 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Questions about Christianity > Maximus on "particular" (for Tom, and the rest of us too) | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:03 AM (GMT -6) |   | I really do think that the expansion of the David/Chopin example explains what I'm trying to say. In the last analogy I made, where the "Chopin-indwelling" Daniel creates a novel expression (new composition) about contemporary matters (Global Warming) in the "spirit" of Chopin. One couldn't really tell WHERE David (Level 1) "ended" and where Chopin (Level 2) "began" and vice versa. The realities of Daniel and Chopin would be entangled and inseprable in the ONE composition, but absolutely DISTINCT influences of the creativity of Chopin and of Daniel.
Does this not help as an example? Bruce gave a GREAT one too with the "sacntuary/nave; spiritual/carnal" concepts of Maximus! 
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Post Edited (Divine Progeny) : 8/19/2008 6:07:13 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
 |
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:05 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:08 AM (GMT -6) | | I completely agree with the Hesychast (against Barlaam, for example) that our knowledge of God is not limited to propositions. We may achieve experiential knowledge of God through prayer and contemplation. Christ does tell us to "go into our closet" to pray. I think this is probably more a warning against being a "show off" than it is a directive to disregard the senses per se. But there is a lot of commotion going on around us and our senses are easily distracted (and can easily distract). So I'm cool with resting our hearts and minds in quiet places so that we can be more receptive to the voice of the Spirit and experience God.
I don't have any problems with the Jesus Prayer. Who could object to praying THAT?
I don't have any problems with ineffable experiences of God on the one hand or other commonalites (like white light) on the other. I've had some pretty moving experiences in my lifetime but am a bit suspicious of comparing experiences. What I would say is that having an experience, even a lifechanging one, doesn't always guarantee that the one having the experience attaches the right theological explanation to it. Experiences don't come with their own metaphysical bill of sale that explains the contents of the box.
Don't know if that helps.
T | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:15 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I think this is probably more a warning against being a "show off" than it is a directive to disregard the senses per se.
I'd disagree with that. It really IS about pulling ourselves away from the senses for a specific purpose. There is a very deep danger of "showing off" that can lead one into "spiritual delusion" and away from nepsis. But make no mistake, it IS about "disregarding the senses" at least for a time. Eckhart was BIG on this.
********************************************
Tom:
I don't have any problems with ineffable experiences of God on the one hand or other commonalites (like white light) on the other. I've had some pretty moving experiences in my lifetime but am a bit suspicious of comparing experiences. What I would say is that having an experience, even a lifechanging one, doesn't always guarantee that the one having the experience attaches the right theological explanation to it. Experiences don't come with their own metaphysical bill of sale that explains the contents of the box.
That's why I'm glad that people like Harvey Egan actually take the time and work to critically appreciate the Saints and Mystics of the Church. Or people that write Spiritual Development TEXTBOOKS in which much of this information (even about the Stages of Assent) can be found. It's useful for the Christian to delve into the wealth of contemplative tradition in the Church.
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Post Edited (Divine Progeny) : 8/19/2008 6:23:29 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:22 AM (GMT -6) | | D: I really do think that the expansion of the David/Chopin example explains what I'm trying to say. In the last analogy I made, where the "Chopin-indwelling" Daniel creates a novel expression (new composition) about contemporary matters (Global Warming) in the "spirit" of Chopin. One couldn't really tell WHERE David (Level 1) "ended" and where Chopin (Level 2) "began" and vice versa. The realities of Daniel and Chopin would be entangled and inseprable in the ONE composition, but absolutely DISTINCT influences of the creativity of Chopin and of Daniel.
T: Let's assume that we can't tell the difference between the interpreter's own unique contribution and an original score. What's that matter? I've always agreed that personhood is an ekstatic, creative achievement and that there's no way to posit one's identity without also positing the identity of others. Both are always present. But this 'inseparability' does not presuppose a certain causal relationship regarding, say, David's performance of Chopin. If WE are unable to pull the contributions of each apart and lay them on separate tables, that's hardly surprising given the ekstatic nature of personal creative expression and the resulting synergy. The creative expression is a work of synergy. It's going to be impossible to separate the contributions into individual strands. But why is that a problem for my belief that the synergy that produces the end result comprises free and self-determining movements? In other words, just because we can isolate every unique Daniel-determined contribution from every unique Chopin-determined contribution doesn't mean there are no such unique Daniel-determined contributions. The fact that Daniel plays a Chopin piece like no one else plays that piece is evidence of the fact that Daniel is determining himself uniquely within the range of creative forms consistent with Chopin's score (and Chopin's intentions).
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:28 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
Let's assume that we can't tell the difference between the interpreter's own unique contribution and an original score. What's that matter? I've always agreed that personhood is an ekstatic, creative achievement and that there's no way to posit one's identity without also positing the identity of others. Both are always present. But this 'inseparability' does not presuppose a certain causal relationship regarding, say, David's performance of Chopin. If WE are unable to pull the contributions of each apart and lay them on separate tables, that's hardly surprising given the ekstatic nature of personal creative expression and the resulting synergy. The creative expression is a work of synergy. It's going to be impossible to separate the contributions into individual strands. But why is that a problem for my belief that the synergy that produces the end result comprises free and self-determining movements? In other words, just because we can isolate every unique Daniel-determined contribution from every unique Chopin-determined contribution doesn't mean there are no such unique Daniel-determined contributions. The fact that Daniel plays a Chopin piece like no one else plays that piece is evidence of the fact that Daniel is determining himself uniquely within the range of creative forms consistent with Chopin's score (and Chopin's intentions).
My point is this, Tom: At that stage of virtuosity in "indwelling Chopin", all of Daniel's OWN creative becoming would reflect/replicate the "spirit" of Chopin at all times. Daniel's unconscious, pre-conscious, sub-conscious, and conscious musical reflection would be impacted by Chopin...making every new creation by Daniel to be actually a DIALECTIC work. Using Paul Ricouer's language for this, Chopin would be the "Voice behind the voice" of Daniel.
Chopin would exert "marginal control" over all of Daniel's creativity.
In like manner, Jesus' Real Presence (Christ-the-Logos-in-us via the Holy Spirit) exerts "marginal control" over all of the believer's thoughts, feelings, actions and beliefs.
NO, this does NOT mandate near-exhaustive determination...but I've already said that time and again.
I'm just more willing that you are for it to get to that point, according to God's wishes, even in the eschaton. 
Is this making sense?
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Post Edited (Divine Progeny) : 8/19/2008 6:42:35 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:29 AM (GMT -6) | | I'm not saying we never need to set our senses in their proper order, even disregard them. I'm saying (a) I've had life-changing encounters with God that transported me experientially through engaging the sense as well as through disregarding the senses (and I get the idea that you think the latter is the 'higher' road to an experiential knowledge of God, which is isn't), and (b) any disregard of the senses would be a temporary discipline required of us by our finite and weak constitutions and nothing more, since we are obviously INTENDED by God for resurrected, embodied existence. Eventually the highest, most intense experience of God we're intended for will be equally one MOST cognizant of the body, not LEAST cognizant of it.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:34 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
and I get the idea that you think the latter is the 'higher' road to an experiential knowledge of God, which is isn't
Dude, what is all this "higher/lower" stuff that you seem to be concerned about? This keeps coming up. about me thinking some way is "higher" than others or something. What's the deal? Is that your issue? WHY is that an issue for you?
*************************************
Tom:
Eventually the highest, most intense experience of God we're intended for will be equally one MOST cognizant of the body, not LEAST cognizant of it.
Like when Christian believers have experienced the "light of Tabor" and the bodies are turned into "tapers" of "living flame" in God's Grace/Glory like in the Transfiguration of Christ? (And there ARE some Christian saints that have reported to have had this experience) Yeah, I know that. Theosis or bust, baby. 
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Post Edited (Divine Progeny) : 8/19/2008 6:39:27 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:42 AM (GMT -6) | | D: My point is this, Tom: At that stage of virtuosity in "indwelling Chopin", all of Daniel's OWN creative becoming would reflect/replicate the "spirit" of Chopin at all times. Daniel's unconscious, pre-conscious, sub-conscious, and conscious musical reflection would be impacted by Chopin...making everything a DUAL work. Using Paul Ricouer's language for this, Chopin would be the "Voice behind the voice" of Daniel.
Chopin would exert "marginal control" over Daniel's creativity.
Is this making sense?
T: I can hardly believe you ever thought I'd question any of this (though I think we MEAN different things by the same ters). Seriously. OF COURSE personhood and creative expression is a dual-work. How can it be a synergy and NOT be a dual-work? How can it be expressive of PERSONAL identity and not be a DUAL work (if personhood is ekstatic)?
BUT...this begs the question of the kind of control exerted.
To my mind the synergy and creative form is not expressive of Daniel's personal identity (though I'm not saying that's ALL his creative expression must be; but it must be this AS WELL as expressive of Chopin) if the control exerted effectively determines which particular creative expression Daniel's playing takes. That is, where Chopin's music permits a range of creative expressions all of which are equally faithful to the spirit and intentions of Chopin, it would be near blasphemy (OK that's too strong) to Chopin to deny him and his music the beauties of creative expression he intended them for and which are possible only through a synergy that requires Daniel to creatively self-determine within that range.
T | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:46 AM (GMT -6) | | D: Dude, what is all this "higher/lower" stuff that you seem to be concerned about? This keeps coming up. about me thinking some way is "higher" than others or something. What's the deal? Is that your issue? WHY is that an issue for you?
T: No issues. Just making sure the body isn't lost in the pursuit of perfection. We're fine.
D: Like when Christian believers have experienced the "light of Tabor" and the bodies are turned into "tapers" of "living flame" in God's Grace/Glory like in the Transfiguration of Christ?
T: Yeah, that's fine. Flame on. Just don't burn the body up in the process.
T | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:49 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
To my mind the synergy and creative form is not expressive of Daniel's personal identity (though I'm not saying that's ALL his creative expression must be; but it must be this AS WELL as expressive of Chopin) if the control exerted effectively determines which particular creative expression Daniel's playing takes. That is, where Chopin's music permits a range of creative expressions all of which are equally faithful to the spirit and intentions of Chopin, it would be near blasphemy (OK that's too strong) to Chopin to deny him and his music the beauties of creative expression he intended them for and which are possible only through a synergy that requires Daniel to creatively self-determine within that range.
That's why I used the example that I did: David creating a composition about GLOBAL WARMING in the "spirit" of Chopin. Global warming is a context that Chopin NEVER EXPERIENCED and didn't know anything about. That would be DANIEL'S realm of understanding. In other words, Daniel would be the one who goes through HIS understanding of Chopin and linking that with a CONTEMPORARY issue in such a manner that Daniel composes what Chopin WOULD HAVE COMPOSED had he been here today, looking at global warming. It's almost like Daniel, in his own becoming, is REINCARNATING Chopin's creative reality in another time and place. Here, Chopin's reality would "effectively determine which particular creative expression Daniel's playing takes", for sure...but NOT in a way that denies the reality of Daniel's personhood...because Daniel's personhood is the "bridge" between Chopin's reality and a contemporary experience (global warming).
Get it?
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Post Edited (Divine Progeny) : 8/19/2008 6:57:09 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:51 AM (GMT -6) | | D: Dude, what is all this "higher/lower" stuff that you seem to be concerned about? This keeps coming up. about me thinking some way is "higher" than others or something. What's the deal? Is that your issue? WHY is that an issue for you?
T: No issues. Just making sure the body isn't lost in the pursuit of perfection. We're fine.
Given the Incarnation, Epiklesis, and Transfiguration, how could an orthodox Christian believe that the pursuit of perfection would "lose" the body...instead of "spiritualizing" and "divinizing" the body?
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 6:55 AM (GMT -6) | | And thinking about the "Daniel/Chopin" thought above...isn't this JUST LIKE what Jesus was doing?
"If you see me (love in created, human context), you are seeing the Father (Uncreated, Eternal Love)!"
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Post Edited (Divine Progeny) : 8/19/2008 7:03:04 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 7:01 AM (GMT -6) | | Hmmmm...
Daniel "reincarnating" Chopin...
I wonder is THIS the kind of thought that Kallistos Ware had when he said...
Just as the Spirit sends the Son at the Annunciation, the Baptism, and the Transfiguration, and just as the Son in his turn sends the Spirit at Pentecost, so after Pentecost it is the Spirit's task to bear witness to Christ, rendering the risen Lord ever present among us. If the aim of the Incarnation is the sending of the Spirit at Pentecost, [then] the aim of Pentecost is the continuing of Christ's Incarnation within the life of the Church. This is precisely what the Spirit does at the epiclesis in the Eucharistic consecration; and this consecratory epiclesis serves as a model and paradigm for what is happening throughout our whole life in Christ.
Sounds right to me...but...
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Post Edited (Divine Progeny) : 8/19/2008 7:04:34 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 8/19/2008 7:03 AM (GMT -6) | | D: In other words, Daniel would...composes what Chopin WOULD HAVE COMPOSED had [Chopin] been here today looking at global warming...
T: Different claims then. We're not saying the same thing. You are stuck on the notion that were Chopin here today there's ONE thing he'd compose, or one particular way he'd want to interpret one of his established pieces with global warming in mind.
I reject that whole assumption. There IS NO ONE THING Chopin "would compose" were he here and no ONE WAY Chopin would play any one of his own pieces in response to a new circumstance like global warming.
T | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 7:07 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
D: In other words, Daniel would...composes what Chopin WOULD HAVE COMPOSED had [Chopin] been here today looking at global warming...
T: Different claims then. We're not saying the same thing. You are stuck on the notion that were Chopin here today there's ONE thing he'd compose, or one particular way he'd want to interpret one of his established pieces with global warming in mind.
I reject that whole assumption. There IS NO ONE THING Chopin "would compose" were he here and no ONE WAY Chopin would play any one of his own pieces in response to a new circumstance like global warming.
No, Tom. Please get off of the "ONE THING" perspective. That's NOT what I was saying. I did NOT claim that there is only ONE THING that Chopin would have composed for global warming. (That doesn't even make sense to me, honestly.) My thought was that if any musical critics knowing the life and thought of Chopin had heard Daniel's work, they would have said "Wow! It's like Chopin was RIGHT HERE playing this! We could definitely see Chopin composing things THIS WAY for this context if he were alive here and now." That's all.
You are REALLY about this "no-one-way" thing...man... 
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 7:11 AM (GMT -6) | | |
Tom's Statement:
You are stuck on the notion that were Chopin here today there's ONE thing he'd compose, or one particular way he'd want to interpret one of his established pieces with global warming in mind.
It seems that you are BENT on trying to 1) assert that I REEEEEEEALY want exhaustive determination by God (rather than the closest possible intimacy and relational unity with God [Good show, Corey]) and 2) I think that's THAT (exhaustive determination by God) is the "higher way"
What is the deal, dawg? For real...
It's getting pretty old now. 
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Post Edited (Divine Progeny) : 8/19/2008 7:17:58 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 7:16 AM (GMT -6) | | I bet that THERE'S the caricaturization that Bruce is talking about, Tom...
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 7:21 AM (GMT -6) | | Let me repost this (with additions and emphases) for you to help, Tom...
________________________
I believe that my human "self-as-spirit" will self-determine creative of expression in God's World (the created "I' agency is the creator of "worlds" as seen in ego-development itself) ONLY THROUGH the bi-polar assymetrical relational unity my "self-as-spirit" NATURALLY HAS with Divine Presence (Christ-the-Logos via the Holy Spirit) such that THIS would be the CORE BELIEF for every thought and action...
“I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me.”
___________________
This would work out such that my "self-as-spirit" would be under marginal control of Divine Presence...JUST LIKE...Daniel's creativity would be under marginal control of Chopin.
I know this has GOT to make sense by now. 
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. Post Edited (Divine Progeny) : 8/19/2008 7:25:54 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 8:01 AM (GMT -6) | | You feelin' where I'm tryin' to come from, Corey?
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 8:17 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I don't have any problems with ineffable experiences of God on the one hand or other commonalites (like white light) on the other. I've had some pretty moving experiences in my lifetime but am a bit suspicious of comparing experiences. What I would say is that having an experience, even a lifechanging one, doesn't always guarantee that the one having the experience attaches the right theological explanation to it. Experiences don't come with their own metaphysical bill of sale that explains the contents of the box.
For the concern about mystical experience going beyond healthy theology. Loder on Kierkegaard on this. Knight's Move. Page 113. Paragraph and note.
In Kierkegaard's careful investigation of Magister Adler's visions and voices, he concluded in an uncharacteristic phrase that Adler need to study "dogmatics"* This was not merely for doctrine's own sake. Rather, Kierkegaard recognized the equal necessity of both existence and eternity in the complementarity of faith, lest visions of eternity belie existence, or the struggle with existence make one despair of eternity.
* -- 25. On Authority and Revelation, The Book on Adler trans. Walter Lowrie (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1955) was Kierkegaard's effort to deal with a visionary clergyman who claimed to have direct words from God. Eventually given early retirement, Adler was essentially dismissed by the established church. It was important to Kierkegaard to determine in what sense the case of Adler was a legitimate challenge to the authority of the church.
See what great love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. All who have this hope in him purify themselves, just as he is pure.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 8/19/2008 8:41 AM (GMT -6) | | T: I reject that whole assumption. There IS NO ONE THING Chopin "would compose" were he here and no ONE WAY Chopin would play any one of his own pieces in response to a new circumstance like global warming.
D: No, Tom. Please get off of the "ONE THING" perspective. That's NOT what I was saying. I did NOT claim that there is only ONE THING that Chopin would have composed for global warming. (That doesn't even make sense to me, honestly.)
T: Well, you said Daniel ends up playing “what Chopin WOULD PLAY if Chopin were here.” That sure looks pretty ‘specific’ to me.
D: My thought was that if any musical critics knowing the life and thought of Chopin had heard Daniel's work, they would have said "Wow! It's like Chopin was RIGHT HERE playing this! We could definitely see Chopin composing things THIS WAY for this context if he were alive here and now." That's all.
T: That’s what I thought you said, and that’s what I’m objecting to. I don’t think that’s what God (or Chopin) wants. I think he’d want people to know it’s Daniel sitting right there playing Chopin’s music. Given the variety of creative possibilities, there’s no way we can know how Chopin would play if he was RIGHT HERE playing this. That’s not what Chopin wants to hear. He wants to hear, “Wow, look how diverse and creative Chopin’s music is!”
D: You are REALLY about this "no-one-way" thing...man.
T: I’m about interpersonal loving relationality realizing as much beauty as possible on into eternity, and I don’t see that your view best explains this. I’m also convinced love’s infinite creativity is unencumbered in its diversity of expression in contexts void of evil and risk of threat.
D: It seems that you are BENT on trying to assert that I REEEEEEEALY want exhaustive determination by God (rather than the closest possible intimacy and relational unity with God…
T: Funny! You just said I’m “REEEEEEEALLY about the ‘no-one-way’ thing” but then complain that I think you’re “REEEEEEALLY about determination by God.” If the latter is me caricaturizing YOU, wouldn’t yours be a caricature of me? Hmmm.
But anyhow….Bro, I realize you want the closest possible intimacy with God as is possible. I’ve never doubted that. What I’m saying is that for you such intimacy and such determination are one and the same, or rather that apart from such determination there’s no such intimacy. You said it, not me: Daniel is “effectively determined.” You don’t think this undermines Daniel’s personhood. I do.
D: I bet that THERE'S the caricaturization that Bruce is talking about, Tom.
T: All I’m saying is that you’re claiming God determines all creaturely movement in the eschaton. You said it. Yes, you think this is expressive of the closest possible intimacy. I realize that. But how’s it a caricature of you by me to just repeat what you say—“effectual determination.”
T | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 11:44 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
D: My thought was that if any musical critics knowing the life and thought of Chopin had heard Daniel's work, they would have said "Wow! It's like Chopin was RIGHT HERE playing this! We could definitely see Chopin composing things THIS WAY for this context if he were alive here and now." That's all.
T: That’s what I thought you said, and that’s what I’m objecting to. I don’t think that’s what God (or Chopin) wants. I think he’d want people to know it’s Daniel sitting right there playing Chopin’s music. Given the variety of creative possibilities, there’s no way we can know how Chopin would play if he was RIGHT HERE playing this. That’s not what Chopin wants to hear. He wants to hear, “Wow, look how diverse and creative Chopin’s music is!”
How could they NOT know that it's Daniel who's doing this? Seriously, now. It is DANIEL who has experienced Global Warming, not Chopin. Chopin himself didn't. (Likewise, the Incarnate Word didn't know about supermassive black holes during his sojourn on earth.) So, it is DANIEL (the "self") who is the contemporary person who is "transparently" expressing core aspects of Chopin's musical expressiveness in new contexts. If anything you're quote would be pretty much what they would be saying...
"Wow, look how diverse and creative Chopin's musical style is...as demonstrated by Daniel Belt."
*******************************************************************
T: I’m about interpersonal loving relationality realizing as much beauty as possible on into eternity, and I don’t see that your view best explains this. I’m also convinced love’s infinite creativity is unencumbered in its diversity of expression in contexts void of evil and risk of threat.
I agree with this. When we become "one in Spirit with the Lord", the Spirit's freedom-creating, community-sustaining power is released in our own spirits' creativity. At this point, God's creativity is inseparably united with a human self-as-spirit's creativity such that only the RELATIONSHIP can be claimed as the irreducible reality...not JUST the human spirit and not JUST God's Spirit. Synergy. I couldn't agree more.
This is the natural result of a perichoretic bi-polar assymetrical relational unity between the Uncreated Holy Spirit and created human spirit. The "little infinity" of the human self-as-spirit completely unified in and through LOVE with the "big infinity", the One Triune God.
The only thing we disagree on is what this means for the possibility of God's "effectively exhaustive determination" of a human "self-as-spirit's" creativity. You say it's not possible at all. I say that God can do what he wants when he wants, with respect to this.
Soooo...okay.
**********************************************
Tom:
What I’m saying is that for you such intimacy and such determination are one and the same, or rather that apart from such determination there’s no such intimacy.
and...
All I’m saying is that you’re claiming God determines all creaturely movement in the eschaton. You said it. Yes, you think this is expressive of the closest possible intimacy. I realize that.
No, Tom. I don't believe that God determining all creaturely movement is the closest possible intimacy. I believe that it is one possible variation of the trajectory of "closest possible intimacy." No more, no less.
God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.
"I love, therefore I am in I Am." Post Edited (One Love) : 8/19/2008 11:49:08 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 12:50 PM (GMT -6) | | | Noticing a difference in perspective...
My summation of Tom's perspective (with which he essentially agreed)
Human believing heart speaking:
So, Jesus, what would you do in this situation?
Jesus responding:
Well, there's a million equally loving things that "I" might do in your situation. BUT IT'S NOT MY SITUATION...IT'S YOURS! You are NOT me, dear beloved...and I am not you. I'm a totally distinct person from you...and as such, your situation is not "mine" to choose within. YOU are free (and healed enough) to decide how YOU want to determine your thoughts, feelings, and bodily actions in whatever loving means of expression the situation allows for the Father's glory. So, YOU use YOUR purified vision and heart...and YOU choose what to do. I'll trust you and empower you to do what YOU to creatively decide what YOU want. Do what you believe and/or feel in your deified heart...and that will be fine!
Now Dallas Willard on Christian Discipleship. Renovation of the Heart. 242-242.
...the second aspect of discipleship concerns all the details of what, for lack of a better term, we call our "secular," our "non-churchy" life. How do you run a business? How do you live with your parents or a mate, or raise a family? How do you get along with neighbors, participate in government, get an education, engage in the cultural life of your society? These too are matters in which we are to be constantly learning how Jesus would lead our lives if he were we. He would do those things if he were we. And they are not just matters of keeping his commandments, though they presuppose that. In these matters of ordinary human existence also, Jesus is our constant teacher and we his constant apprentices. "He walks with me and he talks with me," as the old hymn says, about all these matters.
------------------------------------------
Just noticing the difference of perspective...
Actually, that hymn was one of my maternal grandparents' favorites...
"And...He walks with me, and He talks with me...and he tells me I am His own..."
God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.
"I love, therefore I am in I Am." Post Edited (One Love) : 8/19/2008 12:54:05 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 8/19/2008 12:56 PM (GMT -6) | | | | |
| 183 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:51 AM (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 |
|
|