From: Joe (jhmau@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Mon Apr 14 2003 - 21:25:50 BST
on 13 April 2003 10:26 AM David B writes:
Hi David, Scott, Sam, Rick, and all:
> DMB wrote: An objection that it "begins with the conclusion", is simply
pointing out
> that perhaps the difference between what's social and what's intellectual
> can be demonstrated by the tension between doctrinal authority and
> intellectual freedom. My questions about and objections to putting
> theology on the fourth level revolve around that.
Scott replied:
I don't see them as "beginning with the conclusion", but as "beginning with
revelation". And the first thing they must do is account for that beginning
(called apologetics). The ways they have accounted for it are varied, but a
common one amounts to "it just is the case that I have faith in this
revelation, by the grace of God".
dmb says:
See. This is what I'm talking about. When asked to justify or explain these
giant, GIANT truth claims, the answer is only "I have faith". Frankly I'm
baffled that you and Sam don't see why this sort of thing as a problem. I
don't see how you can adopt this stance and simultaneously claim theology to
be intellectual. I'd say it is non-intellectual at best. It borders on the
irrational.
joe: What is Faith? IMO The vibration of existence comes from many levels.
Without an explanation of how we know things, Faith in a level of a higher
existence is obscure.
The certainty in an exposition that something is beyond my experience
requires an acceptance of miracles to explain the existence I experience.
The explanation of something as a miracle depends upon how I experience and
describe existence. In a system based upon intuition, I intuit existence as
an aspect of dq in a pattern.
Faith intuits the aspect of existence in a pattern by Grace apart from any
sense of the aspect of quality or purpose, which in that pattern are above
the level of my intuition. I don't know how it happened, or what happened.
It just happened. The aspect of quality and purpose needed for my awareness
comes from my memory of the lower level previously intuited. For example
walking on water, raising the dead. Since the existence in the event is of
a higher level, instead of knowledge I have Faith in a higher level. The
aspects of quality and purpose are changeable in a Faith pattern. The
fundamentalist with a subject-object metaphysics will not agree.
Faith is quite different from the trust in words in the social order. An
analogy of this is when I move from an intuited trust in social knowledge
and communication to intuited certainty in intellectual knowledge in an
action. From trust to certainty in knowledge for what I am doing. An
adherence to the purposes in the pattern 'I', which can come from an
intuited purpose different from the pattern in awareness can be confused
with intellectual certainty in the existence of levels in my actions.
Social and intellectual activity can be confused.
Faith is as certain as any aspect of existence for action on the
intellectual level. The two different apprehensions of the aspect of
existence can be confused.
Joe
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 14 2003 - 21:23:48 BST