Reality and fantasy

[Akita Suggagaki]

...concluded that Jesus wasn't merely speaking to Himself...

Thanks for that. I guess I tend toward Monism so the question comes to me, "When I pray am I praying to myself?" That is an Eastern view and so they use "self" and "self" to have some sort of distinction. I have not really solved the question for myself but on a practical level stick with an orthodox view. I also have not really settled with a theory of redemption. I favor Moral Example over penal substitution. But again the status of Jesus is central because he is the one who redeems.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Thanks for that. I guess I tend toward Monism so the question comes to me, "When I pray am I praying to myself?" That is an Eastern view and so they use "self" and "self" to have some sort of distinction. I have not really solved the question for myself but on a practical level stick with an orthodox view. I also have not really settled with a theory of redemption. I favor Moral Example over penal substitution. But again the status of Jesus is central because he is the one who redeems.

We all have the current epistemic paths we feel we're on at the moment, and we're all trying to find our way out of the murky swamp of 'truth.'

... As for epistemic tensions that rise up when we deliberate over our methods of conceptual engagement with Christianity, I prefer to be critical and analytic where and when monism or dualism are specificially cited either way. I think both terms are too generic and too polysemous to offer anyone anything decisive, especially where explaining Jesus' nature and that of the Trinity comes up for discussion.

On the side of the theory of redemption, I take the tact of surveying and analyzing the competing theories and thinking that none of them in and of themselves are utterly conclusive or exclusive of all of the others. Needless to say, this means that I realize that in order to accomodate each theory of redemption, or at least more than one theory of them, I end up modifying each one to allow their mutual presence in my thinking. So, I hold my understanding about Redemption firmly but critically and tentatively. I also know that in various ways, you do too.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I think we all realize that it is quite easy to convince ourselves. That is, to believe what we want to believe. I think for a good chunk of my life I lived in a naïve fantasy. I am not telling anyone that their beliefs are fantasies, but how do we guard against slipping into fantastical thinking? It is easy to find the speck in a brother's or sister's eye. But what about our own.

I am thinking first that we have to be humble enough to accept the possibility that we might be wrong.
Then we have to be able to look at the same information in a different way.

When people depart from the sound doctrine clearly written in the Scriptures and resort to fables, then people do move into fantasy. The answer is to remain faithful to the Scriptures and not believe every spirit but test the spirits whether they are of God or not.

 

[Stephen3141]

I think we all realize that it is quite easy to convince ourselves. That is, to believe what we want to believe. I think for a good chunk of my life I lived in a naïve fantasy. I am not telling anyone that their beliefs are fantasies, but how do we guard against slipping into fantastical thinking? It is easy to find the speck in a brother's or sister's eye. But what about our own.

I am thinking first that we have to be humble enough to accept the possibility that we might be wrong.
Then we have to be able to look at the same information in a different way.

I wish that Christian congregations would spend considerable time, teaching about our shared reality (my words).

The Christian definition of "lying" is misrepresenting our shared reality.
But most congregations seem afraid of addressing what our shared reality is.

What reality is, gets into other large questions.
Besides the obvious question, "What is real?"
there is "How do we accurately perceive, what is real?"
What does the Bible present, as real?
How does the Bible present our perceptions?
How are we to test an opinion/belief, to prove that it is TRUE?

If you are a reader, try the book by Wood called "Epistemology".

Epistemology: Becoming Intellectually... book by W. Jay Wood

 

[BeyondET]

I think we all realize that it is quite easy to convince ourselves. That is, to believe what we want to believe. I think for a good chunk of my life I lived in a naïve fantasy. I am not telling anyone that their beliefs are fantasies, but how do we guard against slipping into fantastical thinking? It is easy to find the speck in a brother's or sister's eye. But what about our own.

I am thinking first that we have to be humble enough to accept the possibility that we might be wrong.
Then we have to be able to look at the same information in a different way.

Often wonder the importance in creating the mind to have allusions and to fantasize. Sometimes no matter how hard one tries can't see the reality.

 

[Stephen3141]

For those who claim, that no matter how hard they try, they cannot see reality --

How can you describe what it is that you cannot see, if you cannot describe
precisely what "reality" is?

This argument is internally illogical.