What Are You Reading Currently, 2.0

[votivesoul]

I am still reading Man and His Symbols. About halfway through.

I recently read The First Paul: Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church's Conservative Icon by John Dominic Crossan and Marcus Borg. A typical liberal revisionist view of Paul. Some interesting historical and cultural notes worth reading, but a lot of mess, mostly.

https://www.johndominiccrossan.com/T...rst%20Paul.htm

Right now I am also reading Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion by Dr. Paul Bloom.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01CY2LCZI...ng=UTF8&btkr=1

Also, in other news, I have finished reading the entire NLT. It's the first translation beside the KJV that I've read all the way through. I am nearly done with the OT in the ESV. I've started the NASB as the next on my list of English translations to read through.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I am still reading Man and His Symbols. About halfway through.

I recently read The First Paul: Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church's Conservative Icon by John Dominic Crossan and Marcus Borg. A typical liberal revisionist view of Paul. Some interesting historical and cultural notes worth reading, but a lot of mess, mostly.

https://www.johndominiccrossan.com/T...rst%20Paul.htm

Right now I am also reading Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion by Dr. Paul Bloom.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01CY2LCZI...ng=UTF8&btkr=1

Also, in other news, I have finished reading the entire NLT. It's the first translation beside the KJV that I've read all the way through. I am nearly done with the OT in the ESV. I've started the NASB as the next on my list of English translations to read through.

I read Jung before I became a Christian. What do you think of his ideas so far?

[navygoat1998]

"Run with the horses" - Eugene Peterson

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I read Jung before I became a Christian. What do you think of his ideas so far?

It's a bit early to say much. Man and His Symbols was edited by him, but he didn't write the bulk of it, though it all pretty much contains his ideas, as the rest was written by his highly trained staff. Dr. Jung only wrote the opening essay.

And, apart from that, the only other work of his that I have read in full is The Undiscovered Self.

I was thoroughly impressed with the first two chapters, confused and couldn't make much sense of the next two, but rather liked the end.

The first two chapters read to me like a prophecy for the future. I posted a youtube video to an audio version of the book here in this thread some pages back. As much as people want to credit George Orwell for his seemingly prophetic view in 1984, I find Dr. Jung's treatment of collectivism versus individualism orders of magnitude more insightful.

I've purchased and intend to read Dr, Jung's The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. I think once I've read through that, I can come away with a conclusion.

But so far I am enjoying myself. I find the material interesting, even fascinating at times. I haven't found myself changed or wowed with agreement, except for those first two chapters mentioned above.

It seems to me his understanding of the Self, and the process of individuation and the shadow is very coherent. But there is a lot more to learn about his views.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

It's a bit early to say much. Man and His Symbols was edited by him, but he didn't write the bulk of it, though it all pretty much contains his ideas, as the rest was written by his highly trained staff. Dr. Jung only wrote the opening essay.

And, apart from that, the only other work of his that I have read in full is The Undiscovered Self.

I was thoroughly impressed with the first two chapters, confused and couldn't make much sense of the next two, but rather liked the end.

The first two chapters read to me like a prophecy for the future. I posted a youtube video to an audio version of the book here in this thread some pages back. As much as people want to credit George Orwell for his seemingly prophetic view in 1984, I find Dr. Jung's treatment of collectivism versus individualism orders of magnitude more insightful.

I've purchased and intend to read Dr, Jung's The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. I think once I've read through that, I can come away with a conclusion.

But so far I am enjoying myself. I find the material interesting, even fascinating at times. I haven't found myself changed or wowed with agreement, except for those first two chapters mentioned above.

It seems to me his understanding of the Self, and the process of individuation and the shadow is very coherent. But there is a lot more to learn about his views.

Ever read Nietzsche?

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Ever read Nietzsche?

I read some of his works before I was born again. Not a large quantity, however.

[CC1]

The Economist Magainse - weekly
DK Eyewitness - Florence and Tuscany
Fodor's Essential Italy
Lonely Planet Italy
Fodor's Essential Greek Islands
Rick Steve's Italy
Mediterranean by Cruise Ship

Hmmm............seems to be a pattern here!

[Costeon]

Christianity without the Cross by Thomas Fudge.

Fudge argues that the current histories of the UPCI have downplayed the significance of the doctrinal differences regarding the new birth that were present at the time of the formation of the UPCI in 1945 and that the faction that believed that Acts 2.38 equals the new birth has consistently violated the spirit of the merger and has contended for their view to such an extent that their view is now the only acceptable view of the New Birth in the UPCI. It is fascinating that the first general superintendent of the UPCI, Howard Goss, did not believe that Acts 2.38 equaled the new birth.

[diakonos]

Originally Posted by Costeon

Christianity without the Cross by Thomas Fudge.

Fudge argues that the current histories of the UPCI have downplayed the significance of the doctrinal differences regarding the new birth that were present at the time of the formation of the UPCI in 1945 and that the faction that believed that Acts 2.38 equals the new birth has consistently violated the spirit of the merger and has contended for their view to such an extent that their view is now the only acceptable view of the New Birth in the UPCI. It is fascinating that the first general superintendent of the UPCI, Howard Goss, did not believe that Acts 2.38 equaled the new birth.

We all know what this book is about.

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by diakonos

We all know what this book is about.

What would that be?