Maybe this is what students need (not)

November 30, 2011 By scotmcknight 7 Comments

From Scientific American:

So Air Force researchers were delighted recently to learn that they could cut training time in half by delivering a mild electrical current (two milliamperes of direct current for 30 minutes) to pilot’s brains during training sessions on video simulators. The current is delivered through EEG (electroencephalographic) electrodes placed on the scalp. Biomedical engineer Andy McKinley and colleagues at the Air Force Research Laboratory at Wright–Patterson Air Force Base, reported their finding on this so-called transcranial direct current stimulation (TDCS) here at the Society for Neuroscience annual meeting on November 13….

They used magnetoencephalography (MEG) to record magnetic fields (brain waves) produced by sensory stimulation (sound, touch and light, for example), while test subjects received TDCS. The researchers reported that TDCS gave a six-times baseline boost to the amplitude of a brain wave generated in response to stimulating a sensory nerve in the arm. The boost was not seen when mock TDCS was used, which produced a similar sensation on the scalp, but was ineffective in exciting brain tissue. The effect also persisted long after TDCS was stopped. The sensory-evoked brain wave remained 2.5 times greater than normal 50 minutes after TDCS. These results suggest that TDCS increases cerebral cortex excitability, thereby heightening arousal, increasing responses to sensory input, and accelerating information processing in cortical circuits.

 

Filed Under: Uncategorized 7 Comments

New/Old Perspective on Justification 7

November 30, 2011 By scotmcknight 15 Comments

The last major study in James Beilby and Paul Rhodes Eddy’s new book, Justification: Five Views, reveals why we need historians of theology, because Oliver Rafferty’s study of the history of justification that set the context for the Council of Trent, where the definitive rejection of the Lutheran view of justification was stated in bold letters, is just what we need. This chp also illustrates why we need New Testament historians who care less for later theology and more for the New Testament, which is why Jimmy Dunn’s final response says so much. [You may have already noticed the snazzy new buttons Patheos has installed on the blog; they make "sharing" easier. Thanks Patheos. And they help spread the word in these posts.]

On Jan 13, 1547, the Council of Trent rejected Luther’s view, but that Council was the climax of centuries of discussion about justification. Until Augustine — don’t forget that — justification was not a big issue. In fact, prior to his encounter with Pelagius, Augustine’s view was not even Augustinian! Total depravity, the need for grace to awaken a person unto faith, and lack of freedom to believe … all these things developed in Augustine’s arguments with Pelagius. But don’t forget that Augustine saw justification as not only forensic but also transformative.

What is the difference between Catholics and Protestants on justification? do you think that debate creates a dichotomy the NT authors — e.g. Paul — would not recognize?

Again, not all that much debate about justification … esp the stronger elements of Augustine, until Luther. A big development was the connection of justification to baptism and to penance in medieval theologians. It wasn’t a big or central issue.

Trent repudiated Luther and sought to articulate justification in that context. The big issue is that Trent connects justification and sanctification, and humans had to cooperate with God.

A highlight of this book is a second Catholic statement, this one Gerald O’Collins’ (an Aussie) story of his own life and connection to justification debates. He doesn’t highlight anything new here but he does set his own studies in the context of all this debate.

I wish to highlight a few points in the responses: [Read more...]

Filed Under: New Perspective, Theology 15 Comments

Simply Jesus 6

November 30, 2011 By scotmcknight 4 Comments

In one chap in Tom Wright’s new book Simply Jesus: A New Vision of Who He Was, What He Did, and Why He Matters, he sketches his views of the resurrection, of the ascension and of the second coming! But he does so through the lens of God becoming king in Jesus, and so it is all related to the grander cosmic scheme at work in Tom’s new book.

[You may have already noticed the snazzy new buttons Patheos has installed on the blog; they make "sharing" easier. Thanks Patheos. And they help spread the word in these posts.]

First, Easter is about new creation. Second, ascension is about the enthronement of Jesus as the king of new creation — it is not about Jesus, in some spiritual non-bodily state disappearing into heaven where spirit existence is established. Third, the second coming is not a “return” to earth so much as the reappearance of the Son of God where new creation will be finally established.

Tom’s books on resurrection (The Resurrection of the Son of God, Surprised by Hope) have already been digested by many of us, so I’ll avoid saying much except to say this: resurrection is not about some ethereal existence but about a physical, bodily existence.

The ascension, and I don’t believe I’ve read much about the ascension in Tom’s stuff, reminds us that heaven and earth are not far apart; heaven is the place from which the earth is run; the “vertical” movement in Acts 1 is metaphor for ascension and assumption of the throne; and the ascension mocks the rule of Caesar and announces that Jesus is the true king.

The second coming … well, Tom begins by saying most of North Americans are all messed up because they’re addicted to rapture stuff and they are not right. It is about the re-appearance (parousia) of Jesus Christ as King, it is about our (metaphorical but real) “meeting” him in order to escort him back to the new heavens and new earth to be with him (and he is now with us). [Read more...]

Filed Under: Uncategorized 4 Comments