In the last few weeks, I have been thinking about the relationship between the abstract and the concrete. Both are necessary.
Hearing versus living through a story
Hearing about a story, it sometimes seems unbelievable. We would never take part in human sacrifices of the Aztecs. We could never sit and watch Roman Gladiator plays because of their brutality. Something could never happen to us. It seems too absurd, or farfetched.
But then there’s the concrete, when we’d live in those times, we would probably participate. This is because concrete reality is different from the abstract story. This might not take away from the fact that the story still has some semblances to the original event. You might still feel the joy of the victory when it is told, but less. You might still feel sadness when hearing about the death of a person.
Truth as words, or truth as a person
Truth is an encounter. One feels truth in a certain way. The platonists made truth something abstract, in effect taking away from the fullness of it.
Christian art contains faces of holiness, not abstract diagrams.
Christ came as a human. While still being a God.
Truth is living, and has a face.
Thanks for the post.
Truth is someone whom we build a relationship with. It makes us feel secure and safe. A life without knowing Truth in a relational way, is like living in a confusing maze.
Have people tried using a new reading app called CommonPlace? I assume everyone here is an erudite reader and the app is light years better than Goodreads. It enables readers to save their favorite quotes and annotations to then post to a twitter / reddit style architecture by which you can follow friends and family and join groups (bible studies, book clubs, etc). Below is a link if people want to check it out.
Thought I would share, cheers.!