Re: [Kierkegaardians] Time
- DonThank you for your very good description of time in CA. It fits what I recall -- we probably could add some detail by looking at specific passages, but I think that you have the general parameters right. I think I had pictured the "moment" as a single point at which time intersects eternity in the individual's subjective experience.I don't have my copy of CUP with me, but I think that in the terms you set out, the paradox of RB is that the individual's subjective experience of Christ -now- stands against the historical reality of the incarnation 2000 years ago (separation by time understood in an objective sense), but which the RB individual accepts as the basis of his/her experience of Christ in the present. Thus, the RB individual is contemporary with a 2000 year old Christ in the present.I think that it's wise to keep in mind that the paradox of RB is an offense to thought and crucifies the intellect.
Jim ROn Jun 28, 2010, at 7:00 PM, "Don Anderson" <don@...> wrote:
Jim, thanks for your helpful recent discussion.
K’s understanding of time is based on the New Testament understanding of time expressed as Kairos. K is opposed to the Greek understanding of time which is Chronos. Chronos is linear time, clock time and K and some of the pseudonyms call it “a passing by”. K also calls it spacialized time. Some people call it object time or objective time because it is based on the linear movement of objects. Kairos on the other hand is usually defined as a time of opportunity or fulfillment. Taylor calls it life-time. K and others call it the moment, the instant, and even “the fullness of time.” Kairos is experienced time or subjective time.
- Don --When you get back, come up with some specific quotations that actually support your claims, or respond to the quotations I've already provided.Jim R