Sarah Coakley - Analytic Theology

What happens when deep questions of God are addressed by the precise methods of analytic philosophy? It’s not about “proving” the existence of God. It is about clarifying the attributes and doctrines of God. So why is analytic theology controversial?



Sarah Coakley is an Anglican systematic theologian and philosopher of religion with wide interdisciplinary interests. In 2011 she became deputy chair of the School of Arts and Humanities at Cambridge University.


Closer to Truth presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

[theophilus]

RLK, I think, is at his best here. His questions are both pertinent and reveal some grasp of various traditions. His various conversations with Sarah Coakley have been most revealing, and Coakley's responses have been eminently clear.

[sapanacharya]

yes, this is some high quality youtube

[GreaterDeity]

Video: This is interesting.
Comments: Intimidated by vocabulary.

Fucking grow up.

[tylerlynch]

It's hilarious that every video on theology on this channel brings out every edgy armchair sophist of the back waters of Youtube, disparaging them without bringing forth any arguments or even intelligible discourse whatsoever

[jamesruscheinski]

What is continental philosophy? What does continental philosophy emphasize?

[jamesruscheinski]

Analytic theology uses logic of language in narrative of sacred text for personal experience and human emotion? Human emotion and personal experience can be connected to God through analytic theology of narratives and language in sacred text?

[jamesruscheinski]

Sacred text of Bible has historical context from which analytic theology can relate narratives and language to personal experience and human emotion?

[jamesruscheinski]

Can use analytic theology directly on the language and narratives in the text of the Bible, without preconceived doctrine or theology, for personal experience of the language and narratives?

[jamesruscheinski]

Personal experience and human emotion can be logically connected to the language and narratives of sacred text in Bible using analytic theology?

[jamesruscheinski]

Christ taking on human nature to redeem from sin allows personal and emotional experience of human nature to logically connect to the narrative and language of the text in the Bible using analytic theology?

[jamesruscheinski]

Analytic theology of narratives and language in Bible to form emotion and personal experience; as well as personal experience and emotion for narratives and language of Bible to develop theology?

[jamessmith]

"Ever learning and never coming to the knowledge of the Truth"

[xspotbox]

Christian analytic philosophy could not be distinguished from Buddhism on Hinduism. Perhaps this is why it will never be developed, since it would became just another word salad, describing infinite logical loops of common natural phenomena and classifications of various moral virtues. Bible is a story, so best analytic method can do is to explain what people in book meant with those adventures and conversations.
This is interesting phenomena because only Christianity decided for narrative instead of rules and interpretations. It wasn't always so, but story telling became important when Rome was converted from ancient Greek mysticism to Catholicism. They didn't just abandon their pantheon of gods, biggest problem was what to do with diverse European paganism, since every tribe has already developed their own system of divine natural forces and spirits. So they decided for a story of Jesus and build an idea of humanistic values around his personality. Difference is, Jesus was about being a model citizen in new world empire, his life and ideas are theology, no other spiritual practices, rituals or meditations are required. Other world religions are focused on consciousness, mindscapes and tribal, family life, they demand discipline and obedience from believers, but can't describe common mental or cultural space where religion can became part of every day experiences.
Christianity was developed from Hebrew occult mysticism, based on unknown God and system of sephirots, representing moral values and their interactions, much like eastern traditions still are today.
Another problem is, Bible is a written word of God and that's why it can never change. It's on every individual reader to find meaning in Biblical narrative itself, words stay the same, only interpretations can change over time. But this is exactly what European oligarchies demands from modern citizens, since nothing is more important for an invisible Empire than a human condition.
If analytical theology doesn't want to became another form of Hindu theosophy, than it must evolve into legal morals, theory of culture, psychology, genetics, ... same BS that almost destroyed a planet not a 100 years ago.

[sahelanthropusbrensis]

I have a phd in the study of fairies behavior.

[MysticDreamer]

The problem I have with theologians is that they don't appear to me to be applying any serious rational critique to their religious doctrines. I often see atheistic skeptics arguing scientific reasons that religious doctrines can't be true. For example that it's not scientifically possible for someone to die and raise from the dead. I personally don't even bother with those kinds of arguments. The bottom line is that if a supernatural God actually exists, then violating physical laws would not be an issue.

However, if we ignore all the physical problems with theology and just look at the utter absurdities of what it demands in terms of the mere behavior of this Biblical God, it seems to me to be readily apparent that the doctrines can be nothing other than man-made nonsense. The very idea of a supposedly omnipotent, all-wise, creator God behaving in the ways requires for Christian or any Abrahamic doctrines to be true, that God would need to be seriously mentally ill, or extremely inept.

I just personally can't see how any intelligent person can take these religious doctrines seriously. Not only this, but the fact that educational institutions even allow theology to be a respected academic subject causes met to question the validity of academia. The very idea that they even allow for the serious consideration of things like Christian doctrine to be studied like as if it could potentially be true, is a sad state of affairs for academia.

I mean, sure, academia can allow for the study of art, and mythologies. But theology isn't treated as a mythology. It's treated as though it could potentially be true. IMHO, it's truly sad that we haven't moved beyond this.

Am I saying there cannot be a god of any kind? No. But I think it should be obvious to any thinking person that something like Christian doctrine cannot possibly be true. Nobody considers the ancient religious doctrines of Greece to potentially be true. Why they haven't recognize this for the Abrahamic religions is beyond me. If there is a "god" it most certainly isn't Yahweh or Jesus anymore than its Zeus or Apollo.

On a philosophical note, I can see where Eastern Mystical ideas of theology might have a place in philosophy. But even they should be taken as nothing more than philosophical speculation.

I guess the problem is that there are so many people who cling to things like Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, that they just aren't prepared to let it go. But as far as I can see, there is no justification for any of these doctrines to be taken seriously by academia. They should have been relegated to the halls of mythology by now. To continue to take them seriously is nothing short of extreme naiveté.

They obviously cannot be true "as written".

Could something else be true that might have some commonality with the underlying principles of these ancient doctrinal myths? Sure. But even if that is the case it doesn't justify a continued support and study of the original doctrines. They clearly cannot be true, "as written".

After all, there could be some truth similar to principles taught by ancient Greek mythology too. That doesn't make the tales of Zeus. Apollo, and company true either. I mean, if someone wants to believe that there is a "god" who cares about righteousness and justice, and may even pass judgement on individual humans after they die, so be it. That may very well be true. But than would not make these doctrines true. So while the idea of eternal life and justice may be appealing (or even potentially true), that's not a good reason to continue to support these obviously false ancient doctrines (i.e. fables).

[ripleyfilms]

sound is the equator and i know how make first day of music or nature and can cut a beat gods face using two pictures

[Ndo]

The whole field of analytic philosophy is so dry and needs to stop.

[ripleyfilms]

my job for webb telescope is everything color kingdom analization heaven dreams of construction at nasa make the same tools same idea and know bible from time i believe philosophy of science leads to religion = LiFe

[shekhardasgupta]

Lets say we put a man in a planet where there are no animals but only plants. This man has no knowledge of the human body. One day he wants to know what is inside his head/skull. Is there any way he can ever find out? God is like that.

[paulbrocklehurst]

A great example of word salad pretending to be wisdom.