Posted on 09/24/2003 11:25:56 PM PDT by betty boop
I sometimes get far afield on tangents, I would be interested in what you think about my larger point that man is motion.
I really believe this because any description of "man" will attempt to classify him as a "thing" w/ certain properties. Invariably there are exceptions and contradictions to any system, no matter the degree of detail or sophistication. A living man cannot be pinned to the matte like some exotic butterfly (and thank God for that). Man's fluidity is his saving grace, it has saved us countless times from the genius of other men.
Like when a scientist looks at a photon expecting to see a wave he sees a wave, and when he expects to see a particle he sees a particle, so too does a philosopher's expectations color his findings--because we are many these things. We're a lion and a mouse and a hero and a louse. We're a that, a this, an it , a thing, a movement and a monument. And we're all these things at the same time, all the time.
Because of this multi-fluidity an analogy like "i towards I" can sometimes strike a resonance. I truly believe the more we eccentricize our oscillations towards God the more resonance we find in reality. That is; the more we look to God the more God reveals to us.
In a certain sense, although man has "a nature," it seems to me that he is unclassifiable, as you suggest and for the reasons you suggest, Pietro. Man is simultaneously in one sense "motion," and in another sense "essence," or perfect "stillness" (I think the latter is how God, Who knows all things completely, sees us).
In other words, as the Greeks would have it, man is simultaneously "becoming" and "being." I guess this is the deal man gets for existing at the "intersection of time and timelessness," the preeminent quality of man as mediated by the soul.
On a different level, the analogy to man you give in the particle/wave duality of the physicist is a very apt idea -- two complementary aspects of a single phenomenon, the choice of which to consider being wholly in the "eye of the observer."
Thus depending on the observer, man can be "this" or "that." In other words, the observer will see what he's looking for -- yet neither the "particle" nor the "wave" aspect is a complete description of man.
Plus some observers, in viewing man, may "observe things" which are neither "particle" nor "wave," but some other construct that isn't "there" at all. Call this a type of psychological projection maybe. To expect to find a complete description of man in general or in the particular on the basis of any discrete observation is bound to be a reductionism. (Yet people have been known to make entire careers out of a reductionism like this.)
Man truly is an amalgamation of the glorious -- and the abject, of the saint and the sinner. He lives in the tension in between time and timelessness, the depths and the heights of the soul; and I believe that in that "oscillating" tension, the more man "eccentricizes [his] oscillations towards God the more resonance [he] finds in reality," and particularly the reality of what he is, in himself.
I wholly agree with you that the more we look to God, the more God reveals to us -- and that revelation is God's perfect Truth.
That's really false ... mirror --- reality check ?
One simple difference for Christianity ... if you go the way of Jesus Christ --- you won't have any self righteousness (( works - evolution )) left !
I'm not sure I'm understanding you correctly, f.Christian. On the one hand, self-righteousness in every sense is something that Christianity abhors. On the other hand, I don't think Christianity requires that we forget that we are selves (souls), and created as selves to boot.
"God loves variety" is the main takeaway I get from being a participant and observer of His Created Reality. Would He create us as we are -- individual human souls -- if what He putatively wanted us to do was expunge our human individuality (i.e., erase His creative work), just to please Him?
Perhaps this is so. Though personally I doubt it, the fact remains none of us humans has any idea of, or access to, God's purposes or reasons. So I don't think there can be a final or definitive [human] answer to this question.
IMHO, to say as much is not in any way to undermine the Mystical Body of Christ, the holy church, the communion of Christ's disciples of all times and places. God's salvation was by means of Personal sacrifice, suffered and actualized "in living color" by Person. It was not accomplished by some kind of generic, anonymous, universal "Force."
If God would like us to be like Himself, then do you imagine He would prefer to contemplate his creature, Man, as a human puddle, than as a community of individual men who love Him, and are united in the spirit of friendship because of their love for Him?
That shouldn't be a problem. We are able to do certain things, and that is an indicator of what we should do. We were each given one or more talents, put them to work don't bury them, and time is limited for each individual. That's about all the purpose we need to know.
We can get beyond this into the area of what is still science-fiction and think about how we can cause the universe to avoid the heat death or the Big Rip. Perhaps that is our purpose: make the universe into something that will last forever, and maybe ourselves with it. Anyway, carry on and we may stumble into the answer.
You wrote:
Our works - evolution ... esp spiritual --- is an abomination to God ! ... Only Christ's righteousness is acceptable to God !
If you believe that faith is everything, and works count for naught, then you elaborate an ancient controversy. And so I suspect neither you or I have the answer to it.
If only Christ's righteousness is acceptable to God, then why did God sacrifice His Son to redeem mankind?
If God Himself submitted to this Sacrifice, then do you think He might possibly have had a more favorable "opinion" of mankind, His creature, than you seem to have? A Sacrifice made for the purpose of renewal and resumption of the "in the Beginning" divine/human communication that existed before Man fell -- and took the world with him?
What else could possibly "redeem mankind" other than Immanuel?
maybe you can come out of your shy shell here among friends, and let us know what you really think. hope so!
relax, I'm not going to accuse you of blasphemy, and your invitation on the other thread said that you welcomed all viewpoints.
There are indeed, "forerunners" of Christ, but they are found in the bible. Certainly, Isaac is one, Joshua is one, and Samson is one.
Perhaps you as a Christian, might want to consider Paul's biblical words as concerning philosophy --beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Col 2:8 before you proclaim a Greek thinker as in the same mold as Jesus Christ.
Unless of course, your Jesus was just a man, a remarkable man,yes, yet a man
If only Christ's righteousness is acceptable to God, then why did God sacrifice His Son to redeem mankind?
God is all for good works; however, His standards are perfect. God's redemptive work and our works are really not related. Consider the following:
Isa 64:6
But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
KJV
2 Cor 5:21
1 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
NASB
Thanks for the essay, BB.
I guess you could call a monastery a Christian utopia, but that is not really the spirit of Christianity. Christianity has always been about individual conviction, it's emphasis is on the individual, not the group.
For Plato, this mind had to achieve enlightenment. (Sound familiar?) It was all about the individual attaining its own godhood. This is exactly the opposite of Christianity, so for you as a Christian, to gush over Plato as a forerunner of Christ, is laughable, at the least, and irresponsible at best. Thank you
Resonance
On the basis of Genesis and what I have learned about cosmology and physics, I envision that the first element of creation (the big bang) was geometric and harmonic – which gave rise to wave functions and thus, energy, particles, etc. – the physical laws that make up the natural realm.
From Genesis 1 and the following verse we know that God spoke everything into being. We can even see sound waves in the cosmic microwave background.
On the other hand, I see man as much more than physical, and thus much more than resonance. Adamic man is unique because he has been given the breath of God (neshama):
Grace v Works
Certainly, I agree that we are saved by grace and not by works. If anyone could be good enough to get to heaven, then Christ died for nothing. That is the essential message of Romans 1-8. And it is summarized in Ephesians 2:8-9:
He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
For we know him that hath said, Vengeance [belongeth] unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.
[It is] a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. - Hebrews 10:26-31
But there are at least three different views of the significance. To the Calvinists, it cannot happen because a person who truly believes would never willfully defy the Word and thus the warning is to those who profess but do not truly believe. To the Arminians, it means a believer could and would lose their salvation for willfully defying the Word. And to others, the passages mean that a believer who willfully defies God will be burdened with extraordinary suffering in this life.
The bottom line is that professing belief on the one hand – and willfully defying the Word on the other – is a troubling situation per se. I sincerely, earnestly and urgently pray for anyone in such a predicament.
He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. - 1 John 2:4
With regard to enlightenment and Christianity, you might find the following verses helpful:
For [it is] impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put [him] to an open shame. - Hebrews 6:4-6
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.