Villagersonline : blogs : SueKay : respGBrqpY

From: SueKay
Date: Sat Jul 17 11:25:19 MST 2004
Subject: response

Responses
eric: No Subject (7/17/04)

SueKay: What? (7/17/04)

derek: No Subject (7/17/04)

Responses (sorted by date)
derek: No Subject (7/17/04)
SueKay: What? (7/17/04)
eric: No Subject (7/17/04)

Once upon a time in my long ago past
Stepping stones led to inexorable conclusions
He is more than a carpenter
Demon, delusional, or God himself
No other options
Logic suspended by
Strands of web
Fading into the darkness
“Where is the wise man?
Where is the scribe?
Where is the debater of this age?
Has not God made foolish
The wisdom of the world?”
What is the mind of God?
What unimaginable logic lives there?
Tell me the logic of love
Which leads a God to sacrifice
“Some ask for signs
And some for wisdom
But we preach Christ crucified -
To the God-seekers a stumbling block
And to the atheists beyond absurd,
But to us
Power and wisdom,
This foolishness of God.”
Where is the golden key
To change my can’t to can,
My shadow to substance?
Persuasive words of wisdom
Have wrought few changes
In the percentages of this world
The kingdom of God does not live in words, but in action.
[passages in quotes are paraphrased from 1Cor. 2 I lost the poetry somewhere along the way. Oh well. I think I said most of what I was trying to say, although I didn’t talk about all my issues with this subject. If I am logical, and I am made in the image of God, then shouldn't God be logical as I am? (weak argument of course: could use the same using the word 'sinful') See end of I Cor chapter 2 for a taste of how convoluted it all gets in my brain – we are not wise, yet now we have the mind of Christ…]
- Susan (Keltner) Park

Edit this blog
Write a response

From: eric
Date: Sat Jul 17 11:28:09 MST 2004
Subject:

"The chief defect of all previous materialism (that of Feuerbach included) is that things, reality, sensuousness are conceived only as the form of the object, or of contemplation, but not as sensuous human activity, practice, not subjectively. Hence, in contradistinction to materialism, the active side was set forth abstractly by idealism—which, of course, does not know real, sensuous human activity, practice, not subjectively." Marx I believe
Eric

Edit this response
Write a response Email the author

From: SueKay
Date: Sat Jul 17 12:14:32 MST 2004
Subject: What?

Was supposed to understand any of that?
- Susan

Edit this response
Write a response

From: derek
Date: Sat Jul 17 14:21:16 MST 2004
Subject:

I'm pretty sure it means:
We used to define stuff as just "being out there." We need to start defining stuff as "interacting with us." We don't know it is there except that we sense it. We see it, so there's something there to be seen. . .
Right?
I'm not sure about the phrase "which, of course, does not know real, sensuous human activity, practice, not subjectively." I think there might be words missing in the middle. :)

Edit this response
Write a response Email the author

Write a blog