[lit-ideas] Re: Kataphatic, Negative and Apophatic Theology

From: JulieReneB@xxxxxxx
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 13:32:44 EDT

Back to Weil -- Gravity & Grace is more ponderings on mysticism than  
theology.
 
Julie Krueger
========Original  Message========     Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: Kataphatic, 
Negative and Apophatic  Theology  Date: 8/6/2004 12:21:53 PM Central Daylight 
Time  
From: _Scribe1865@xxxxxxxx (mailto:Scribe1865@xxxxxxx)   To: 
_lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)   Sent on:    
In a message dated 8/6/2004 9:01:34 AM Eastern  Daylight Time, 
phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
To remain solely with the  via negativa is to eventually end up in the 
difficult spot of having to  explain how one can make statements about what 
'stands 
outside' that which  makes statements possible. 
_____
A philosopher or theologian may have to  explain how such statements are 
possible, but does an individual using via  negativa as a spiritual exercise?

The need to explain distinguishes  between theologian and mystic isn't it? 

By striving for coherent  explanation as a measure of transcendental truth, 
doesn't one unnecessarily  restrict the object of one's examination? Using 
the 
metaphor of the Blind  Men and the Elephant, isn't coherent explanation like 
describing the  elephant (being) in terms of its right front leg (logical  
consistency)?


------------------------------------------------------------------
To  change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest  on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html


------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

[lit-ideas] Re: Kataphatic, Negative and Apophatic Theology

Other related posts: