on the fifth and last part of this small series. only a very small piece, guys! (Kettcar)
As promised, I will try to show why we talk about making the gospel outside of the discourse must take place, or - as it signifies another major school of thought - 5 as
domination-free communication
we saw yesterday, that there is a clear communication logos adopted an eternal, as it were a god outside, above or behind the Logos incarnate, that Jesus can not give. the incarnation seriously, the talk is always blurry, ambiguous and, above all biased by the fact remain its own character sets. to the same object to speak, it requires constant mutual deconstruction and, based on the search for intersections in the deconstructed character sets., with the aim of arriving at mutual understanding, not to do through the back door talking uniquely.
this mode of conversation is appropriate because he reality of the possibilities of human communication into account and not on the illusion of uniqueness is based. where a claim is to be made or uniqueness that is inappropriate conversation. because then the conversation is no longer benefited from its integrated object, but only from a certain arbitrary character set, which is claimed uniqueness. what object then here is the conversation, is a tool with a human, namely, the language created image. it is not entirely independent of the object, but not identical to it. precisely this illusion of identity is produced but where claims uniqueness and thus the mutual deconstruction is stopped.
the Bible calls the generation of the illusion of unique human character of products of "idolatry". even if it involves optical and acoustic character is, and Isaiah, the book described in 44.15 to 18 in the language of his time is very impressive: The [Wood] gives people firewood, of which he takes and warms himself, nor he fires it and bakes bread; But from this he makes a god and worships it; he makes an idol of it and kneels before nieder.16 Half of it burns in the fire, he roasts meat on her and eats the meat and saturated, warm up well, saying: Ah ! I am warm, I feel the fire. 17 But the other half he makes to God that it was his idol, before which he kneels and fall down and pray, saying, Deliver me, for you are my God! 18 you know nothing and understand nothing, for they are blinded from seeing their eyes, And their hearts can not.
here is clear: the illusion of the identity of character and generates object "blindness", ie an assessment of the reality that this is inappropriate. realistic assessment of the possible is to have adequate, but the interest of every man, only she will allow him to lead a successful life, ie to take decisions on the basis of proper assessment of their circumstances and find the intended target was the result. (Who has ears, let him hear what series of my favorite schools of thought-here provides part. At all is this a happy eclecticism of different mind-tradition, which is I still break the argumentative neck)
this is precisely the need to talk that communication about the Gospel, to make free of domination, that is, the exercise of power by avoiding, whenever possible. for the exercise of power in communication is one thing above all: to impose my own set of signs to explain clearly and for a time, this alleged uniqueness and recognize themselves only to use these marks. So to force the other, an illusion to decay. follows from the above that, ultimately means to take him the possibility of a happy life by the knowledge of the impossibility of uniqueness replaced by the illusion of an existing uniqueness. But when exactly to have this opportunity the interest of every person and thus all the talk is concerned, it is also in the interest of all, no exercise is exercising to tolerate.
but why should that makes exercise, now without it? actually he should be happy and it makes no occasion to see, give it to him. but the enforcement of their own making with the help of sign also binds the men in power to the illusion. by the fact of mutual deconstruction, which extracts only a possible reality of adequate communication. that is, that he by the exercise of his own best interest makes acting contrary. the boundaries of his own as he sets itself can not break through, the possibility of the opening from the outside but not allow, he remains a prisoner is not adequate communication and is thus doomed to make decisions that can not contribute to a life be succeeding.
all this, the last five components of support are fundamental to me, andis polemical call with the fullest conviction. and so this series should now see an end.
some of your stuff but I observed and taken seriously: This is an attempt to think, publicly, in part, in areas in which I am familiar little. It is not a "Henni-of-states-now-you-by-just-the-world". I do not even pretend that my thoughts are least stringent in full. Finally, no clear object Henni open up a talk, but his characters take stock of your deconstruction's feet and hope that one or the other intersection might be. so fresh to the factory and take everything apart. I'm looking forward honest.
thinks ahead and! because just within my traditional, theological discourse immensely missing many topoi that are only touched on here or wrongly do not, what does all this mean, if it is true because, for the concept of revelation and hermeneutics? how can we understand salvation? Which view of eschatology as overcoming the circumstances of creation requires it? wonder what is it with spiritual gifts and the like from? and, finally, how do we go beyond the theory and design our practice of piety according to our conviction that, if it has become since our conviction?
0 comments:
Post a Comment