Page 2 of 4

Re: meta's metaphor search. {g}

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:22 am
by Metacrock
JasonPratt wrote:
Metacrock wrote:God is so far above us we should try to think of God as the dialectic or something.
Even the other images you borrowed from the Bible are not abstractions like "dialectic", though.

Besides, isn't dialectic a description of interpersonal relationship? {s!}
NO I don't think so. It's a form of logic really. Not an interpersonal relationship becasue it applies to ideas not personalities.

Re: TO OPEN

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:24 am
by Metacrock
unred typo wrote:Are you ready for the po white, trailer trash, TV dinner version? Probably not… and it’s past my bed time… lucky you... ;)
O I'm from Texas, I'm sure I grew up with it.

Re: TO OPEN

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:28 am
by unred typo
Actually, I only have a nice user friendly synopsis of the trinity, if you’re interested. I’m still working out the goose bumps though.

Re: meta's metaphor search. {g}

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:58 am
by JasonPratt
Metacrock wrote:
JasonPratt wrote:
Metacrock wrote:God is so far above us we should try to think of God as the dialectic or something.
Even the other images you borrowed from the Bible are not abstractions like "dialectic", though.

Besides, isn't dialectic a description of interpersonal relationship? {s!}
NO I don't think so. It's a form of logic really. Not an interpersonal relationship becasue it applies to ideas not personalities.
Not entirely sure how useful the analogy will be, then. ;)

Btw, remember how over on the Cadre backchannel I was griping about how even Christian theologians have a habit of treating God fundamentally as not being an interpersonal relationship? :mrgreen:

Re: TO OPEN

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:07 am
by Metacrock
unred typo wrote:Actually, I only have a nice user friendly synopsis of the trinity, if you’re interested. I’m still working out the goose bumps though.

sure, that's what the board is here for! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Re: meta's metaphor search. {g}

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:09 am
by Metacrock
JasonPratt wrote:
Btw, remember how over on the Cadre backchannel I was griping about how even Christian theologians have a habit of treating God fundamentally as not being an interpersonal relationship? :mrgreen:

It's a thorny problem. I feel that the parental love aspect of God is essential and really there. Yet I can't reduce God to the psychological dimensions of a human.

Re: meta's metaphor search. {g}

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:57 pm
by unred typo
Metacrock wrote:
JasonPratt wrote:
Btw, remember how over on the Cadre backchannel I was griping about how even Christian theologians have a habit of treating God fundamentally as not being an interpersonal relationship? :mrgreen:

It's a thorny problem. I feel that the parental love aspect of God is essential and really there. Yet I can't reduce God to the psychological dimensions of a human.
Well, we were created in his image. Has to be some resemblance... or am I misunderstanding you?

Re: TO OPEN

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:06 pm
by KR Wordgazer
I think its that though we were made in God's image, Unred, we have a tendency to think of God as being in our image. We put God in a box; we limit Him to our conceptions of Him.

We are like God in certain ways, but God is beyond us, beyond our full grasp and understanding. Still, I think it pleases God when we meet Him according to our best understanding of Him-- as a child to a Father (or Mother, as some of the biblical imagery shows). In fact, Christ made it clear that that's the best way to approach God: as a child. That's the stance that gives us enough humility to understand that we don't fully understand.

If we are not to think of God as a Person, it's because He's more than a person, not less than a person.

Re: meta's metaphor search. {g}

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:18 pm
by Metacrock
unred typo wrote:
Metacrock wrote:
JasonPratt wrote:
Btw, remember how over on the Cadre backchannel I was griping about how even Christian theologians have a habit of treating God fundamentally as not being an interpersonal relationship? :mrgreen:

It's a thorny problem. I feel that the parental love aspect of God is essential and really there. Yet I can't reduce God to the psychological dimensions of a human.
Well, we were created in his image. Has to be some resemblance... or am I misunderstanding you?

I don't know. If you think I'm saying we can't communicate with God then you are misreading me. God can communicate with us. I agree, we are made in god's image, and to me that means consciousness, so there has to be a fit someplace.

Re: TO OPEN

Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:19 pm
by Metacrock
KR Wordgazer wrote:I think its that though we were made in God's image, Unred, we have a tendency to think of God as being in our image. We put God in a box; we limit Him to our conceptions of Him.

We are like God in certain ways, but God is beyond us, beyond our full grasp and understanding. Still, I think it pleases God when we meet Him according to our best understanding of Him-- as a child to a Father (or Mother, as some of the biblical imagery shows). In fact, Christ made it clear that that's the best way to approach God: as a child. That's the stance that gives us enough humility to understand that we don't fully understand.

If we are not to think of God as a Person, it's because He's more than a person, not less than a person.

well said Kristen. yes, that's what I'm saying too. I think we tend to religate God to being just a big guy, a big powerful version of us. What I see in common is the notion of consciousness itself. Not to say God is limited to our limits.