TextExpander Archaeology: The Snippets of a Ph.D. Student

I’m finally retiring an old set of TextExpander snippets I built up during my Ph.D. work. Before I delete them, I wanted to keep a record, because a person’s text-expansion abbreviations turn out to be a surprisingly honest map of what was constantly on their mind. Mine were almost entirely about two theologians, their books, and one stubborn question: can you be scriptural without being religious? Here’s the archive. The people I couldn’t stop typing Snippet Expanded to xdb Bonhoeffer xddb Dietrich Bonhoeffer xkb Barth xkkb Karl Barth xnietz Nietzsche xSlot van ’t Slot Bonhoeffer’s works Snippet Expanded to xab / xas Act and Being / Akt und Sein xcf / xsf Creation and Fall / Schöpfung und Fall xdisc Discipleship xlpp Letters and Papers from Prison xlt Life Together Barth’s works Snippet Expanded to xcd Church Dogmatics xrom2 / xröm2 Romans / Römerbrief xderr Der Römerbrief The concepts at the heart of the dissertation Snippet Expanded to xpor / xoffenb positivism of revelation / Offenbarungspositivismus xtcr / xttcr theological critique(s) of religion xtis / xttis theological interpretation(s) of Scripture xvra vicarious representative action xsp Schriftprinzip (the Scripture principle) xbbr the Barth-Bonhoeffer relationship xkge / xge knowledge of good and evil / good and evil The biblical and theological furniture Snippet Expanded to x10c Ten Commandments xsom Sermon on the Mount xot / xnt Old Testament / New Testament xbt biblical theology xst systematic theology The workflow scaffolding Snippet Expanded to xcn [[[CITATION NEEDED]]] (in alarming red) xpara ¶ xs § xreadingnotes a full reading-notes template (bibliographic data, interpretation, critique) The links I kept reaching for xproposal → the elevator pitch for my dissertation proposal xwsample → my writing sample on Barth, Bonhoeffer, and religion Looking back What strikes me now is how narrow and deep the list is. Just Barth and Bonhoeffer, their major works in both English and German, and a tight cluster of concepts (revelation, religion, Scripture, good and evil) that I evidently typed so often I couldn’t bear to spell them out one more time. Even the [[[CITATION NEEDED]]] snippet, flashing red, says something about the anxieties of that season. ...

The Cowardice of 'Both Sides': Why False Neutrality Is a Moral Failure

I keep seeing the same rhetorical move, and it’s making me furious. An ICE agent shoots someone on video. The administration lies about it in ways that would make Orwell blush. And the response from certain Christian commentators? “Let’s not fan the flames.” “We shouldn’t rush to conclusions.” “There are extremes on both sides.” This posture has the appearance of wisdom. It sounds mature, measured, above the fray. It positions the speaker as the reasonable adult in the room while everyone else loses their heads. ...

Bonhoeffer on Stupidity

In his “Letters and Papers from Prison,” Dietrich Bonhoeffer made some remarkably insightful observations about the nature of stupidity and its dangers to society. These reflections, perhaps more relevant today than ever, deserve our careful attention. Here they are in full. On Stupidity (DBWE 8:43-44) Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed—in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical—and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack. For that reason, greater caution is called for when dealing with a stupid person than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous. If we want to know how to get the better of stupidity, we must seek to understand its nature. This much is certain, that it is in essence not an intellectual defect but a human one. There are human beings who are of remarkably agile intellect yet stupid, and others who are intellectually quite dull yet anything but stupid. We discover this to our surprise in particular situations. The impression one gains is not so much that stupidity is a congenital defect but that, under certain circumstances, people are made stupid or that they allow this to happen to them. We note further that people who have isolated themselves from others or who live in solitude manifest this defect less frequently than individuals or groups of people inclined or condemned to sociability. And so it would seem that stupidity is perhaps less a psychological than a sociological problem. It is a particular form of the impact of historical circumstances on human beings, a psychological concomitant of certain external conditions. Upon closer observation, it becomes apparent that every strong upsurge of power in the public sphere, be it of a political or a religious nature, infects a large part of humankind with stupidity. It would even seem that this is virtually a sociological-psychological law. The power of the one needs the stupidity of (page 44 begins) the other. The process at work here is not that particular human capacities, for instance, the intellect, suddenly atrophy or fail. Instead, it seems that under the overwhelming impact of rising power, humans are deprived of their inner independence and, more or less consciously, give up establishing an autonomous position toward the emerging circumstances. The fact that the stupid person is often stubborn must not blind us to the fact that he is not independent. In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with him as a person, but with slogans, catchwords, and the like that have taken possession of him. He is under a spell, blinded, misused, and abused in his very being. Having thus become a mindless tool, the stupid person will also be capable of any evil and at the same time incapable of seeing that it is evil. This is where the danger of diabolical misuse lurks, for it is this that can once and for all destroy human beings. Yet at this very point it becomes quite clear that only an act of liberation, not instruction, can overcome stupidity. Here we must come to terms with the fact that in most cases a genuine internal liberation becomes possible only when external liberation has preceded it. Until then we must abandon all attempts to convince the stupid person. This state of affairs explains why in such circumstances our attempts to know what “the people” really think are in vain and why, under these circumstances, this question is so irrelevant for the person who is thinking and acting responsibly. The word of the Bible that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom declares that the internal liberation of human beings to live the responsible life before God is the only genuine way to overcome stupidity. But these thoughts about stupidity also offer consolation in that they utterly forbid us to consider the majority of people to be stupid in every circumstance. It really will depend on whether those in power expect more from peoples’ stupidity than from their inner independence and wisdom. ...

It's Official. I'm Hitting Pause on My Ph.D. for a Year

I received word yesterday that the Ph.D. Committee voted to approve my request for “Excused Program Leave” beginning in January 2021 and lasting until January 2022. At the risk of sounding like Captain Obvious, 2020 has been a particularly difficult year. Attempting to complete my “Barth, Bonhoeffer, and the Bible” dissertation has taken a toll on my mental health as I ran into some major research and writing roadblocks right before and during the COVID pandemic. ...

Want a taste of what my dissertation is about? Read these two passages (Dissertation Dispatch, 2020-04-03)

What does “religion” mean? Great question! I’m writing my dissertation on Barth, Bonhoeffer, the Bible, and “religion.” However, getting clear on just what Barth and Bonhoeffer meant by “religion” is a huge challenge. It’s what I devoted my entire writing sample to examining, and I plan to devote an entire chapter of my dissertation to the topic. Neither Barth nor Bonhoeffer used the word “religion” in the way that we’re prone to use the word in everyday speech today. According to Merriam-Webster, “religion” means: ...

What did Barth and Bonhoeffer think of the Bible? (Dissertation Dispatch, 2020-03-30)

I’m trying to parse out the relevance of Barth’s and Bonhoeffer’s engagement with Scripture for making sense of the “Barth-Bonhoeffer relationship.” Specifically, I’m trying to, at the very least, add some biblical content and context to the ongoing debate over the relationship between Barth’s and Bonhoeffer’s theological critiques of religion. As I put it in the “elevator pitch” for my dissertation proposal: Why does Bonhoeffer in prison, after adopting Barth’s theological critique of religion as idolatrous unbelief… Why does Bonhoeffer, after claiming that the critique of religion was Barth’s greatest merit and original contribution as a theologian… Why does Bonhoeffer say that Barth left us with nothing more than a “positivism of revelation” — a flattening of doctrines to the same relative importance, as a result of which the world is left to its own devices — whatever that means! Why does Bonhoeffer then speak approvingly of a “religionless Christianity,” something that Barth explicitly refused to support? ...

Barth, Bonhoeffer, and the Bible: Back to the Beginning (Dissertation Dispatch, 2020-03-26)

Perhaps it’s just the global COVID–19 pandemic, but I’ve been really discouraged about my dissertation lately. My normal reading/writing workflow has ground to a halt because (1) we are temporarily without childcare and (2) my wife, a Family Nurse Practitioner is still working full-time from the office. That leaves me home alone with our 1.5-year-old during the week and, while she is a wonderful child, she’s not really jazzed about dad sitting quietly in a corner getting some reading and writing done during the day. ...

Barth, Bonhoeffer, and the Sermon on the Mount (Dissertation Dispatch 2020-02-04)

I’m still very much in the weeds, taking a closer look at how Bonhoeffer and Barth read the Sermon on the Mount. Given the importance of the Sermon on Mount for Bonhoeffer’s life and work, I’m persuaded that there’s something important to be found here—something that will hopefully shed some light on the Barth-Bonhoeffer relationship re:their theological critiques of religion. Additionally, there are at least two other tidbits that have me interested in how Barth and Bonhoeffer read the Sermon on the Mount. ...

Are the Beatitudes “Renunciations” (Verzichte)?

In Discipleship (DBWE 4), Dietrich Bonhoeffer frames all of the Beatitudes in terms of Jesus’ disciples living in renunciation (Verzicht) and want (Mangel). Interestingly, for Bonhoeffer, Jesus is only speaking to his disciples in the Beatitudes (he makes this argument on the basis of Luke 6:20ff.). And the disciples’ renunciation and want are caused by Jesus’s call to discipleship. Jesus sees: his disciples are over there. They have visibly left the people to join him. He has called each individual one. They have given up everything in response to his call. Now they are living in renunciation and want; they are the poorest of the poor, the most tempted of the tempted, the hungriest of the hungry. They have only him. Yes, and with him they have nothing in the world, nothing at all, but everything, everything with God. (DBWE 4:101). ...

Are the Beatitudes “Good Works”? (Matt. 5:13–16)

Yesterday, I wrote just a bit about interpretive approaches to the Beatitudes in Matthew 5. I’m trying to get a better handle on how Barth and Bonhoeffer treat the Sermon on the Mount, and I’m starting with the Beatitudes. However, it’s pretty challenging to situate Barth and Bonhoeffer in light of the “standard” approaches to both the Beatitudes and the Sermon on the Mount. A case in point: yesterday, I felt pretty confident that Bonhoeffer does not take the standard “entrance requirements” approach to the Beatitudes. ...

Interpretive Approaches to the Beatitudes

As I said in my previous post, “Interpretive Approaches to the Sermon on the Mount,” I’m working on how Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer read the Sermon on the Mount. Of course, when interpreting the Sermon on the Mount, the best place to start is at the beginning! This means beginning with the Beatitudes in Matthew 5:1–12. The Beatitudes (Matt. 5:1–12) 1 When Jesus saw the crowds, he went up the mountain; and after he sat down, his disciples came to him. 2 Then he began to speak, and taught them, saying: 3 “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 4 “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. 5 “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. 6 “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled. 7 “Blessed are the merciful, for they will receive mercy. 8 “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God. 9 “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God. 10 “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 “Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. 12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. (Matt. 5:1–12, NRSV). ...

No One Knows what "Positivism of Revelation" Means!

When it comes to the Barth-Bonhoeffer relationship, there is perhaps no greater conundrum than the meaning of what Bonhoeffer called Barth’s “Offenbarungspositivismus” (“positivism of revelation” or “revelatory positivism”) in his Letters and Papers from Prison (DBWE 8). Now, before we proceed, please note that Bonhoeffer meant something very particular by “religion” in his prison letters. For an overview of how Bonhoeffer and Barth differed on the meaning of “religion,” and what that means for how we interpret their theological critiques of religion, please see my essay: “To Be or Not To Be Religious: A Clarification of Karl Barth’s and Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Divergence and Convergence Regarding Religion.” ...

I'm quite excited for these Oxford Handbooks!

If you’ve not yet consulted the Oxford Handbook series, you should! The Oxford Handbook of Systematic Theology (paid link) is especially useful! I’m very excited because the Oxford Handbook of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and the Oxford Handbook of Karl Barth are both about to be released soon! I just wish they weren’t so expensive!

Bonhoeffer Timeline: A Chronology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Life

The Cambridge Companion to Dietrich Bonhoeffer SOURCE (Amazon affiliate link): John W. de Gruchy, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Dietrich Bonhoeffer (paid link) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), xxiv–xxvi. 1906, 4 February, Dietrich Bonhoeffer born in Breslau, Germany 1912 Family moves to Berlin, where Karl Bonhoeffer, Dietrich’s father, takes up a position at Berlin University 1913 Dietrich Bonhoeffer begins gymnasium studies 1916 Family moves to the suburb of Grunewald 1918 Walter Bonhoeffer, Dietrich’s brother, dies on the western front 1921 Dietrich and twin sister, Sabine, are confirmed 1923 Begins theological studies at Tübingen 1924 Continues theological studies at Berlin; travels to Rome and north Africa with elder brother Klaus 1927 Qualifies for licentiate with his doctoral dissertation, Sanctorum Communio (DBWE 1) 1928 Curate in Barcelona 1929 Summer lectures in systematic theology, Berlin; assistant pastor in Berlin 1930 Completes second dissertation, later published as Act and Being (DBWE 2); Sloane Fellow at Union Theological Seminary, New York (1930-1) 1931 July: first meeting with Karl Barth August: lecturer in theological faculty, Berlin September: appointed Youth Secretary of World Alliance for Promoting International Friendship through the Churches Conference, Cambridge October: chaplain at Technical College, Berlin November: takes confirmation class in Berlin-Wedding 1932 Winter lecture course on ‘Creation and Sin’ (later published as ...

Dissertation Dispatch: 2019-11-11

I’m narrowing my focus to Genesis 1–3 and the Sermon on the Mount. Originally, my dissertation proposal cast a very wide net. I was going to have the following chapters: Introduction (5,000 words) Chapter 1: Creation and Fall (Genesis 1–3) (16,000 words) Chapter 2: The Prophets (16,000 words) Chapter 3: The Gospels (16,000 words) Chapter 4: The Epistle to the Romans (16,000 words) Chapter 5: Completing the Biblical Critique of Religion (16,000 words) Summary and Conclusion (5,000 words) However, after doing survey work, and spending most of the previous academic year working on Barth and Bonhoeffer’s reading of Genesis 1–3, I’ve decided to narrow my focus down to Genesis 1–3 and the Sermon on the Mount. ...