tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post114929983642378748..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Confessions of a Reformed mobsterRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1149353184632116942006-06-03T12:46:00.000-04:002006-06-03T12:46:00.000-04:00Thanks, Jim Crigler, but you're talking to a music...Thanks, Jim Crigler, but you're talking to a musician (classical) who is very aware of form and structure. <BR/><BR/>Music has structure? that's your point? Methinks your point rather is: a computer could have composed Beethoven's 3rd. Now, if that's not your point you have no point, and that point is not a good point.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1149351659886987522006-06-03T12:20:00.000-04:002006-06-03T12:20:00.000-04:00sk, Beethoven did most assuredly compose the 3rd S...<B>sk</B>, Beethoven did most assuredly compose the 3rd Symphony ("Eroica", meaning "heroic", originally dedicating it to Napoleon, but erasing NB's name after some the latter crowned himself emporer, rather like Heinlein's widow forcing the removal of his name from the <I>Starship Troopers</I> movie) using algorithms on many different levels. The first movement, for instance, is a modified sonata allegro; the second, a funeral march, etc. The individual movements have internal structure; the parts of movements, more structure, etc. The fact that LvB pulled off a great work of art is <I>not</I> diminished simply because he used the conventional structures (algorithms) of his day. You need a new analogy.Jim Criglerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11437189788683651969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1149323894501198522006-06-03T04:38:00.000-04:002006-06-03T04:38:00.000-04:00I understand that Armstrong believes reformed theo...I understand that Armstrong believes reformed theology is SO DARK THE CON OF MAN, to which I recommend using SOFIA to unlock this cryptex.kletoishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04937744112201328478noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1149305279029664652006-06-02T23:27:00.000-04:002006-06-02T23:27:00.000-04:00Your response to point 10 was weak, IMHO. Armstro...Your response to point 10 was weak, IMHO. Armstrong has a real case against Reformed types in that point 10. The others, not such a good case.<BR/><BR/>Beethoven didn't compose his 3rd symphony using algorithms, and developing in the faith is not solely a matter of intellectually understanding the beautiful and powerful doctrines of grace (as important as they are, yet with the Spirit inside one understanding of them comes rather naturally). Anyway, to truly see and understand them requires more than mere intellect.<BR/><BR/>It's IS difficult to think about emotion regarding the faith and how to develop in that area.<BR/><BR/>For instance, one way to develop emotionally, or the heart, in the faith is the practice of consciously putting yourself in another person's shoes. Of course the shallow will teach that, or take that, in a moralising way, or way to preach political correction or whatever, but when a person in the faith does it honestly at times when that person would normally be asleep regarding other people's perspective and so on then it becomes a real practice that will develop one in the faith in a way that is not solely intellectual. <BR/><BR/>Bringing up the biblical meaning of heart is one thing, but suggesting that that meaning has only to do with intellect is off-the-mark. Intellect is limited in a way the heart isn't. You increase your capacity for understanding via development of the heart (and yes that can sound abstract, or wishy-washy, yet there is a practical approach, I mean, stop the mocking and just think of the difference between learning and performing music vs. writing an essay on a doctrinal point. Just because there are types who are solely emotional and don't have a balanced (or don't try to have a balanced) development doesn't make effort to develop oneself emotionally a ridiculous thing. Being emotional in a shallow way (like many Roman Catholics, pining for Mary or similar things) and never thinking about biblical doctrine is not the faith. Neither is a solely intellectual approach.<BR/><BR/>The emotional part of oneself vis-a-vis development in the faith is the hardest to see and the hardest to do (which is not a small reason why it is controversial). But for instance, separating oneself unto the Gospel can be painful. Separating yourself from the world can be difficult and emotional. Handling it requires effort to develop in the area of emotion (of the heart). It doesn't mean 'being emotional' in cliched ways or shallow ways. <BR/><BR/>I could go on, but I'll end this here...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com