Like, there's a distance between what is true and what was represented in the writing, and a distance between what was represented and what was interpreted (but the interpretation was a totally valid one given the text), but I think your reaction was dead on given that interpretation of that representation. Commendably so.
I'm not offended. The reply was helpful and informative and I wanted to acknowledge that while leaving open the question of whether or not I'm like the people who you are referring to (because I'm really not sure).
In this context? In the text, Kierkegaard (or Anti-Climacus, really) takes it as an unchallenged background theory and doesn't attempt to justify its theological claims.
As somebody who finds these theological claims uncompelling, I find it an unsatisfying solution to the problems of selfhood and despair that he raises.
That sounds like an excellent book and I think I'll see if I can reserve it at the library. I agree that if you're going to hold up Christianity as the solution to despair, or as the solution to anything, then you have to defend it. I've known friends whose lives were transformed by faith, but I think it's something you need to find yourself rather than having a book tell you about it, and I certainly wouldn't say it's the only answer. There are plenty of answers. And yeah, in order to actually change anything you DO have to get up and start making things move in your life. You can do that with or without faith, Christian or otherwise.
Comments 9
Reply
Reply
Reply
I'm not offended. The reply was helpful and informative and I wanted to acknowledge that while leaving open the question of whether or not I'm like the people who you are referring to (because I'm really not sure).
Reply
Reply
As somebody who finds these theological claims uncompelling, I find it an unsatisfying solution to the problems of selfhood and despair that he raises.
Reply
Reply
Is that what you are asking?
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment