www.tebe-trazim.com

Pusti samosažaljenje kameno, Duh Sveti će nastanit...srce tvoje ranjeno
Sada je 24 stu 2017 19:23

Vrijeme na UTC [LJV]




Započni novu temu Odgovori  [ 706 post(ov)a ]  Idi na stranu Prethodni  1 ... 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71  Sljedeće
Autor Poruka
 Naslov: Re: Ateizam
PostPostano: 28 ruj 2014 13:28 
Odsutan
Korisnik s više od 100 postova
Korisnik s više od 100 postova

Pridružen: 06 ruj 2013 01:19
Postovi: 143
Podijelio: 1 zahvala
Zahvaljeno je: 6 zahvala
Vjeroispovjest: Katolik
Status: Solo
Samuel napisao:
Pa to je da ti mozak stane!! Ali se zna jako dobro udarati po tom SSPX-u zbog održavanja i strogog vezanja za tradiciju, pa se je lupalo i po jednom (zaboravio kako se zove, mislim bratstvo svetog Pia)
Pa SSPX ti je to bratstvo svetog Pija. To je jedno te isto.


Vrh
 Profil  
Citiraj  
 Naslov: Re: Ateizam
PostPostano: 28 ruj 2014 13:46 
Odsutan
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Avatar korisnika

Pridružen: 10 lip 2008 20:55
Postovi: 3731
Lokacija: Santa Fe (New Mexico)
Podijelio: 0 zahvala
Zahvaljeno je: 49 zahvala
Samuel napisao:
Morat ću se nekako početi natjerati učiti engleski, ako je to uopće moguće!!

Isplati se Sami, baš se isplati. Jer kad vidiš koliko knjiga stoji na netu, stoje i samo čekaju da ih netko skine- besplatno! Lol. Ma nema kaj nema na netu. Već u ovom postu moram obilno citirati na engleskom jeziku. Moram to učiniti iz dva razloga: knjige koje ću citirati nisu prevedene na hrvatski jezik ili su prevedene ali ih nemam doma. Kad bi ih imao, najmanji mi je problem odskenirati stranicu ili dvije u pdf format i onda copy/pasta, ali nemam. Kaj se tu može? :l30:

Samuel napisao:
Ovaj SSPX je neposlušan u ja mislim jednoj stvari, iako je to jako široka tema i duboka, jer se uvijek iznenadim koliko malo znam, pa mi nekad nije jasno u ćemu su uopće neposlušni, na kraju ispadne da je ređenje biskupa ostao problem, ali to je jako velika tema koju nisam dovoljno proučio, pa ne volim se baš duboko petljati, jer je doista zamršeno. Uglavno sastajali su se i sastajat će se da se vrate u krilo, iako mislim da ako nisu u krilu da se za njega na sebi svojstven način drže, i kako kažu uvijek na svojim Misama obvezno na kraju mole za papu!!

Neposlušni su i ne priznaju Drugi vatikanski sabor, kao i sve dokumente poslje njega. Papu, odnosno, pape poslije sabora možda formalno priznaju, ali kad bi ih doista priznali onda bi im bili poslušni. I ne manje bitno: i dalje zaređuju svećenike iako nemaju ovlasti za to.


Samuel napisao:
Ali da se vratim na ono što i mene smeta. A to je neposluh ostalih, i to puno gori, prikriveni neposluh oko kojeg se šuti, pa i odobrava,kako ova časna tako i mnogi vjernici, pa i svečenici u Crkvi!!Nepsoluh koji metastazira na svim poljima!!
Da samo znaš koliko poznam vjernika koji odbijaju dogme, koji uzimaju ono što im paše i sami si tumače, od kondoma, abortusa, plodni/neplodni dani (bračna čistoća), umjetna oplodnja, preljub, drugi "brak", život u preljubu i još mnogo ostalih stvari! Ali redovito mole na Misi VJEROVANJE (u svetu Crkvu katoličku)

Kao što sam spomenuo, sad bi se čovjek obilno trebao pozvati baš na dvije knjige. Nažalost, možeš već pogoditi, knjige nisu prevedene kod nas. Radi se o knjigama: "The Devastated Vineyard" i "Trojan Horse in the City of God" katoličkog filozofa Dietrich von Hildebranda. Intelektualno poštenje nalaže da odmah spomenem kako je on te knjige napisao protiv "modernizma". Ali ovde se javlja pitanje, šta je točna definicija "modernizma"? Za SSPX su svi modernisti, svi koji su prihvatili dokumente Drugog vatikanskog sabora i kasnije. Evo kako od njih prozvani "modernist" definira "modernizam";


MODERNIZAM je skupna oznaka za teološki krive ili grbave poglede koji su se pojavili oko 1900. god. kao po sebi opravdana želja (štaviše trajna obveza) da se sadržaj kršćanske vjere objavi ljudima onoga vremena na adekvatan način. Pritom su u Francuskoj,. Engleskoj i Italiji izronile među ostalim sljedeće zablude: *teologija je stvar osjećaja, *religija izvire iz religiozne podsvijesti, a razum ne može ovladati ni jednim ni drugim jer je on religiozno u najvišoj mjeri sekundarna funkcija, objava je posvješćivanje imanentne religiozne potrebe, a nosioci objave su je samo najjasnije objektivirali, kad se ukoče te objektivacije nastaje *tradicija. *Dogma je samo simbolički izraz tih objektivacija koje se (skupa s dogmom) moraju mijenjati s napretkom kulture. Postoji naravna potreba da se vlastite objektivacije religioznoga saopće drugima, a kad se to realizira nastaje *Crkva. Ti su pogledi bili povezani s ekstremnom *kritikom Biblije. Te i druge zablude osudio je Pio X. u dekretu »La-mentabili« (DS 3401-3466; NR 111-127 395-401224-235 520 si 546 si 558 675 si) i u enciklici »Pascendi« (DS 3475-3498; NR 523). Mora se dodati da su u toj polemici protiv modernizma, koji je na mnoge pravilno gledane probleme pružao naopaka rješenja, mnogi pristaše modernizma jili ogorčeni klerikalnim intrigama i istjerani iz crkvene zajednice. »Modernizam« je, nažalost, do danas ostao odbojna, mrska rugalica unutar crkvene arogancije koje se ne tiču poteškoće vjere u današnjem svijetu. Karl Rahner & Herbert Vorgrimler "Teološki rječnik"


Ne treba ni spomenuti da se ni Rahner a ni današnja Crkva ne smatra modernistima. Nismo mi nikakvi modernisti, već je Crkva ona ista kao što je i bila prije 2000 godina. Zake sam onda spomenuo ove dvije knjige? Zato jer se osvrću baš na našu temu. Sve šta si napisao, citiram još jednom;

Samuel napisao:
Ali da se vratim na ono što i mene smeta. A to je neposluh ostalih, i to puno gori, prikriveni neposluh oko kojeg se šuti, pa i odobrava,kako ova časna tako i mnogi vjernici, pa i svečenici u Crkvi!!Nepsoluh koji metastazira na svim poljima!!
Da samo znaš koliko poznam vjernika koji odbijaju dogme, koji uzimaju ono što im paše i sami si tumače, od kondoma, abortusa, plodni/neplodni dani (bračna čistoća), umjetna oplodnja, preljub, drugi "brak", život u preljubu i još mnogo ostalih stvari! Ali redovito mole na Misi VJEROVANJE (u svetu Crkvu katoličku)

Sve je to gotovo proročki najavio Dietrich von Hildebrand. Iako, ako se pogleda sa druge strane, ne treba biti neki poseban prorok da se skuži kako Crkvu čakaju problemi u budućnosti. Uvijek je bilo problema, od početka pa do sada, a ne treba ni spomenuti da će ih i dalje biti.


Today we can no longer call the situation in the holy Church "The Trojan Horse in the City of God." The enemies who were hidden in the Trojan Horse have stepped out of their encasement and the active work of destruction is in high gear. The epidemic has advanced from scarcely recognizable errors and falsifications of the spirit of Christ and the holy Church, up to the most flagrant heresies and blasphemies. Dietrich von Hildebrand "The Devastated Vineyard"


We live in unprecedented times in the history of the Church. Never before, not in the protestant revolt, not in the Arian heresy, has so much of the Church openly embraced what has always been considered error. We have confusing, troubling, or worse statements or actions from even the highest levels of the Church. Dietrich von Hildebrand "The Devastated Vineyard"


Is not the devastation of the vineyard of the Lord an exhortation to love God, Christ, and His Holy Church more than ever? Do we not betray Christ if we turn away in disgust? Should not we of all people strive to see that true beauty of the vineyard of teh Lord, which objectively must be to work for the glorification of God, and toward our own personal sanctification, and to oppose this-worldliness by our own unconditional imitation of Christ. Dietrich von Hildebrand "The Devastated Vineyard"


Another example is the tendency to substitute for real faith a mere loyalty to the Church as an organization with rules for its members. Instead of being aware of the awful privilege of assisting at Holy Mass, many Catholics go to church on Sunday just as they fulfill profane duties out of loyalty to the country or to an institution to which they belong. That is, they perform this task because they just happen to be Catholics. Here, indeed, the letter has replaced the spirit. This substitution of loyalty for holy obedience and grateful love indicates the loss of a true understanding of the nature of the Church. It suggests that the Church is a merely human institution. Such a ritualistic conception of one’s religious life leaves no place for transformation in Christ—a process that implies orienting one’s entire life around Christ and bearing witness to Christ in one’s contact with the world. But many Catholics, having accepted the Catholic faith as a mere heritage similar to their nationality, having failed ever to come to a full profession of faith, to an awareness of what it means to be a member of the Mystical Body of Christ, are completely lost and helpless when confronted with atheists. They yield, or at least remain silent, when atheists say something incompatible with Christian revelation or that betrays an ignorance of the Church. They are silent because they consider Catholicism to be something only for Catholics, for those who belong to it, as they belong to family or country. It therefore does not apply or refer to “outsiders.” These Catholics have made a mere ghetto of the all-embracing Church which addresses Herself to every human being with the good tidings of the Gospel. Dietrich von Hildebrand "Trojan Horse in the City of God"


The cause of formalism and legalism consists precisely in approaching supernatural truth through natural categories. Even though the supernatural was stressed in the abstract, those responsible for ossification in the Church retained a way of thinking and acting that was secular. The moment they left the abstract plane, their approach to religion breathed only a secular atmosphere which could not sustain authentic Christian revelation. Absent was the breath of Christ, the epiphany of God; absent was the perfume of holiness, the splendor of the supernatural, all so gloriously present in the saints and homines religiosi to whom we have referred. This lack drains life from religion, creates a Catholic ghetto, and deprives the message of Christ of its irresistible power. Dietrich von Hildebrand "Trojan Horse in the City of God"


It must certainly be admitted that priests have, at times, scandalized people because of their religious mediocrity. Oftentimes, they were harmless bourgeois whose personalities never breathed a religious atmosphere. Sometimes they were filled with suspicion against every sort of élan. They oversimplified all questions. They were incapable of understanding the message of God contained in great art and in other great natural works of man. These were regrettable features, indeed, of the practical life of the Church. But the way to overcome them is certainly not to encourage priests to fall into another extreme by abandoning their former narrowness for indiscriminate ravings about secular crudities or for a taste insensitive to vulgarity. This is to flee from one mediocrity to another. The progressives tend to believe that narrowness is the only kind of mediocrity. They forget that being blind to those things which are antagonistic to true greatness and true culture and lavishing enthusiasm on shallow worldliness are expressions of a more blatant mediocrity and are even more incompatible with religion. Dietrich von Hildebrand "Trojan Horse in the City of God"



Također, von Hildebrand naglašava da je religijski pluralizam, kojeg danas ne manjka među deklariranim katolicima, čisto zlo.


Insofar as cultures are concerned, multiplicity has a value, just as does the pluralism of national characters. When, however, it comes to metaphysical or ethical truth -- and especially when it comes to religion -- any pluralism is an evil. Evil, too, are the many fluctuations in the life of religion that occur in history. Unlike cultural pluralism, religious pluralism is in no way a sign of life, but rather a symptom of human fraility and insufficiency. Great metaphysical and ethical truths, and the true religion itself, are destined to take root among men. Here the 'oughtness' of assuming social reality gives to their aliveness a special significance. It represents a descending of Christ into the soul of the individual person and the erecting of His Kingdom in the interpersonal sphere. It is the dimension of Christ's victory that He predicted in saying: 'Where two or three are gathered together in my name, I am in the midst of them.' To supplant truth in its transcendent existence with a merely social reality is to imprison man and history in a desolate immanentism. On the other hand, the incarnation of transcendent truth in man and history represents the victory of transcendence over the purely immanent. Dietrich von Hildebrand "Trojan Horse in the City of God"


Pa onda još ta Satanska nepokornost današnjih katolika, nepokornost Bogu, a ni Crkvi;


Satanic pride refuses all submission as such. Apart from his antagonism toward the world of values and its serene harmony, the maniac of pride repudiates all submission as such; his non serviam is meant to challenge any kind of authority; he would bow neither to man nor to God. Dietrich von Hildebrand "Transformation in Christ"

Sve šta si spomenuo, sve to mori Crkvu. Ljudi su jednostavno takvi, želi misliti svojom glavom, žele sami "krojiti" dobro i zlo, istinu i laž, žele sami sebi biti autoritet.

Samuel napisao:
Tako da me doista pomalo čudno smeta taj udar na tradiciju i gledanje kroz prste onima koji pokušavaju biti milosrdniji od samog Boga, pa do toga da budu moderniji i od samih sekularista.

To jest istina. Ovi, neću ih nazvati "modernisti", nego bolje rečeno nju ejđ- sekularni katolici, jedva čekaju da se udari po tradicionalistima, jer su za njih i tzv. "modernisti" preveliki tradicionalisti. Ako me razumiš.


Samuel napisao:
Modernizam i preskakanje i izvrtanje pravila je nevjerovatan!! Evo imao sam situaciju u župi gdje je odjednom časna počela pričešćivati da pričest traje ni pet minuta, pa mi to nekako čudno i provjerim malo i dođem do ovoga:
158. Izvanredni djelitelj svete Pričesti smije Pričest dijeliti samo onda kad nema svećenika ili đakona, kad je svećenik uslijed bolesti, poodmakle starosti ili nekoga drugog razloga spriječen, te ako je broj vjernika koji pristupaju Pričesti tako velik da bi se slavlje Mise previše odužilo. Isto je potrebno shvatiti tako da kratko produženje prema mjesnim navikama i običajima nije dostatan razlog.
Kongregacije za bogoštovlje i disciplinu sakramenata Redemptionis Sacramentum.
I ajd ti sada nešto reci! Pa ćeš ispasti svakakav, neki kruti tradicionalist koji je neposlušan ili što već ili mrgud bez ljubavi!
Ili kod pjevanja gdje se stalo preskaće ili izvrtava Agnus Dei i Jaganjče Božji!!
Kako mi kćer prvopričenica reče, da nikako ne može izmoliti molitvu poslije pričesti jer ju smetaju pjesme (svakakve) dok traje pričest i malo poslije, jer to doista izbacuje i remeti koncetraciju!! Nema svetog pjevanja i tišine, sve nekako da bude što zanimljivije na opipljiv način!
Pa do pričešćivanja, sad kad su izmuzili neprestanim mantranjem kako je pričest na ruku dopušten! OK, iako je i to izvanredan način (sad je skoro pa pravilo) ali da vidiš kako sve ljudi uzimaju Hostiju,pa to je strašno, ko da uzimaju punicino otpusno pismo iz bolnice !!
Nema više desna ruka ispod lijeve i stavljanja Hostije pred svečenikom!

Tu Ratzinger i Romano Guardini upozoravaju, ali tko sluša?


Za život Crkve hitno je potrebna obnova liturgijske svijesti, liturgijsko pomirenje koje će ponovno priznati jedinstvo povijesti liturgije, koje Drugi vatikanski sabor neće shvaćati kao lom nego kao stupanj razvoja. Uvjeren sam da se kriza Crkve kroz koju danas prolazimo uvelike temelji na raspadu liturgije koju se ponekad čak shvaća ‘etsi Deus non daretur’: da joj više uopće nije važno postoji li Bog, govori li nam i uslišava li nas. Ako se, pak, u liturgiji više ne pojavljuje zajedništvo vjere, jedinstvo Crkve i njezine povijesti koje obuhvaća cijeli svijet… gdje će se Crkva još pojavljivati u svojoj duhovnoj biti? Tada zajednica slavi samu sebe, a to se ne isplati… Stoga nam je potreban novi liturgijski pokret koji će oživotvoriti istinsku baštinu Drugoga vatikanskog sabora. Joseph Ratzinger "Moj život"

Liturgija poslije koncila ponekad ispada smiješna, reklo bi se- običan cirkus. Ali za to nije kriv koncil, nego ljudi. Jer, koliko god da tražio po dokumentima koncila, nigde nisam pronašao tekst u kojem bi koncil spominjao da se može od mise praviti cirkus.


Liturgija nije šou, predstava za koju su potrebni genijalni redatelji i talentirani glumci. Liturgija ne živi od simpatičnih ‘iznenađenja’, od toga da nekome ‘omili’, već od svečanog ponavljanja. Ne treba izražavati aktualnost i prolaznost, već otajstvo Svetoga. Mnogi su mislili i govorili da liturgija mora biti ‘učinjena’ od cijele zajednice, da bi bila doista njezina. Takav pogled je doveo do mjerenja ‘uspjeha’ terminima uspješne spektakularnosti, zabave. Na ovaj način izgubila se liturgijska vlastitost koja ne proizlazi iz onoga što mi činimo već iz činjenice da se ovdje događa Nešto što mi zajedno ne možemo učiniti. U liturgiji djeluje sila, moć koji ni cijela Crkva ne može dati. Ono što se ovdje manifestira u potpunosti je Drugačije od onoga što po zajednici (koja, dakle, nije gospodarica nego sluškinja, puko sredstvo) dolazi do nas. Joseph Ratzinger "Razgovor o vjeri"



It cannot, however, be denied that great difficulties lie in the question of the adaptability of the liturgy to every individual, and more especially to the modern man. The latter wants to find in prayer--particularly if he is of an independent turn of mind--the direct expression of his spiritual condition. Yet in the liturgy he is expected to accept, as the mouthpiece of his inner life, a system of ideas, prayer and action, which is too highly generalized, and, as it were, unsuited to him. It strikes him as being formal and almost meaningless. He is especially sensible of this when he compares the liturgy with the natural outpourings of spontaneous prayer. Liturgical formulas, unlike the language of a person who is spiritually congenial, are not to be grasped straightway without any further mental exertion on the listener's part; liturgical actions have not the same direct appeal as, say, the involuntary movement of understanding on the part of someone who is sympathetic by reason of circumstances and disposition; the emotional impulses of the liturgy do not so readily find an echo as does the spontaneous utterance of the soul. These clear-cut formulas are liable to grate more particularly upon the modern man, so intensely sensitive in everything which affects his scheme of life, who looks for a touch of nature everywhere and listens so attentively for the personal note. He easily tends to consider the idiom of the liturgy as artificial, and its ritual as purely formal. Consequently he will often take refuge in forms of prayer and devotional practices whose spiritual value is far inferior to that of the liturgy, but which seem to have one advantage over the latter--that of contemporary, or, at any rate, of congenial origin. Romano Guardini ""The Spirit of the Liturgy"

Samuel napisao:
Ali naprimjer, ovo kad sam pogledao, šta govore ovi predavači sa teologije unatoš učiteljstvu i nauku, e tu sam ostao PAFFFF!!!!!
http://vimeo.com/99413645
Pogotovo na kraju kada kaže dotični Grbac kako bi volio vidjeti tko bi to uskratio pričest osobi koja živi u grijehu bluda (ponovno civilno vjnečanoj), dok se Šuljić nadoveže sa zgražanjem i osudom kako je on vidio nadbiskupa kako je odbio pričestiti osobu u tom grijehu!! Pa se zajedno zgražaju, sa facom punom nekakvog svog "milosrđa"!!

Ova dva mi izgledaju kao dva šarlatana. Ne vjerujem da će papa Franjo popustiti ni za milimetar po tom pitanju, ako se ipak dogodi promjena, spreman sam je pokorno i bez preispitivanja prihvatiti, bez obzira kakva ta promjena bila.

_________________
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you, wo wo wo.


Vrh
 Profil  
Citiraj  
 Naslov: Re: Ateizam
PostPostano: 01 lis 2014 19:40 
Odsutan
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Avatar korisnika

Pridružen: 10 lip 2008 20:55
Postovi: 3731
Lokacija: Santa Fe (New Mexico)
Podijelio: 0 zahvala
Zahvaljeno je: 49 zahvala
Da stavim još koje slovo po pitanju pravih i lažnih ateista;


The case of true atheism is totally different. If a man really denies in his heart the existence of God, not because he confuses Him with a figment of his imagination, but because he refuses to allow the existence of that same God Who is the object of faith and of right reason and Whose authentic idea he grasps, and misuses, then, through an act of his intellect in which he commits his own person explicitly and consciously, that man makes it impossible for himself to take God as the end of his existence and his action. Doubtless he loves God ontologically, as does every creature, however sinful, since every effort and every operation tends to some good (even though the operation is itself sinful) and therefore to God to the same extent. But the real atheist cannot, even unconsciously, choose God as the end of his life, and love Him above all things efficaciously. Jacques Maritain "The Range of Reason"

_________________
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you, wo wo wo.


Vrh
 Profil  
Citiraj  
 Naslov: Re: Ateizam
PostPostano: 05 lis 2014 09:43 
Odsutan
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Avatar korisnika

Pridružen: 10 lip 2008 20:55
Postovi: 3731
Lokacija: Santa Fe (New Mexico)
Podijelio: 0 zahvala
Zahvaljeno je: 49 zahvala
The act of true atheism performed in the soul is indeed a lethal obstacle to the inner dynamics and immanent dialectic of the first act of freedom in its process of choosing the good; this act stops or turns aside the impulse by which the will, in tending toward the moral good (bonum honestum), tends indivisibly toward the separate Good. When he deliberates about himself such a real atheist is able to ordain his action and his existence toward the moral good, but then either he receives the grace of conversion and will cease to be an atheist, or else he ordains his life toward a concept which he believes to be that of the moral good but which is not really that, being a pseudo-moral-good, bonum honestum taken as excluding God, and thus it is toward a corpse or an idol of moral good that he is ordaining his life. He has killed the moral good by shattering and destroying the relationship with the Separate Good which it essentially implies. Moral good, duty, virtue inevitably become demands of his own perfection viewed as an absolute center, or a desolate rite of his own grandeur -- or a total submission of himself to the sweet will of deified Becoming; and thus moral good, duty, virtue lose their true nature. The fact remains that God knows infinitely better than he does, God alone fully and truly knows whether that man is really an atheist, just as He alone knows fully and truly whether a man really has faith and charity. Jacques Maritain "The Range of Reason"

_________________
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you, wo wo wo.


Vrh
 Profil  
Citiraj  
 Naslov: Re: Ateizam
PostPostano: 09 lis 2014 19:54 
Odsutan
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Avatar korisnika

Pridružen: 10 lip 2008 20:55
Postovi: 3731
Lokacija: Santa Fe (New Mexico)
Podijelio: 0 zahvala
Zahvaljeno je: 49 zahvala
A question arises for the honest, open-minded, truth-seeking fallibilist: Is there an idea of God that enhances the otherwise atheistic picture of reality, one that refuses to attribute hyperbolic properties to God such as omniscience and omnipotence insofar as these properties are understood strictly and literally? Can theism “come of age” as Dietrich Bonhoeffer urges and no longer believe in a transcendent realm of the divine, refusing to seek refuge in orthodox Christian dogma in order to attempt to dodge genuine and legitimate philosophical questions about the problem of God? Can the debate about God be revisited without many orthodox Christian theists demanding a supreme sacrifi cium intellectus of those who accept the claim: “God exists”? And can the debate take place without the underlying empirical influences of a certain brand of analytical philosophy going unchallenged and having an undue influence on the outcome of our reasoning about God? These questions are vital in that centuries of debate about the problem of God have issued numerous credible objections to the traditional Christian conception of God. From the concepts of divine goodness, power and knowledge, to the natural theological ontological, cosmological and teleological arguments for God’s existence to the arguments from religious experience and morality, each of these notions and arguments have met with formidable challenges so much so that the very idea of God is rightly considered to be an essentially contested concept. But does it follow from this that “the time has come for theology openly and fully to confront the death of God”? J. Angelo Corlett "The Errors of Atheism"

_________________
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you, wo wo wo.


Vrh
 Profil  
Citiraj  
 Naslov: Re: Ateizam
PostPostano: 12 lis 2014 07:48 
Odsutan
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Avatar korisnika

Pridružen: 10 lip 2008 20:55
Postovi: 3731
Lokacija: Santa Fe (New Mexico)
Podijelio: 0 zahvala
Zahvaljeno je: 49 zahvala
Is God Dead?


Besides erring in the form of a kind of “presentism” in its “immolation of history,” radical theology’s statement that “God is dead” is peculiarly ambiguous. First, it might mean that, sociologically speaking, there is no idea of God. But this implies the denial of an obvious fact of most, if not all, societies, namely, that some idea of God is alive and well in influencing several people in this or that way. Second, it might mean that “God is dead” in the sense that God is no longer alive for people. While this claim seems to make some sense by pointing to the utter discouragement that many people experience when facing problems in the world, wondering where God is to make meaning of it all, strictly speaking the claim makes no sense. The reason for this is that any being worthy of the name “God” cannot die, as by definition God is, among other things, everlasting. Thus something else other than God must be dead, but not God, if in fact God ever existed in the first place. Third, “God is dead” might have the intended meaning that, say, the orthodox Christian notion of God is no longer viable in light of the knowledge of our times. Thus the concept of God is no longer plausible because of our enlightened situation. But strictly speaking, it makes no sense to say that “God is dead” in this sense either. For if the orthodox Christian idea of God is incoherent, then this implies that that very conception of God is implausible. But this just implies that that notion of God has no referent, which implies that there never was a God corresponding to that idea. But then it might be asked how such a God could be dead when She never existed in the first place? What the death of God theologian or philosopher (such as Friedrich Nietzsche) is entitled to proclaim here is that there has been a set of discoveries over time that reveal to the reasonable and informed person that it is not the case that God exists, assuming that what is under discussion is an orthodox Christian notion of God. The foregoing suggests that the question of meaning (what we mean when we engage in God-talk) is intimately related to the question of God’s existence. I shall not attempt to dissect these questions, but instead address the problem of God’s existence. But in doing so, I recognize that this question implies questions of what we mean by “God.” Even more important, the question of the existence of God is really one of how we ought to think of God, should God exist. So the problem of God is a deeply normative question insofar as meaning is concerned. What exactly is God? J. Angelo Corlett "The Errors of Atheism"

_________________
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you, wo wo wo.


Vrh
 Profil  
Citiraj  
 Naslov: Re: Ateizam
PostPostano: 30 stu 2014 21:08 
Odsutan
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Avatar korisnika

Pridružen: 10 lip 2008 20:55
Postovi: 3731
Lokacija: Santa Fe (New Mexico)
Podijelio: 0 zahvala
Zahvaljeno je: 49 zahvala
THE CHALLENGE FROM A SECULARIZED WORLD


The confession that ‘Jesus is the Christ’ is the answer to the question of salvation and redemption. That question was widespread at the time of Jesus. Expectations of salvation were universal among Jews and pagans then. In the age of Augustus those expectations crystallized in hope for a kingdom of freedom and justice. In his famous fourth eclogue, Vergil expresses that longing most poignantly. The new realm of peace and justice is expected in the birth of a child. There is no mention of who is meant by the child. Probably Vergil was not thinking of any specific child; instead ‘child’ was a symbol of salvation and nothing more. Similar prognostications of salvation are to be found in Judaism. The history of Palestinian Judaism at the time was a history of blood and tears. The apocalyptics reacted to the inward and outward stress of circumstances with visions of the future filled with expectation of the coming of a heavenly kingdom of God. The Zealots on the other hand carried on a kind of guerrilla war against the heathen powers – the occupation troops – and tried by force of arms to establish the Kingdom of God as an earthly theocracy. The primitive Christian proclamation of Jesus the Christ (that is, the redeemer and liberator sent by God) could be taken then as a direct answer to the question of the age. The question, ‘Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?’ (Mt 11.3) was to be heard everywhere. But what about that same question today? Is the problem of salvation and redemption still an issue for us now? How do we experience the Christ news as a saving and liberating answer? Does it really mean anything to us? The contemporary world is often described as secularized. Terms like ‘secularization’, ‘desacralization’, ‘demythologization’ and even ‘de-ideologization’ are used as magic amulets or universal terms for the entire presentday situation. But quite diverse phenomena can be concealed in portmanteau words of this kind. In a tentative, still very general, way we can say, however, that in the process of secularization man and society escape the tutelage of models of thought and behavour with a Christian and religious emphasis. Man wants to assess the world and treat it in a worldly way. He wants to reach a rational insight into the immanent objective structures of politics, economics, science, and so on, and to orientate his activity accordingly. The ‘absolute’ and ultimate questions which cannot be solved in this way are largely counted as meaningless and as best set aside in favour of the soluble problems which – so it is claimed – accord with actual needs. Walter Kasper "Jesus the Christ"

_________________
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you, wo wo wo.


Vrh
 Profil  
Citiraj  
 Naslov: Re: Ateizam
PostPostano: 01 pro 2014 20:16 
Odsutan
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Avatar korisnika

Pridružen: 10 lip 2008 20:55
Postovi: 3731
Lokacija: Santa Fe (New Mexico)
Podijelio: 0 zahvala
Zahvaljeno je: 49 zahvala
The modern secularization process is to be understood only against the background of the basic principle of modern thought: the principle of subjectivity. Subjectivity means that man posits himself as the starting-point and measure for understanding reality as a whole. It is not to be confused with subjectivism – which might be defined as an obdurate insistence of the individual subject on his limited perspective and on his special interests. Subjectivity is not a matter of that particular, but of a wholly universal, perspective. This so-called anthropological turning-point began, after the preliminaries of mysticism and Nicholas of Cusa, with the Cartesian cogito ergo sum. From that point on, man no longer understood himself in terms of the total context of a reality encompassing him and determining his notions of measure and order. Instead he himself became the reference-point of reality. Where man makes himself the lord of reality in that way, reality becomes a mere object to be comprehended through the sciences and controlled by technology. Of course it still contains a mass of unsolved problems, but no real mysteries. Man believes that he is in the process of increasingly understanding the real causes of things, and that he is coming more and more to master and control them. God is dispensable as a cognitive and working hypothesis, and the world is demythologized and desacralized. The demythization of the objective world naturally results in the deobjectifi cation of the image of God and of religious ideas. The Enlightenment and Romanticism, natural science and mysticism in the modern era, have often been but the two aspects of a single movement. (It would be naive to say that the problems posed by the secularization process of modern times are going to be resolved by the present – however fortunate – ‘religious wave’). Behind this modern development there is ultimately the emotive phenomenon of freedom and of liberation from objective pressures. Emancipation is therefore a kind of epochal catchword for our contemporary experience of reality, and an historico-philosophical category used to characterize the processes of enlightenment and liberation in the modern era (Metz). But what exactly does that mean? Walter Kasper "Jesus the Christ"

_________________
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you, wo wo wo.


Vrh
 Profil  
Citiraj  
 Naslov: Re: Ateizam
PostPostano: 07 pro 2014 10:42 
Odsutan
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Avatar korisnika

Pridružen: 10 lip 2008 20:55
Postovi: 3731
Lokacija: Santa Fe (New Mexico)
Podijelio: 0 zahvala
Zahvaljeno je: 49 zahvala
THE DEMYTHOLOGIZATION OF BELIEF IN CHRIST


When human freedom and maturity become the dominant midpoint and criterion of thought, traditional religious ideas and convictions must appear mythological. The traditional faith in Jesus Christ has also incurred the suspicion of being mythological. Can we honestly and sincerely continue to hold and pass on the message that God came down from heaven, assumed human form, was born of a virgin, walked about working miracles, descended to the dead after his death, rose again on the third day, was exalted to the right hand of God, and now is present and effective from heaven through the Spirit in the proclamation and sacraments of the Church? Surely all that is the language and substance of an out-of-date mythic world-view? Surely, out of intellectual honesty and for the sake of a more genuine idea of God, we have to demythologize the whole thing? That question cannot be answered if we do not first make clear what we mean by mythology and demythologization. I shall restrict myself here to the understanding of myth and mythology predominant in the history of religions, or comparative religious studies, and in the associated theology of demythologization. According to that view, myth is the form of understanding proper to an out-of-date epoch of human history: the primitive era, or childhood, of mankind. In that epoch, man was not yet aware of the real causes of things, and therefore he saw supramundane and divine powers at work everywhere in the world and in history. Mythology is accordingly the mode of thought and imagination which understands the divine in a worldly form, and the worldly in a divine form. God is the gap-filler, the deus ex machina, who replaces natural causes with miraculous and supernatural interventions. The divine and the mundane are intermingled and form a whole, the one cosmos. The divine is so to speak the numinous dimension of depth in the world. It can be experienced everywhere and directly in everything. All reality can become a symbol in which the divine can be experienced. The demythologization programme tries to accord with man’s changed understanding of reality. But the intention behind demythologization is not, as the word seems at fi rst to imply, a process of elimination; it is interpretation. Its essential concern is positive, not negative. Demythologizers want to keep the remaining objective core which was present as a mythological cypher in the traditional profession of faith. They want to reveal the lasting content and intention in a way appropriate to the modern mind. Walter Kasper "Jesus the Christ"

_________________
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you, wo wo wo.


Vrh
 Profil  
Citiraj  
 Naslov: Re: Ateizam
PostPostano: 08 pro 2014 20:38 
Odsutan
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Korisnik s preko 1000 postova
Avatar korisnika

Pridružen: 10 lip 2008 20:55
Postovi: 3731
Lokacija: Santa Fe (New Mexico)
Podijelio: 0 zahvala
Zahvaljeno je: 49 zahvala
The demythologization project is not new. It was already apparent among the English Deists. Some of them (Locke for instance) wanted a rational Christianity, and some a religion without mystery (Toland). Spinoza anticipated in essence the entire modern debate. On the basis of his panentheistic philosophy, he is convinced that the divine wisdom has taken a human form in Christ. But the divine wisdom shows itself in Christ only so that it stands out with exceptional clarity against nature and the human spirit. Scripture teaches nothing that offends against reason. Its authority does not concern questions of truth but questions of conversion; of alteration of a way of life and of virtue – what we would call practice. Significantly, Spinoza entitled his work Tractatus theologico-politicus. Similarly, though from other premisses, Kant wished to see all statuary laws and all positive historical ecclesiastical belief as a means and vehicle for the encouragement and extension of a religion of morality. Otherwise, in his view, it was no more than superstition and foolish subservience, religious fanaticism, and idol worship. The first major discussion of the problem of mythology in Christology occurred, however, when D.F. Strauss published his epoch-making two-volume Life of Jesus, and explained faith in Christ as the unintentional outcome of a myth in literary form. He too wished to make the religion of Christ a religion of humanity. For ‘. .. the humanity is the union of the two natures, the God become man, the infinite God self-emptied to the point of infinity, and the finite Spirit remembering his infinity . . .’ ‘Conceived in an individual, a Godman, the qualities and functions which the teaching of the Church ascribes to Christ contradict one another . . .’ Nevertheless, Strauss maintained that there was an historical core to the Christ-event. He did not hold the untenable thesis which A. Drews proposed at the turn of the century with something approaching missionary fervour. Drews maintained that Jesus had been a myth and had never really existed. Similarly, for B. Bauer and A. Kalthoff, Jesus was only a symbol of the ideas of the early Church. The discussion of ‘these contraband pathways to the heights of thought’ was resumed by E. Troeltsch and W. Bousset. For them Jesus is symbolic of the cult of the early Church. Of course a cultic symbol is only effectual and effective if there is a real man behind it. But historical facts serve Troeltsch only ‘for illustration and not for demonstration’. Walter Kasper "Jesus the Christ"

_________________
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
A nation turns its lonely eyes to you, wo wo wo.


Vrh
 Profil  
Citiraj  
Prikaz prethodnih postova:  Sortiraj po  
Započni novu temu Odgovori  [ 706 post(ov)a ]  Idi na stranu Prethodni  1 ... 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71  Sljedeće

Vrijeme na UTC [LJV]


Tko je online

Nema registriranih korisnika pregledava forum i 1 gost


Ne možeš započinjati nove teme.
Ne možeš odgovarati na postove.
Ne možeš uređivati svoje postove.
Ne možeš izbrisati svoje postove.
Ne možeš postati privitke.

Traži prema:
Idi na:  
Pokreće phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
phpbb.com.hr