marcel proust: the real act of discovery consists not in finding new lands but in seeing with new eyes."
i was thinking about paradigm, perpspective, frames and something i heard george lakoff say a weekend ago at a bookstore...in the studies about linguistics and how the mind works from a very physical understanding the perspective we maintain draw increasing power by the repitition. the more we hear what we believe the more we believe it.
his emphasis made me think of the physical and the spiritual...believers add the spiritual as just as real or maybe more real but just as real. in the kingdom both the spiritual and physical are real.
back to where i was going...this makes any kind of conversion seem ominous. who listens to the voice they don't agree with or the idea that seems so unusual or counterintuitive that it just doesn't seem right. what does it take for a paradigm to shift? what does it take to convert?
t. kuhn suggests that the shift might happen when the old perspective cannot answer the question for us. when the old paradigm cannot account for the evidence it is possible for something to change...something that better answers the questions.
i may be off base but i am wondering how anyone can believe in grace. why would anyone believe this when the evidence we can see would not reinforce? this idea of saved by grace, unconditional love, the sufficiency of a savior to create new life...how does conversion take place?
if the cross and empty tomb are more than legend do they answer the questions better than the latest self help book...
what door would we walk through in our journey to enter new life and find ourselves running into an adventure called faith?
do i have to experience any of it ahead of time to get it?
can it all be brand new?
can we really choose?
why do we believe what we believe?
do we have any idea of what we are getting into?
why do we risk faith?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment