Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Soren Kierkegaard and knights of faith
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="2PhiloVoid" data-source="post: 70841980" data-attributes="member: 167101"><p>From reading the scraps about spiritual "knighthood" which Kierkegaard left us to ponder over, it almost seems to me that in order to actually be a "knight of faith," one would have to have an epistemological vantage point that provides just a bit more than a mere willingness to jump. Kierkegaard, for instance, seems to allude to the idea that the apostles were in a position, in their daily social interactions with Jesus, to have the paradoxical presence posed to them in such a way that, even though someone like Peter could not know for sure that Jesus was God, he nevertheless still had Jesus and the miraculous by which to move ahead in faith as a knight. Abraham, likewise, had visits by the pre-incarnate Jesus (the Word)................................as well as the absolute knowledge that Isaac was a miracle child. Thus, I think Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac at the alter because Isaac himself was a demonstration of what God had ALREADY accomplished. Abraham's faith was not blind, and I'm not quite sure how existential it fully was.</p><p></p><p>So, on this account, this is why I relegate my status to that of just a "Pawn" of faith since: 1) I know that in my own self and mind, I am a rational person, and I can only leap in faith just so far, and 2) the term "pawn" (as in the game of chess) better illustrates that even though there is still some leaping on my part taking place, it isn't a leaping born out of some hyper sense of self-sufficient autonomy, nor is it a leaping that might be applied to one who is truly "knighted" <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite11" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll Eyes :rolleyes:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /> ......or even benighted. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite5" alt=":confused:" title="Confused :confused:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":confused:" /></p><p></p><p>We usually don't have direct access to that kind of experiential evidence, which makes a difference as to the extent one might be willing to existentially 'jump to faith' on behalf of God's mysterious presence in our lives. And this is where I part with Kierkegaard, even though I do appreciate the concept of some mode of taking a "leap of faith."</p><p></p><p> Yes. And this is not the kind of existentialism that can easily be appropriated, even though I think Kierkegaard gives us something important to think about here.</p><p></p><p> Yes.</p><p></p><p> Yep. I'm just a "pawn." But even a "pawn" can be used effectively by the Hand of God.</p><p></p><p> Perhaps. But if God somehow shows you something which you perceive to be an unveiling of at least some mystery about God and His purposes--even if not all mysteries are unveiled--then the little "revelation" you do have may become a psychological motivator for you, and you might find yourself 'willing' to take a further existential leap and become a "Knight of Faith," acting in ways befitting a true "Knight"...like attempting to sacrifice your miracle child at the behest of the same God who gave you that very same miracle child.</p><p></p><p>(Lest we forget, or remain ignorant as so many do, let's remember the fuller context of the story in our existential deliberations here: Isaac was a <strong>miracle child</strong>. <u>Nothing less</u>. <em>Nothing Less</em>! And it was in this instance that God told Abraham to perform the unimaginable horror...the same horror that God Himself not only <u>did not finally permit</u> Abraham to act upon, but did "commit" in the giving of the life of His own son, Jesus. <strong>Another miracle child</strong>.)</p><p></p><p>Peace,</p><p>2PhiloVoid</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="2PhiloVoid, post: 70841980, member: 167101"] From reading the scraps about spiritual "knighthood" which Kierkegaard left us to ponder over, it almost seems to me that in order to actually be a "knight of faith," one would have to have an epistemological vantage point that provides just a bit more than a mere willingness to jump. Kierkegaard, for instance, seems to allude to the idea that the apostles were in a position, in their daily social interactions with Jesus, to have the paradoxical presence posed to them in such a way that, even though someone like Peter could not know for sure that Jesus was God, he nevertheless still had Jesus and the miraculous by which to move ahead in faith as a knight. Abraham, likewise, had visits by the pre-incarnate Jesus (the Word)................................as well as the absolute knowledge that Isaac was a miracle child. Thus, I think Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac at the alter because Isaac himself was a demonstration of what God had ALREADY accomplished. Abraham's faith was not blind, and I'm not quite sure how existential it fully was. So, on this account, this is why I relegate my status to that of just a "Pawn" of faith since: 1) I know that in my own self and mind, I am a rational person, and I can only leap in faith just so far, and 2) the term "pawn" (as in the game of chess) better illustrates that even though there is still some leaping on my part taking place, it isn't a leaping born out of some hyper sense of self-sufficient autonomy, nor is it a leaping that might be applied to one who is truly "knighted" :rolleyes: ......or even benighted. :confused: We usually don't have direct access to that kind of experiential evidence, which makes a difference as to the extent one might be willing to existentially 'jump to faith' on behalf of God's mysterious presence in our lives. And this is where I part with Kierkegaard, even though I do appreciate the concept of some mode of taking a "leap of faith." Yes. And this is not the kind of existentialism that can easily be appropriated, even though I think Kierkegaard gives us something important to think about here. Yes. Yep. I'm just a "pawn." But even a "pawn" can be used effectively by the Hand of God. Perhaps. But if God somehow shows you something which you perceive to be an unveiling of at least some mystery about God and His purposes--even if not all mysteries are unveiled--then the little "revelation" you do have may become a psychological motivator for you, and you might find yourself 'willing' to take a further existential leap and become a "Knight of Faith," acting in ways befitting a true "Knight"...like attempting to sacrifice your miracle child at the behest of the same God who gave you that very same miracle child. (Lest we forget, or remain ignorant as so many do, let's remember the fuller context of the story in our existential deliberations here: Isaac was a [B]miracle child[/B]. [U]Nothing less[/U]. [I]Nothing Less[/I]! And it was in this instance that God told Abraham to perform the unimaginable horror...the same horror that God Himself not only [U]did not finally permit[/U] Abraham to act upon, but did "commit" in the giving of the life of His own son, Jesus. [B]Another miracle child[/B].) Peace, 2PhiloVoid [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Soren Kierkegaard and knights of faith
Top
Bottom