|Posted by Holder of the Secrets on January 31, 2011 at 11:47 PM||comments (7)|
Hi everyone! Again thanks for the interesting discussion inthe Ratzinger group today. For those who were there I wanted to clarify someideas that I'm not sure got across fully. 1. The reason why the only way to getto the kingdom is through Jesus. 2. To answer Alexandra's question about whichGod to choose in a pluralist society.<<> 3. Why have/need reason if it categorizes, separates anddisseminates, more often than unites.
1. The reason why the only way to get to the kingdom is through Jesus isbecause he is the mediator. He is the Grand Transducer (my term;) between theseen and the unseen or the material and spiritual worlds. When Jesus (Yeshua)said "Come follow me" (in my opinion) was to point to the particularway of life and contemplation that Jesus set out for us to follow (not literallyfollowing behind) it is his PATH that must be followed hence "I am theway". People have the free will to choose to follow this narrow and lessfrequented path or not. When you die, it is Jesus that will judge whether ornot you did a good job attempting to follow the path he has set out. He is theJudge or Anubis who "weighs your soul against the feather" so tospeak. THIS is why the only way to the kingdom is through him, he decides whois worthy. He is obviously worthy himself because he wasnot corrupted and hence became a part of the Trinity, therefore trusted todo this task (because he too was found worthy by God).
2. It is a very good and important question to ask, which God to we pray to orwhich God's laws do we accept in a pluralist society. This points to theproblem of objective moral principles or truths. But, IS there any objectivemoral principles or truths? There is universal consent that survival isobjectively universal principle, but that has what's led to the rampant greedwe see in society because it leads to stepping over people and using them tothe means to their end. Not cool. If we believe that there is truth out thereand certain things can be "proven" in several different ways usingseveral different methods, then the end of the means of this adventure on awhole leads to One big-ass universal Truth. Some say this is God, some say aunified field theory etc. But, I like what David said about Plato? that thegreatest truth is Love. Love happens to be the greatest living principle innatewithin us (or the most honourable and respected) and happens to be the messageJesus gave - "love one another" He also said his God was the God ofLove. Truth and love seem to be interchangeable here and could be why Jesusalso said he was the truth. So to answer the question, the God of Love shouldbe the God (or lets say principle because that includes those who are seculartoo), that should be regarded as "best" thus to be followed.
3. Reason is a funny thing because it is the newest addition to the animalkingdom's brain. Emotion and instinct are quite established and are used inchildhood to understand the world as their senses begin to give theminformation on how the world works and looks like then reason or reflectioncomes in (I am preparing for Essay 2 in the Empiricist class here lol).Cognition, or reason has instinct too and the principle it runs on is tocategorize and find patterns, otherwise we would live in world of chaos.Reason does this because it is "in its nature” and here lies the problem,it is corruptible. It was, after all, what the scorpion said to the turtle asit killed him anyway, even though the turtle was helping him out (or showinglove/compassion). Reason is corruptible because people tend use only half ofits principle and revere one over the other by using reason more often forcategorization, than for finding patterns (uniting). So, to answer the questionof why we need reason as well as faith (which i operationalize as a result ofour emotional capacities) is because reason helps us understand and interactwith the material world and emotional capacities help us understand thespiritual world. Since it is truth that unifies, in order to find the truththrough reason would be to find patterns that assimilate. (The mind then accommodatesand so on). Everything is a reciprocal balance. Why say accommodation is BETTERthan assimilation? It’s absurd. It would be like saying breathing out is wayBETTER than breathing in: Although there is reciprocity between the two, theystill battle over which is superior. Our western civilization believes reasonto be superior to faith. This is like saying the newborn or teenager is betterthan the adult (see the brain anatomy point at beginning). Perhaps sometimesit's true. But, reason is corruptible and its pal, the material world issusceptible to decay. While we are on this planet, there should be a balancedreciprocity between the two and to abandon reason while alive is flawed becausereason aids in the understanding of faith/emotion. (When we die we can abandonreason as it will be no longer useful). But, to abandon emotion, spiritualityand faith while still on the earth is more than just flawed it would be as ifone were already dead. This is far from beinganswered – sorry!
Woah! I wasn't expecting this answer to beso convoluted and there are probably flaws in my logic (no pun intended). But,feel free to start a debate about this!! Good to see you all today - sorry Ican't make it tomorrow, perhaps next time!