Grace again. Misc.

Tue Aug 1 20:36:08 CDT 2017

You been smokin' the wacky?

Extreme conjecture of time relativity to one's possible personal eternal
existence (afterlife?). If personal consciousness survives beyond death,
why should it forever be banished from this world?  And why not be my dog
in that next life.  He's got it really good.

David Morris

On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 5:36 PM Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe existence in Eternity is meant to mimic life in time. It just isn't
> fair.
>
> Or, maybe, nothing can actually happen in Eternity, neither Salvation nor
> Damnation, since you need a time dimension for any kind of action.
> Eternity is just a placeholder.l
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 4:10 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Luther's Grace evolved into Calvin's predestination for the very reason
>> you cite:  If it is completely unearned, then why do some receive it while
>> others don't?
>>
>> Paradox doesn't make sense.
>>
>> David Morris
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I've never heard tell of any theologians on the p-list but it seems to
>>> me Luther's notion of grace is so otherworldly it could be of little use to
>>> novelists. It's just too totally other, as Luther's God is totally other.
>>> It doesn't help poor sinful humanity to be good. It doesn't make dodos talk
>>> or Byron eternal.  It doesn't do anything material or physical.  It IS
>>> free.  You don't have to do anything, or say anything. You don't even have
>>> to whistle.  It CAN save you from damnation, but that's off in eternity
>>> somewhere.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 2:09 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen <
>>> lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but the question is whether Pynchon's use of the word is, perhaps,
>>>> closer to Luther's teaching on Grace than it is to the other ones that were
>>>> mentioned in this thread.
>>>>
>>>> Is there a theologian on board?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 31.07.2017 um 12:56 schrieb David Morris:
>>>>
>>>> Luther's revolution was born of his concept of Grace.  Say "grace,"
>>>> hear Luther.
>>>>
>>>> David Morris
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 2:32 AM Kai Frederik Lorentzen <
>>>> lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Could it be that Pynchon's understanding of Grace is Lutheran?
>>>>>
>>>>> > ... Martin Luther’s theology can be fundamentally construed as the
>>>>> development of his thought regarding the nature of grace, the nature of
>>>>> God’s favor and blessing bestowed upon undeserving human beings. The many
>>>>> dimensions of Luther’s biblical teaching and theological reflection have,
>>>>> in the background a desire to understand God’s grace most fully revealed in
>>>>> Jesus Christ. As such, Luther’s concepts of the righteousness of God,
>>>>> justification by faith, the bound will, the distinction of law and gospel,
>>>>> the new obedience, the “happy exchange,” and many related concepts are, at
>>>>> heart, attempts to describe what it is to have a God of grace.
>>>>> Most interpreters have rightly understood that in Luther’s view, to
>>>>> have a gracious God means to have a God who does not require human beings
>>>>> to fulfill a set of prerequisites in order to receive God’s gift in Christ
>>>>> or to reciprocate God’s giving in order to continue receiving Christ and
>>>>> his benefits. For Luther, to have a God of grace means to believe and trust
>>>>> that through Jesus Christ, God has already met all prerequisites and
>>>>> fulfilled all reciprocations. On this point, Luther found himself breaking
>>>>> new ground (or recovering lost ground) in the understanding of divine
>>>>> grace. Luther “broke” with those theological forebears who taught that
>>>>> divine grace was, in one way or another, partly dependent on human willing
>>>>> and doing. For Luther, God graciously wills and works “all in all.”
>>>>> Nevertheless, when Luther’s many descriptions of what it is to “have a
>>>>> gracious God” are analyzed, a more nuanced understanding of the
>>>>> relationship between the One giving the gift and the ones receiving it
>>>>> begins to reveal itself. For Luther, faith—that gracious means through
>>>>> which God graciously bestows the righteousness of Christ—creates a dynamic
>>>>> rather than static experience of possessing and being possessed of a God of
>>>>> grace ... <
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://religion.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-335
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 30.07.2017 um 13:58 schrieb Mark Kohut:
>>>>>
>>>>> In Calvinism and other religious traditions, grace gets earned--or
>>>>> shown-- by human free will choices.
>>>>>
>>>>> if grace is not earned or shown-- by free will human choices, then
>>>>> grace as Pynchon uses it, is unearned, totally unexpected (by Lew and in
>>>>> the text) and is somehow a function of the cosmos. Chance or otherwise. No?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 7:41 AM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If Free Will replaces Grace, then it is it's equal, not its opposite.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David Morris
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 5:27 AM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now THAT'S an answer I did not expect---nor really know (although I
>>>>>>> know some of that shit from that tradition).
>>>>>>> Another theologian rendered into the dustbin of churchyards because
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> Augustine's dominance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A heretic, P's tradition. One might say a theological preterite,
>>>>>>> analogously speaking? As Bailey alludes, and Morris fills in:
>>>>>>> a kind of theological shlemiel, maybe? Profane Pelagius.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm going to suggest that as Pynchon transformed the concept of
>>>>>>> Grace within the religious tradition, for him
>>>>>>> in the fiction, it became like "the free will" of the cosmos---which
>>>>>>> might all be predetermined, of course, per your observation---
>>>>>>> when Lew experienced it unexpectedly.....when Against the Day
>>>>>>> ends....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In the way back, Pelagius (St Agustine's antagonist) thought we
>>>>>>>> didn't need Grace--that our free will was sufficient to overcome sin. So,
>>>>>>>> the opposite of Grace is Free Will.  Which science now says doesn't exist.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From the wayback (but eternal?) religious uses, the opposite might
>>>>>>>>> be damnation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What might it be in Pynchon's transformation of the meaning of the
>>>>>>>>> word?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Jochen Stremmel <
>>>>>>>>> jstremmel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are the native speaker, Mark, but I would say it's bullshit
>>>>>>>>>> if you don't provide context. What kind of grace? You have disgrace, you
>>>>>>>>>> have clumsiness, I'm sure you have more opposites of grace.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2017-07-29 21:11 GMT+02:00 Erik T. Burns <eburns at gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I suggest "trump"
>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>> From: Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: ‎7/‎29/‎2017 20:06
>>>>>>>>>>> To: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Grace again. Misc.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Gracelessness is an absence of grace, but the English language
>>>>>>>>>>> lacks a word for the opposite of grace.--Cass Sunstein, very
>>>>>>>>>>> recent essay.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20170802/f5e95c7e/attachment.html>