Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Existentialist Christianity

Expand Messages
  • bjunius30
    Hi Eduard:) I have read your response. Perhaps you misunderstood what i wrote. I do not criticise that you must believe in God in order to fear death or
    Message 1 of 23 , Apr 29, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Eduard:)

      I have read your response. Perhaps you misunderstood what i wrote. I
      do not criticise that you must believe in God in order to fear death
      or punishment. Subjectively we speak of God as the "To Be", rather
      than "Not Be", by metaphysical syntax, and meta-language symbology.
      Referring to your Ford as your preferred Choice has nothing in
      context to do with God and your choice made to buy a ford anyway in
      the first place...unless you believe in "Non-determinism", and
      therefore do not believe order exists in the universe as the
      quintessenital meaning of Panetheism.

      Bryan Junius

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, yeoman <yeoman@v...> wrote:
      > Bryan,
      > I take your proposition to be that if we do not believe in a
      > god, then we need not fear death and thus this leads to
      > killing and destruction. I think, however, that if you look
      > at history, most of the killing has been in the name of a
      > god. The Old Testament is full of it. So much so that they
      > should put a warning label on the front cover --- "Caution:
      > This book contains excessive violence".
      > But then the issue here is whether any believed god has an
      > impact upon our choices. Granted we may restrict our choice
      > with respect to some moral code that has been listed in some
      > bible. But a morality can just as easily be adopted by a
      > non-believing individual. In fact if you look at
      > Existentialism, it is highly moral, in that it says we have
      > a responsibility in our choices. If the believers of
      > whatever religion took responsibility, the world would
      > indeed be a better place.
      > I have given the example of choosing a Ford or a BMW. The
      > question still stands. How does a god impact upon my
      > choice?? If he/she/it has no impact, then the example is
      > extendable to any choice. My point is that belief in a god
      > is a non-issue with respect to Existentialism. The
      > philosophy is focused upon "our" existence, not the
      > existence of he/she/it.
      > eduard
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "bjunius30" <bjunius30@n...>
      > To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 3:48 PM
      > Subject: [existlist] Re: Existentialist Christianity
      > > To all:)
      > >
      > >
      > > What is the necessity of living, if one can not
      > acknowledge, other
      > > than himself, that some force or greater power will exist?
      > Why should
      > > logic connotate the idea and philocentrism of being by
      > existential
      > > theory? Existence precedes essence, quoted by Jean Paul
      > Sartre, is
      > > incomplete and un-validated and can not be used as
      > criteria toward
      > > this discussion as something factual, because it is not;
      > systematic
      > > as the ideas are, one would be wiser to believe that
      > independant
      > > logic can better be suited to modify
      > older-out-of-date-philosophical-
      > > arguments such as the misleading philosophy of RENE
      > > MIND/BODY Politic or EUCLID's GEOMETRY as prime examples
      > of false
      > > paridigms.
      > > If one were to suppose on the proposition of pure reason
      > alone and
      > > methodical standards, it can be said, that ideally one
      > must oblige
      > > and agree that God must "BE", v. "NOT BE". Subjectivity of
      > > epiphenomenal experiences leads us to realise by context
      > why Being is
      > > better, than not being at all. If one assumes God as false
      > logic to
      > > being, then he/she must assume perhaps subjectivity is
      > "THE
      > > EXPERIENCE" of what one can not be...simpler to state,
      > that "being"
      > > is our state of not experiencing at all, and we must
      > somehow throw
      > > away all subjective experiences,...however...we cannot, as
      > absurd as
      > > the idea is, it become a very metaphysical truth
      > established by
      > > irreducible boundaries. One can not throw away what He/She
      > is...the
      > > existence of reflection and being, as in the state of
      > one's being is
      > > all the same by abstract value in method as God clings to
      > the
      > > infantile nature that He is bound to and which covets
      > Good/Evil Meta-
      > > ethics of the universe.
      > > By death, we are forever bound by contention to not exceed
      > certain
      > > constraints chosen. If you say free will is our choice,
      > then you must
      > > realise a better option toward our immortality. And if
      > immortality is
      > > in the eyes of Man, then it is certainly not in the Will
      > of God for
      > > us to choose without Him, for what is immortality then
      > another reason
      > > for Mankind to kill and destroy that much longer and have
      > no fear of
      > > death or even the likes of God. I believe in God and
      > existence
      > > because it has a choice for me and i choose freely to not
      > live in a
      > > world of wickedness when it has come upon us. That is the
      > choice that
      > > has always been there. You must have realised that...have
      > you not?
      > >
      > >
      > > Sincerely,
      > >
      > > Bryan Evan Junius
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.