years ago: On the Religious Affections by Jonathan Edwards.  Edwards, a leader in the Great Awakening of the eighteenth century, spoke of the need to have the “affections”–the emotional, affective, feeling regions awakened.  He described the hard heart of Ezekiel’s prophecy as an unfeeling, inert, unresponsive heart.  And he had a very physical understanding of the affections, using words like humours, fluids, and the like to refer to them.  The bodily effects of feeling: weeping, tears, a stirring in the pit of the stomach, flushing of the face, warmth.
Read the rest of this entry »

What drives a concern for thinking about set theory?  This is a sub-text in this ongoing conversation.  Maybe set theory is a ruse for being soft on sin.  We don’t want to obey the Bible’s teaching on sin, so we are trying to find a way around it, and set theory is a convenient sin dodge.  The bounded set seems to be driven by a concern for moral rigor or moral purity. Therefore any attempt to consider a different approach must be driven by a concern to accomodate to the surrounding culture when it comes to sin.
Read the rest of this entry »