 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/15/2010 11:45 AM (GMT -6) |   | |
Knight of Faith and the Knight of Infinite Resignation
Kierkegaard's Silentio contrasts the knight of faith with the other two, knight of infinite resignation (infinity) and the aesthetic "slaves." Kierkegaard uses the story of a princess and a man who is madly in love with her, but circumstances are that the man will never be able to realize this love in this world ever. A person who is in the aesthetic stage would abandon this love, crying out for example, "Such a love is foolishness. The rich brewer's widow is a match fully as good and respectable." A person who is in the ethical stage would not give up on this love, but would be resigned to the fact that they will never be together in this world. The knight of infinity may or may not believe that they may be together in another life or in spirit, but what's important is that the knight of infinity gives up on their being together in this world; in this life.
The knight of faith feels what the knight of infinity feels, but with exception that the knight of faith believes that in this world; in this life, they will be together. The knight of faith would say "I believe nevertheless that I shall get her, in virtue, that is, of the absurd, in virtue of the fact that with God all things are possible." This double movement is paradoxical because on the one hand it is humanly impossible that they would be together, but on the other hand the knight of faith is willing to believe that they will be together through divine possibility.
Abraham and Isaac
Johannes de Silentio believes that Abraham is one such knight of faith. In the Book of Genesis, God told Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac. Abraham dearly loved his son, but although bemoaning this fate, Abraham obeyed this command faithfully. Just as he was about to commit the act, an angel stopped Abraham and rewarded him with his son and his steadfast faith. In the same paradoxical act of committing murder, which would humanly kill off his son, Abraham believed, through virtue of the absurd, he would still have his son alive and well.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. | | Back to Top | | |
 |
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/15/2010 11:46 AM (GMT -6) | | Thought:
When showing oneself unconditional love through forgiving oneself for one's sin (and it's tragic effects) seems impossible for the sinner before God such that there is neurotic bondage in self-doube, self-rejection, and self-alienation (ie. "I will never forgive myself for what I've done", etc.) ...that one must always remember that 1) "with God, all things are possible"...and 2) God (Love) dwells irrevocably in oneself. Therefore, one is NEVER without the ACTUAL available power to unconditionally love and forgive oneself for one's sin. The despairing one is only cutting themselves off from that Empowering Presence...because of a faulty self-perception.
The Knight of Faith believes in divine possibility because of the revelation of reality in the Risen God-Human, Jesus and the Power of God's Spirit...and thusly she is able to do the creaturely "impossible": in relating herself to herself (self-relationship) and in willing to be herself (a sinner before God, who is Love), she rests transparently in the power that established it. (God, who is Love)
Kierkegaard established earlier that conscious despair is either in weakness or in defiance. Here he says that when we posit the individual before God as a sinner, weakness and defiance exchange roles. The weakness of not willing to be oneself, becomes defiance, since the sinner refuses to admit what he is—a sinner. Conversely, defiant despair, willing to be oneself, that is, willing to be and remain a sinner, is weakness, in that there is no forgiveness. Despairing sin, when it refuses forgiveness, is the most intense sin of all. Kierkegaard seems to be saying that both types of conscious despair are at work in the person who is presented forgiveness, but consciously refuses: He refuses to acknowledge that he is a sinner, and also refuses forgiveness. Kierkegaard is not contradicting himself, since he said earlier that "No despair is entirely free of defiance; indeed, the very phrase 'not to will to be' implies defiance". This explains how weakness and defiance can appear to change roles. All despair shares the same underlying function. Kierkegaard again returns to the theme of the individual before God and the offense.
I'm beginning to believe that this will be one of the main contributors to people experiencing "hell" longer than they HAVE to.
They experience the continuing failure to agree with God that they are unconditionally lovable and forgivable as they are...and worth saving. Those who have no peace with themselves in self-hatred cannot agree with God's Perspective on themselves.
Think about this:
1) Is it possible to have genuine peace with any other person (including God) if you don't have genuine peace with yourself?
2) Is it possible to fulfill the Great Commandments if you don't truly love (accept, forgive) yourself ( "Love your neighbor as yourself" )?
I think it's "No" to both.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 6/15/2010 12:45:18 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/15/2010 2:12 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
It's hard. Hard to forgive yourself, especially when others you love are strugglig to forgive you. I'm like, "I'll get around to forgiving myself when others forgive me." .... "When at the altar presenting your offering you remember that someone has ought against you, go...." I'm going, and I'll stay gone until forgivess is complete, THEN I'll come back to my own altar.
Yes, it's VERY hard to forgive yourself...especially when you are faced with the devastation of people's lives that you've caused. I understand that on a quite personal level with my own family and friends, struggling with ADHD and narcissism. At the same time, there's something important here. Let's say that the others who are struggling to forgive you die before you do. What then? Would their deaths release you to forgive yourself? I don't think so. Or God forbid, your victims choose to never forgive you in this life. What then? Ultimately, it's about you and GOD because it's a matter of FAITH in who God is. Who did David say that he sinned against when he had Uriah killed to take Bathsheba? Yeah. Are you to seek being reconciled with others we have hurt, from whom we seek forgiveness? Absolutely. But to make one's acceptance/forgiveness of oneself CONTINGENT upon one's acceptance/forgiveness by one's human victims in FULL LIGHT of God's unconditional forgiveness in Christ...that doesn't seem right to me.
I'm thinking about the guy that raped that 9 month old baby not too long ago in the nearby area. Should he wait until the family and community has forgiven him BEFORE he can see himself as God sees him: forgiven to be free to "go and sin no more"? Don't know about that, man. How long do you think he'd be waiting? Seriously.
*************************************************************
Tom:
I'm just making my very existence an act of repentance. I don't know about forgiving myself, or not forgiving myself. I don't really feel much of either. I'm trying to just BE an act of repentance.
Repentance is choosing to "turn to God" according to God's truth, first and foremost, right? It's not primarily about having a continued sense of remorse unto refusing to accept and forgive oneself in God's grace. As a matter of fact, the Tax Collector's "repentance" (pace the Pharisee's) was meet for justification BECAUSE of his radical trust in God's compassion upon him for forgiveness.
I'm saying that "forgiveness of oneself" (empowered by God Himself) in light of God's forgiveness of oneself is an inextricable aspect of one's "turning" to God.
I hope this ain't sounding forensic or academic. This is real life truth. True story.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 6/15/2010 2:36:20 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/15/2010 2:26 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I'm like "I'll get around to forgiving myself when others forgive me."
God HAS forgiven you...and he's the Supreme "Other" for you to be concerned about, yes?. (Don't forget about that "Secret Place of the Heart" where God tells you that you are a "priceless son". How can one enter that place WITHOUT being willing to truly BE forgiven by oneself??) The Risen Jesus testifies to that fact. That is not sufficient for you to begin the process of forgiving oneself?
Really? Would you suggest this line of thinking for any given repentant child molester or rapist in jail right now?
This is my point exactly. I believe that people can experience MORE "HELL" THAN NECESSARY through refusal (for whatever reason) of self-forgiveness in God's Power.
"Despairing sin, when it refuses forgiveness, is the most intense sin of all."
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 6/15/2010 3:45:40 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/15/2010 2:50 PM (GMT -6) | | "Acquire a peaceful spirit, and around you thousands will be saved."
--St. Seraphim of Sarov
It's not selfish to strive for the "peace that passes all understanding" in God by removing self-rejection on behalf of one's sin. Self-rejection is not the same thing as self-denial.
Wow. Something else I just thought of.
If one's "works of Love" are not grounded in the FREE CHOICE to love (grounded from one's peace with themselves via God's love)...but subtle attempts at "getting others to forgive you" as a prerequisite to getting peace with themselves, how is THAT genuine love in operation? That seems to be a possible trap where one tries to "earn" another's forgiveness...refusing it to oneself until it's "earned" in being given by said other.
Bad joss.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 6/15/2010 2:57:28 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/15/2010 3:10 PM (GMT -6) | | | Self-Acceptance vs. Self-Improvement
It should be fairly obvious at this point that self-acceptance has very little to do with self-improvement, that it really isn't about "fixing" ourselves, or moving toward some sort of personal perfection. With self-acceptance we're simply affirming--non-judgmentally--that we are who we are, with whatever strengths and weaknesses we possess in the moment. The problem with our focusing on self-improvement is that such an orientation inevitably makes self-acceptance conditional. After all, we can never feel totally secure or whole as long as our self-regard depends on constantly bettering ourselves. Self-acceptance is here-and-now oriented--not future oriented, as in: "I'll be okay when . . ." Or, "As soon as I accomplish _____, I'll be okay." Self-acceptance is about already being okay, about seeing ourselves as "good enough" now--with no qualifications of any kind. We don't ignore or deny our frailties, we just see them as not relevant to our basic acceptability.
(OL's Note: This is PRECISELY what the "Secret Place of the Heart" is FOR! Remember what YOU said, Tom...
"We AGREE that a human being's identity as a PERSON doesn't come from the memories she has, the [SINFUL] actions and behavior she engages in with her context, her [BROKEN] relationships with other human beings, nor from anything else in the created realm. Nothing in creation and tell me WHO I am. Only God can do that. So there has to be a place, a moment, an experience where God and I get this done, where I experience God in Christ through the Spirit telling me that I'm a priceless beloved son, that the very sustaining core of my existence, where the potential for fulfilling my 'logos' resides, is an indestructible grace-gift from God that doesn't derive from anything in the created order." )
Finally, it's we--and we alone--that can set the standards for our self-acceptance. And once we decide to stop grading ourselves, or "keeping score with" ourselves, we can adopt an attitude of non-judging forgiveness. In fact, once we refrain from our lifelong habit of continually evaluating ourselves--striving rather to compassionately understand our past behaviors--we'll find that there's really nothing to forgive (remember, "Tout comprendre. . ." ). Personal flaws or shortcomings don't need to get in our way. Certainly, we can vow to do better in the future, but we can nonetheless accept ourselves exactly as we are today.
And here I can't stress enough that it's possible to accept and love ourselves and still be committed to a lifetime of personal growth. Accepting ourselves exactly as we are doesn't mean we'll be without the motivation to make changes or improvements that could enrich our lives or make us more effective. It's just that our self-acceptance is in no way tied to such alterations. We don't have to do anything to secure our self-acceptance: we have only to change the way we view ourselves. So altering our behaviors becomes a matter of personal preference, not a prerequisite for greater self-regard.
It's all a matter of coming from a radically different position. If self-acceptance is to be "earned," a result of working hard on ourselves, then it's conditional and always at risk. The "job" of accepting ourselves can never be done, never completed. Even scoring an A+ in whatever endeavor we're using to rate ourselves can offer us only temporary satisfaction. For the message we're giving ourselves is that we're only as worthwhile as our latest achievement. We can never finally "arrive" at a place of self-acceptance because we've inadvertently defined our journey as everlasting. In holding ourselves to such self-imposed standards, we may in fact be validating the way our own conditionally-loving parents dealt with us. But we're certainly not validating ourselves--or treating ourselves with the kindness and consideration our parents may have failed to adequately provide us.
To conclude, only when we're able to give ourselves unqualified approval--by developing greater self-compassion and focusing more on our positives than negatives--can we at last forgive ourselves for our faults, as well as relinquish our need for others' approval. No doubt we've made mistakes. But then, so has everybody else--and in any case our identity is hardly equal to our mistakes. For sure, such a linkage would represent a bad case of "mistaken identity."
--------------------------------------------------
"Father, forgive them...for they don't know what they are doing."
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 6/15/2010 3:27:02 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/15/2010 3:36 PM (GMT -6) | | We have a dual relationship with our bodies. We can experience the body directly through feeling or we can have an image of it. In the first case, we are immediately connected to the self, whereas in the second case, the connection is indirect. A healthy person has this dual consciousness, but it does not pose a problem because the self-image and the direct self-experience through the body coincide. What such as state presupposes is self-acceptance--an acceptance of and idenfication with the body and its feelings. It is self-acceptance that is lacking in narcissistic individuals, who have dissociated their bodies, so that libido is invested in the ego and not in the body or the self. Without self-acceptance, there is no self love.
I have long maintained that if one does not love oneself, one cannot love others.
Narcissism: Denial of the True Self
Alexander Lowen
Pages 30-31.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/15/2010 3:48 PM (GMT -6) | | | THIS is what I believe Hell will be like. Loving care-frontation with the truth.
Tell me that cry didn't come from a lost soul. ( Rocky Lockridge) (Some context for Lockridge's story, before the intervention)
Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’
Where sin abounds, Grace much more abounds...
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 6/15/2010 5:21:56 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/16/2010 4:01 PM (GMT -6) | | |
Coolness. Some things that may be helpful...
1) Kallistos Ware on Repentance. "A Change of Mind" Pages 113-117
2) Repentance in Judaism known as teshuva (Hebrew תשובה, literally "return" ), is the way of atoning for sin in Judaism.
According to Gates of Repentance, a standard work of Jewish ethics written by Rabbenu Yonah of Gerona, if someone commits a sin, a forbidden act, he can be forgiven for that sin if he performs teshuva, which includes:
--regretting/acknowledging the sin;
--forsaking the sin (see below);
--worrying about the future consequences of the sin;
--acting and speaking with humility;
--acting in a way opposite to that of the sin (for example, for the sin of lying, one should speak the truth);
--understanding the magnitude of the sin;
--refraining from lesser sins for the purpose of safeguarding oneself against committing greater sins;
--confessing the sin;
--praying for atonement; (OL's Note: "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner!" )
--correcting the sin however possible (for example, if one stole an object, the stolen item must be returned or if one slanders another, the slanderer must ask the injured party for forgiveness);
--pursuing works of chesed and truth;
--remembering the sin for the rest of one's life;
--refraining from committing the same sin if the opportunity presents itself again;
--teaching others not to sin.
***********************************************************************
I think this is Jesus' motif:
FIRST, Reception of healing/forgiveness from God
SECOND, The call to "sin no more"
Now there is in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate a pool, in Aramaic called Bethesda, which has five roofed colonnades. In these lay a multitude of invalids—blind, lame, and paralyzed. One man was there who had been an invalid for thirty-eight years. When Jesus saw him lying there and knew that he had already been there a long time, he said to him, “Do you want to be healed?” The sick man answered him, “Sir, I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up, and while I am going another steps down before me.” Jesus said to him, “Get up, take up your bed, and walk.” And at once the man was healed, and he took up his bed and walked.
Now that day was the Sabbath. So the Jews said to the man who had been healed, “It is the Sabbath, and it is not lawful for you to take up your bed.” But he answered them, “The man who healed me, that man said to me, ‘Take up your bed, and walk.’” They asked him, “Who is the man who said to you, ‘Take up your bed and walk’?” Now the man who had been healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had withdrawn, as there was a crowd in the place. Afterward Jesus found him in the temple and said to him, “See, you are well! Sin no more, that nothing worse may happen to you.”
...
Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 6/16/2010 4:16:00 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/17/2010 1:52 AM (GMT -6) | | I love this quote...from here. Co-Narcissism: How We Accommodate To Narcissistic Parents The whole article is worth reading...
Conclusion
All of us are narcissistic, and co-narcissistic, to varying degrees. When our self-esteem varies in relation to how others think and feel about us, we are experiencing a narcissistic vulnerability. When we feel guilty or anxious because we fear that we are not meeting someone else’s needs or expectations, we are being co-narcissistic. These ordinary experiences are problematic the more they interfere with our ability to be successful and enjoy our lives. It is often helpful in overcoming narcissistic anxieties to realize that the other person’s behavior is a result of their own views and experience, is not a reflection on oneself, and one’s self-esteem does not have to be affected by their behavior. For co-narcissistic people, who experience strong feelings of guilt and blame, recognizing that they are not responsible for another’s experience is a great relief. It is important for people with either narcissistic or co-narcissistic problems to come to believe that they have intrinsic value, independent of their accomplishments or what others may think of them.
As Christians who understand the "nothingness" of Creation in and of itself, we understand that the ONLY SAFE unconditional grounding of one's "intrinsic value" is in the knowledge of God's Love to and within oneself. If you think about it, there is NO OTHER SOURCE AVAILABLE for such a belief! Can any genuine consistent atheistic nihilist believe in the "intrinsic value" of any human being?
Thank God for the Love of Jesus! 
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 6/17/2010 2:00:40 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/17/2010 1:49 PM (GMT -6) | | Siblings,
In the end, all we have is Love (God). And that's all we need.
That it...and that's all.
If you don't remember anything else about me, remember that.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/17/2010 2:00 PM (GMT -6) | | | 1
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/19/2010 1:23 AM (GMT -6) | | D: Can any genuine consistent atheistic nihilist believe in the "intrinsic value" of any human being?
J: Well, if they can, it's because they're defining "intrinsic value" different than I do.
Exactamundo, bro. Now take the idea of "Pascal's Wager" in light of this. Wouldn't it make sense for a rational human being to at least be OPEN to the idea of a Uncreated Creator who IS Love? Why NOT give this possibility a chance, given our seemingly immutable belief in "intrinsic value" of human life (see Secular Humanism)? Where else are you gonna ground it? Feel me, Jeff?
Pascal's Wager (or Pascal's Gambit) is a suggestion posed by the French philosopher Blaise Pascal that even though the existence of God cannot be determined through reason, a person should wager as though God exists, because living life accordingly has everything to gain, and nothing to lose. It was set out in note 233 of his Pensées, a posthumously published collection of notes made by Pascal in his last years as he worked on a treatise on Christian apologetics.
Historically, Pascal's Wager was groundbreaking as it had charted new territory in probability theory, was one of the first attempts to make use of the concept of infinity, marked the first formal use of decision theory, and anticipated the future philosophies of pragmatism and voluntarism.
Now, think about this, Jeff. Christians are able to face the "nothingness" of Creation (the "void" that atheists see in Creation) but realize that God Himself (Grace) sustains the "void" perceived by human beings, thus they don't fear it. Nor do they build any false self upon it's assumption. Their chief presupposition about reality is immutable Divine Presence. And that's how human nature was MEANT to live. Jesus shows us this.
Basically, given the "nothingness" inherent in the universe (via entropy), it's actually RATIONAL to "wager" that a God (who is Love) exists. If the void is all there is (nihilism) and nothing really matters anyways (moral/ethical relativism via nilihism), then there is truly "nothing to lose" by risking trusting the belief of a Transcendent Creator who is the God-Human Jesus as a view of reality. A truly consistent nihilistic atheist would have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to lose...if they were truly consistent. The worst that could happen is that you are living a lie that human life has "intrinsic value". The best that could happen is that we are actually created in the "image" of Supreme Love and Beauty and, as such, human nature--even being the no-thing-ness that it is, in and of itself--actually does have "intrinsic value" AS IMAGE. It would be absolutely rational to AT LEAST give the belief in Jesus as theandric a chance. Dogmatic atheism would be IRRATIONAL to hold...even given the atheist's own supposed suppositions about existence.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. Post Edited (One Love) : 6/19/2010 1:35:46 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/19/2010 1:42 AM (GMT -6) | | And what's funny, yo? We have come up with a Christian eventual universal reconcilation that is biblically, theologically, and metaphysically viable that MAINTAINS that level of LFW for the human being. In other words, on this board, we have discussed a Christian universalistic belief that DOESN'T cancel LFW "where it really counts" (as Tom would say.) We know it, y'all.
Can we give God some applause, siblings? 
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 6/19/2010 11:50 AM (GMT -6) | | | D: Dogmatic atheism would be IRRATIONAL to hold...even given the atheist's own supposed suppositions about existence.
J: Indeed. Given the atheist's suppositions about existence, he/she has no grounds for believing he/she even apprehends an extra-ego reality, even. There is an infinite set of merely conceivable ways I could be experiencing illusions that render all significant beliefs false. We're either designed to apprehend, or we're not. If we're not, there's no conceivable a posteriori way to prove we apprehend, or even render that belief plausible in any RATIONAL sense of the term.
Once we accept that we are designed to apprehend by our native categories and modes of inference, we have the historical Christ and the seeming impossibility of PLAUSIBLY explaining him away. That historical Christ accounts for how the KIND of benevolent designer entailed in our own categorical belief could STILL render this screwed-up creation WORTH it. For that historical Christ renders hope PLAUSIBLE in terms of our natural modes of inference, not just in terms of our categories. Even Jesus looked to the joy SET BEFORE HIM!
In short, our categories compel us to believe the designer of our capacity to apprehend is benevolent. But the world seems to be a complete mess, otherwise. Yet, the historical Christ (and pre-incarnational revelation, which includes the promise of that very Christ) gives A POSTERIORI grounds for the PLAUSIBILITY of Christ BEING ONE with the very benevolent designer whose existence is a corrollary of our belief that we are designed to apprehend, all along.
Post Edited (Similitude) : 6/19/2010 3:41:15 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 6/20/2010 12:30 AM (GMT -6) | | Similtude:
J:Given the atheist's suppositions about existence, he/she has no grounds for believing he/she even apprehends an extra-ego reality, even. There is an infinite set of merely conceivable ways I could be experiencing illusions that render all significant beliefs false. We're either designed to apprehend, or we're not. If we're not, there's no conceivable a posteriori way to prove we apprehend, or even render that belief plausible in any RATIONAL sense of the term.
Exactly, Jeff. How many atheists have you experienced that are willing to admit this? I haven't experienced any yet...
******************************
Similtude:
In short, our categories compel us to believe the designer of our capacity to apprehend is benevolent. But the world seems to be a complete mess, otherwise. Yet, the historical Christ (and pre-incarnational revelation, which includes the promise of that very Christ) gives A POSTERIORI grounds for the PLAUSIBILITY of Christ BEING ONE with the very benevolent designer whose existence is a corrollary of our belief that we are designed to apprehend, all along.
No lie, bro. This is EXACTLY what James Loder said in "The Knight's Move". Again, I'm wondering do consistent atheists ever think about these things.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner. | | Back to Top | | |
| 29 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 5:56 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|