Posts
One of the problems of this world is that it is so focused upon the search of fulfilment that we find ourselves in the conflict with the flow of the world's direction.
It has often been said that 'Nature is blind' and I am an advocate of such a view. Nature shows no path in her continued determination. She follows a path which she sets.
For most people, life is quite the opposite of Nature's intention. We all decide that we require targets, goals and aims. There is no greater satisfaction than the knowledge that we are 'in control'.
There is one problem.
How 'in control' are we?
Nature often throws obstacles in the path. We cannot expect those obstacles. These are random occurrences. Much of our life is a random occurrence.
Natural disasters.
Financial problems.
Death.
Can we predict these events? Can we expect these events?
No.
We cannot expect to suffer a natural disaster. We cannot predict that we will struggle one month and have a fruitful one the next. Life is not quite so simple as we hope to make it.
Death is one of our greatest fears.
It is because we cannot control it that we fear.
We do not fear what we can control.
Showing posts with label Life. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Life. Show all posts
Tuesday, 24 February 2009
Review of 'The Shack' [Article]
I would not state that this is set to become the theologian's first port of call in attempting to understand the nature of God. Instead, it seems to portray itself as an introduction into theology, by way of a novelistic style. It has its roots in orthodox Christianity and I was generally satisfied with the approach, though was in no way swayed by its line of thought to convert myself to Christianity.
Alas, it's very difficult to understand some of the profound concepts that it discusses and there are some who might find the book to be pretentious. As one reviewer stated 'This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress did for him'. Of course, few appreciate that the Pilgrim's Progress was nothing more than the solidification of orthodox Christian views in John Bunyan's generation. I find it rather amusing that the comparison would be made.
As a novel, however, it ticks all the boxes. I was impressed with the development of the main character and the plot was both thrilling and interesting. In a generation that has become fascinated with crime, horror and thrillers, this was a pleasant change from the norms.
It's not aimed at those people who are 'Christian' in nature. In truth, it doesn't even describe itself as a 'religious text', rather it has religious themes which border upon the lines between theology and human psychology. Most of the book is concerned with questions most people would have - it provides ample opportunity for empathy for the main character, something that was evoked early in the book.
If someone were to ask me if it were aimed at the agnostic or the atheist, I would have to agree with a friend that it is aimed at the agnostic. The declaration of atheism is an absolute statement and this book requires some element of 'openness' in regards to belief. There is no room for scepticism (save for the part of the main character!). It has that element of subjectivity and conditional views that appeals to me.
What would I describe the book as? I'd describe it as a tragic tale of a man's search within himself for answers to questions he never asked. It has a Christian foreground but it does not impose those beliefs. Rather, it provides a chance for the reader to interchange 'God' for their personal beliefs. It's a beautiful and sad story that is written rather well. Its main feature is its simplicity in style.
In regards to a recommendation, I'd offer it to all who have an open mind and are interested in something that might challenge their belief system. For those who empathise this characters, it is a must. I thoroughly enjoyed the book and I suspect that another million have too.
Become the next one!
Buy 'The Shack'.
Alas, it's very difficult to understand some of the profound concepts that it discusses and there are some who might find the book to be pretentious. As one reviewer stated 'This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress did for him'. Of course, few appreciate that the Pilgrim's Progress was nothing more than the solidification of orthodox Christian views in John Bunyan's generation. I find it rather amusing that the comparison would be made.
As a novel, however, it ticks all the boxes. I was impressed with the development of the main character and the plot was both thrilling and interesting. In a generation that has become fascinated with crime, horror and thrillers, this was a pleasant change from the norms.
It's not aimed at those people who are 'Christian' in nature. In truth, it doesn't even describe itself as a 'religious text', rather it has religious themes which border upon the lines between theology and human psychology. Most of the book is concerned with questions most people would have - it provides ample opportunity for empathy for the main character, something that was evoked early in the book.
If someone were to ask me if it were aimed at the agnostic or the atheist, I would have to agree with a friend that it is aimed at the agnostic. The declaration of atheism is an absolute statement and this book requires some element of 'openness' in regards to belief. There is no room for scepticism (save for the part of the main character!). It has that element of subjectivity and conditional views that appeals to me.
What would I describe the book as? I'd describe it as a tragic tale of a man's search within himself for answers to questions he never asked. It has a Christian foreground but it does not impose those beliefs. Rather, it provides a chance for the reader to interchange 'God' for their personal beliefs. It's a beautiful and sad story that is written rather well. Its main feature is its simplicity in style.
In regards to a recommendation, I'd offer it to all who have an open mind and are interested in something that might challenge their belief system. For those who empathise this characters, it is a must. I thoroughly enjoyed the book and I suspect that another million have too.
Become the next one!
Buy 'The Shack'.
Understanding Time and Life [Article]
One of the problems with the concept of life is that it is so broad. What is life to another person is nothing more than an idea. People often attempt to define life according to particular frames. Imagine that a foetus were defined as being life according to the parameters of time. It is a logical solution, providing that time is linear. What if time is relative? The development of a child is defined according to personal characteristics, not time.
We must define our concepts according to characteristics, not the parameters of time. Planets should be defined according to their features, not according to a pre-determined set of regulations which it must meet. The world is defined according to predestination. It is expected that we will meet particular stages in life; birth, adolescence, adulthood, etc. The list continues. What happens, however, when the pre-determined features of life are shed in a different light?
Imagine that a child has the mind of an adult, a child genius. Imagine that a child understands concepts that no adult has done understood. Is the child still defined as a child? What happens if the child then decides to achieve a Bsc? What happens when the child succeeds the adult in tasks which determine the stage between childhood and adulthood? Imagine that a child then decides to take a job, to have a car, to have a house.
Is it wrong that we continue to define the child according to the parameters of time? Time is too restricting. It limits the possibilities. The world should, instead, be defined according to preconceived ideas. For example, a child should be seen as an adult when one acts in such a manner as to be appreciated and understood as an adult.
Maturity is a concept, a misunderstood concept.
The fact that such a concept exists provides us with the chance to change the world. We have the change to determine our lives according to our own parameters. We should not be bound to the definitions of time. We should be bound only by our own limitations. Our life should not be a challenge against time. It should be a challenge against limits. We should continue to fight against the improbable, against the impossible.
This is life. Define it.
Reflections on Existence and Fortune [Article]
There are particular questions within this life that are often raised but there are few answers which are offered in return. For example, man often questions his purpose and directs it towards those whom are expected to have answers. Religious leaders postulate that man's purpose is to 'steward and dominate the Earth for it is his'. Philosophers argue that the meaning of life is 'personal' to one's achievements and desires. What does this mean? For the common man, what relevance does it have? Little - if any.
What can a man do with such an elusive response as 'personal to one's desires'. How can a man know what he desires if he does not know his purpose? Is it expected that once a jigsaw piece falls into place, the others will follow suit. Life is not quite so simple. Life is a dictation of continuous paths, choices and motifs. It beckons us to question all that is within it. It beckons us to 'live it'. What is a life that is not lived?
Socrates, for example, argued that the unexamined life was not worth living. He postulated that one must understand the inner depths of the soul. It is nothing more than a continuous quest upon which man must find himself in the darkness, in the forests that surround him. Socrates was a man whom believed in 'personal reflection'. To understand one's soul is to understand the world. There is no greater pleasure than the pleasure of understanding.
This is the purpose of life - understanding. It is not a question of meaning. It is a question of knowledge. You must know the boundaries. You must know yourself. You must know your society. The boundaries do not require meaning. You do not require meaning. Society does not require meaning. It requires understanding. Like all things, understanding is the pinnacle of man's creation.
What can a man do with such an elusive response as 'personal to one's desires'. How can a man know what he desires if he does not know his purpose? Is it expected that once a jigsaw piece falls into place, the others will follow suit. Life is not quite so simple. Life is a dictation of continuous paths, choices and motifs. It beckons us to question all that is within it. It beckons us to 'live it'. What is a life that is not lived?
Socrates, for example, argued that the unexamined life was not worth living. He postulated that one must understand the inner depths of the soul. It is nothing more than a continuous quest upon which man must find himself in the darkness, in the forests that surround him. Socrates was a man whom believed in 'personal reflection'. To understand one's soul is to understand the world. There is no greater pleasure than the pleasure of understanding.
This is the purpose of life - understanding. It is not a question of meaning. It is a question of knowledge. You must know the boundaries. You must know yourself. You must know your society. The boundaries do not require meaning. You do not require meaning. Society does not require meaning. It requires understanding. Like all things, understanding is the pinnacle of man's creation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)