Sometimes (actually more often than not) the Lord directs our words with a specific flavor when we converse with others about the nature of Himself and the Gospel. I wanted to share His reply to an individual who is searching out the meaning of (or in) life. Perhaps you too will find it interesting and useful:
Chinny: I had never heard of phenomenology. But the concept has rattled around in my mind for decades. I didn’t think the world would have a word for what comes natural. But, go figure.
Every man can approach an understanding of life from any aspect he chooses. Who am I to say we are wrong as we search out the truth. On the other hand, when we find a helpful directive, it is wise to attempt to share what we know.
Please allow me to respond to the concept of understanding the ultimate meaning of and in life. If we are striving to understand or grasp the absolute truth of any subject, we may toy with lesser values in the beginning. But there is a place where diluted materials stop providing information. I have reached that lack of answers years ago. And was forced to turn to pure materials to develop a pure understanding of what is pure and true. Scientifically speaking, we get the answers we deserve according to the purity of the experiment.
People, in their best basic format, are full of misunderstandings, differings of opinions, and tossed about by all kinds of misinformation. It seems a bit crude to me that we should strive to understand the perfection of God truth by linking together a mass of fallible knowledge. Therefore, I would suggest that we would be better served in our quest by searching out the purest truth available to man.
The truth we seek should not be a peaceful and joyfilled understanding. We have both established that man’s relationships will be full of turmoil. So we surmise that any understanding of purity will necessarily be a bit disquieting to a tumultuous creature. Only after repetition and learning can we hope to endure that truth with any sense of peace. In other words, we come to understand the value of purity by experience alone (assuming that we have found what is pure and make it our specific target of bending our will.)
This is a very difficult subject, as is proven by the amount of words men have employed to research it. I believe you and I are on the cutting edge of balance between true discovery (of a personal nature). Now what remains is the ability to willingly approach the subject minus that sickness of pride that attends every man. Don’t misunderstand that comment about pride. It lives quite vibrantly in every one of us, and often goes undetected by our own perception. It is quite obvious to others, however. And, in the end, we find that we have not reached the fullness of understanding simply for lack of true humility.
I hope I have added something to the conversation here.
Having opened this post with a chart of Hegel’s “Phenomenology of Spirit,” I presume you are advocating a Hegelian understanding of knowledge? If so, then you might want to look more closely at Hegel.
First, Hegel was an Atheist. Of course, not in the New-Atheist (Hitchens, Dawkins, etc.) sense, but he specifically argued for a “death of God” theology, a theology in which God was a self-negating being whose final manifestation would be its own overcoming.
Second, the following quote: “Scientifically speaking, we get the answers we deserve according to the purity of the experiment.” Seems completely out of place in Hegelian thought. Hegel’s account of knowledge, particularly absolute knowledge, begins with an abandonment of simple sensibility (experimental empiricism included).
I would keep these thoughts in mind if you intend to use Hegel to defend a specifically conservative Christian theological perspective.
I hope this is helpful!
LikeLike
Thanks for the comment. Actually, I don’t care about any other “love of wisdom” than that of the Wisdom of God. I simply posted a response to someone who advocates that we can understand God by examining the world and the relationships each item has with another. I wouldn’t have known one philosophy of this world from another.
But thanks for the clarification.
LikeLike
In the analogy of The Cave, Plato shows the ascent of the mind from illusion to truth and pure philosophy, and the difficulties which accompany its progress.
LikeLike
That’s true. And in the Gospel Jesus makes that transformation in us to exceed philosophy. It is no longer just a love or search for truth, He brings us to a living knowledge of a truth beyond man’s abilities. The beautiful thing about the Gospel is that God is able to enliven any mind to conceive what is true. And best of all, it doesn’t take a college degree!
LikeLike