 |
|
|
|
|
|
Religion
> Stranger Than Fiction (May Have Scene Spoilers)
|
|
New Topic |
Post Reply
|
<< |
1 |
>>
| 1. Friday, November 10, 2006 10:06 PM |
| Kevin6002 |
Stranger Than Fiction (May Have Scene Spoilers) |
Member Since
7/23/2006
Posts:802
View Profile
Send PM
|
Okay, I know this is another movie I am posting in the religion form, but I just see some of the spiritual side to things even if it isn't there. So after seeing this movie tonight it made me think of something to discuss. That is do you feel God has planned out your whole life and there is nothing that can change God's plan, or you are in control of your life and God has nothing to do with it, or you can influence God or God can influence you in things that happen in your life. Or do you have a different view point? Please share. I think it falls somewhere inbetween. I think there are things God has planned for me that I can't change no matter what I do, but I think there are some things that depends on choices I make. I believe God has influenced me in choices I have made, but I also think I have influenced Him. I know that may sound like pride. But remember the story of Moses when God wanted to destroy the people and Moses influenced God? I think we can influence God as well by reminding Him of his nature and His promises.
|
| 2. Wednesday, February 7, 2007 1:18 PM |
| Freshly Squeezed |
RE: Stranger Than Fiction (May Have Scene Spoilers) |
Member Since
9/29/2006
Posts:275
View Profile
Send PM
|
I once began from the premise, in all my discussion on religion, that whether or not God exists is 'unknowable'. The premise was not one I originated but one I adopted. It seemed to reflect the most honest assessment of my own epistemological and experiential capacity that I could form. I have since adjusted my view but not before I sought others perspectives on it. I tested this premise against people who claimed to know or behaved as though they knew or seemed confident or inclined or preferred to believe that God in fact existed. I wanted to see if someone else could put forward a more compelling argument that would cause me to review the 'unknowability' premise I had adopted. I also took an interest in noting the various reactions to the basic line of argument I put to them. Those who were inclined or preferred to believe that God existed always agreed, whether or not God exists was unknowable to them but generally this recognition did not make them any less inclined to believe that God in fact existed. Those who behaved as though they knew or seemed confident that God in fact exists appeared to either or both rely on their intuition or find refuge in the prerogative of the religous tradition to which they were aligned. Their reaction to argument along the lines of the unknowability premise was typically highly emotionally charged, vehment and defensive. The more I plugged away at the ground for the beliefs they held, the darker and sentimentally evasive I noticed they became. Finally, those who claimed to simply and definitely know that God exists tended to respond in one or more of several ways. First, they might respond by citing experiences they had but that I either could not possibly verify and/or the claimed origin and/or significance of which was plainly uncertain. Second, those who claimed to know might simply ignore the premise and arguments I put along the lines of 'unknowability' and focus instead on praying for my illumination or otherwise attempting to include me in their religous life. Third, those who claimed to know stood upon their claim and merely challenged me to attempt a leap of faith. This most latter argument against the premise I adopted was the only one I felt compelled to consider: the challenge to make a leap of faith. I noted from the start, however, that those who claimed to know that God existed always proclaimed it as a ‘glorious’ fact and I had no such foresight of the image or face of God. Nor could I derive more clarity about the image or face of God by reading the description of God’s character and accounts of his activities within the bible and derivative texts. Ultimately, it seemed to me that what was really meant by challenging me to take the leap of faith that would open my eyes to the existence of God was to take the leap of faith to believe the descriptions within the bible that make assertions of or purport to demonstrate God’s reality. Without the whole structure of the bible, taking a leap of faith was little more than an exercise in being adament about my own subjective and idiosyncratic mythology. Initially benignly but increasingly approaching the bible with an attitude or disposition of faith in the written word, I educated myelf in the biblical portrayl of God and his works. As you might expect, I struggled most with the purported miracles. They seemed only to mystify rather than clarify the issue of God’s existence. I eventually came to recognise that in order to have faith in the written word, to ‘open my heart’ to the reality of God, as the phrase sometimes goes, I had to close my mind to the sensible doubts I had about that reality. I realised that the virtue of the premise – whether God exists or not is unknowable – was that it was and remained, up to that point, the most honest conclusion I could make and assessment of myself. Attempting to push myself into a leap of faith, on the other hand, led me to despair. I recognised that what appealed to me about the 'unknowability' premise was that I was being honest with myself and that was more important to me than having any conclusive answer, whether affirmative or negative, to the question whether or not God exists. Therefore, I returned to my premise to examine it afresh but my view had changed, had refined. The premise of ‘unknowability’, of course, precludes the possibility of knowing. I knew that I did not know whether or not God existed and found in myself no reason or desire to merely have faith in God’s reality. All the same, does that determine that knowledge of the existence of God is unattainable? I had to conclude that such knowledge could not be attained through taking a the ‘leap of faith’. Intellectual dishonesty leads away from knowledge not to it. The ‘leap of faith’ was a magician’s trick, it demonstrates not through revealation but through obfuscation. However, it does not seem open to one to conclude that whether God exists is ‘unknowable’, that is there is no chance of knowing. It is unknowable to me now but that does not necessarily preclude me from ever knowing. So the premise I have refined is: “I do not know if God exists and I do not know if I will ever know”. This now seems the most honest conclusion and personal assessment of my epistemological and experiential capacities I can make. Please excuse the length of this post. It is not that I need have taken so long to get around to answering your question but that it would have taken a long time to answer it briefly yet effectively. And my answer to your question is, on the whole, the same as my response to the issue of whether or not God exists. That is, I do not know whether or not God has planned out my whole life etc, and I do not know if I will ever know because I do not know if God exists and I do not know if I will ever know. As I mentioned above I have no image of God, moreover there are no means available to me by which to verify the image of God portrayed in bible. As such I have no way of identifying the hand of God in my life.
Beauty is momentary in the mind -
The fitful tracing of a portal;
But in the flesh it is immortal.
The body dies; the body's beauty lives.
So evenings die, in their green going,
A wave, interminably flowing.
So gardens die, their meek breath scenting
the cowl of winter, done repenting.
So maidens die, to the auroral
Celebration of a maiden's choral.
Susanna's music touched the bawdy strings
Of those white elders; but, escaping,
Left only Death's ironic scraping.
Now in its immortality, it plays
On the clear viol of her memory,
And makes a constant sacrement of praise. ('Peter Quince at the Clavier' by Wallace Stevens)
|
| 3. Sunday, November 12, 2006 3:37 PM |
| one suave folk |
RE: Stranger Than Fiction (May Have Scene Spoilers) |
Member Since
12/21/2005
Posts:5862
View Profile
Send PM
|
I haven't seen it yet, but I can see some valid discussion, religiously speaking, on this film, whereas Borat treated religion in such a goofy manner it just didn't warrant serious discourse. On that note, some of the racist, misogynistic frat boys are now trying to sue, claiming they wouldn't have said those stupid, hateful things had they known they'd be in a film like this. Uhh, you guys DID know you were being filmed, right?
|
| 4. Monday, November 13, 2006 9:57 PM |
| Freshly Squeezed |
RE: Stranger Than Fiction (May Have Scene Spoilers) |
Member Since
9/29/2006
Posts:275
View Profile
Send PM
|
On the point of miracles (raised in my preceding post), I recently just came accross a quote from Benjamin Franklin that I think aptly describes the problem. He says: 'No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless ... its falsehood would be more miraculous than the feat which it endeavours to establish'.
Beauty is momentary in the mind -
The fitful tracing of a portal;
But in the flesh it is immortal.
The body dies; the body's beauty lives.
So evenings die, in their green going,
A wave, interminably flowing.
So gardens die, their meek breath scenting
the cowl of winter, done repenting.
So maidens die, to the auroral
Celebration of a maiden's choral.
Susanna's music touched the bawdy strings
Of those white elders; but, escaping,
Left only Death's ironic scraping.
Now in its immortality, it plays
On the clear viol of her memory,
And makes a constant sacrement of praise. ('Peter Quince at the Clavier' by Wallace Stevens)
|
|
New Topic |
Post Reply
|
Page 1 of 1 ::
<< |
1 |
>>
|
|
Religion
> Stranger Than Fiction (May Have Scene Spoilers)
|
| Users viewing this Topic (0) |
| |
Powered by JorkelBB 2006 (Version 1.0b)
|
|
|
