Dad: “Henry, please empty the trash and take it out.”
Henry: “Oh, you are so wise, so strong, and so great. I am just your worthless, stupid son. Your thoughts are not my thoughts. I can never understand what you are saying. Emp…tee… the tra…ashhh? This is a great mystery…”
Peter: “What’s the matter with you? Dad just told you his thoughts. And he is making perfect sense. He is telling you to throw out the garbage. There is the bag. There is the door. Fill that bag with trash and walk outside with it.”
Henry: “Blasphemy! Do you think that the greatness of our father can be explained? I don’t care what you say. For that matter, I don’t even care what he says. He cannot be understood. How dare you bring him down to your level? If I hear you say that Dad makes sense again, I am going to see to it that this family disowns you. You got that? (Screams) I will destroy you! I will kick…you…out!”
Dad: “Son, are you all right? Why don’t you just accept what I say and do what I tell you?”
Henry: “(Screams) Shut up! I am just trying to show you some respect. Don’t worry, Dad. Peter insults you, but I’ll get him. (Sings) Hooowww greeeaaaat thooou arrrrt!”
So Peter takes out the trash. And Dad takes out Henry and puts him in a mental institution.
Henry fits right in, because there nothing makes sense, everything seems to contradict everything else, and everybody is just as confused as he is. Surrounded by contradictions, paradoxes, and antinomies, the thoroughly insane Henry is happy at last.
By Vincent Cheung
www.vincentcheung.com
Samuelmfrost
This is rich. The doctrine of incomprehensibility, which I hold to dearly, does not mean God's ways are ultimately paradoxical or contradictory to logic. “David was a king in Israel” a proposition both God and I know. Incomprehesibility means that God knows all things that can be said about the meaning of the proposition. He knows David thoroughly, eternally. This is usually what is meant when theologians will say “God knows infinitely more.” It does NOT mean that God's knowledge of David is still in process, or that he is still increasing his information about David. It means that he knows David “perfectly” or “absolutely” because he knows him “wholly”. This is the typical way “infinity” is used in the attributes of God. It is not used in the Greek sense.
I have been accused, for example, of “limiting God” to human thinking. But, let's think about this. If infinite procreation is as WE think it is (endless baby making), then who is applying the HUMAN understanding of infinity to what God MUST do? I mean, if we define eternity according to our experiences – human experiences – and then turn around and say, “this is what eternity must be, or else God himself will come to an end”, then who is applying human understanding? However, by saying eternity is a quality of life I know not, then I am saying we CANNOT apply human definitions to this deep mystery. However, I am not imploring paradox in order to do it. It is when humans use their own understanding, their own meanings, that the paradox arises. Eternality is not “infinity” in the human conception of the term. We cannot comprehend eternity. We can utter a few propositions about it, like “eternity is not endless quanititative division” or “eternity is timelessness” but that's about it. We cannot fathom what eternity is aside from a few statements. But, neither do we have to settle for the non sense of paradox.
Samuelmfrost
This is rich. The doctrine of incomprehensibility, which I hold to dearly, does not mean God's ways are ultimately paradoxical or contradictory to logic. “David was a king in Israel” a proposition both God and I know. Incomprehesibility means that God knows all things that can be said about the meaning of the proposition. He knows David thoroughly, eternally. This is usually what is meant when theologians will say “God knows infinitely more.” It does NOT mean that God's knowledge of David is still in process, or that he is still increasing his information about David. It means that he knows David “perfectly” or “absolutely” because he knows him “wholly”. This is the typical way “infinity” is used in the attributes of God. It is not used in the Greek sense.
I have been accused, for example, of “limiting God” to human thinking. But, let's think about this. If infinite procreation is as WE think it is (endless baby making), then who is applying the HUMAN understanding of infinity to what God MUST do? I mean, if we define eternity according to our experiences – human experiences – and then turn around and say, “this is what eternity must be, or else God himself will come to an end”, then who is applying human understanding? However, by saying eternity is a quality of life I know not, then I am saying we CANNOT apply human definitions to this deep mystery. However, I am not imploring paradox in order to do it. It is when humans use their own understanding, their own meanings, that the paradox arises. Eternality is not “infinity” in the human conception of the term. We cannot comprehend eternity. We can utter a few propositions about it, like “eternity is not endless quanititative division” or “eternity is timelessness” but that's about it. We cannot fathom what eternity is aside from a few statements. But, neither do we have to settle for the non sense of paradox.
Samuelmfrost
This is rich. The doctrine of incomprehensibility, which I hold to dearly, does not mean God's ways are ultimately paradoxical or contradictory to logic. “David was a king in Israel” a proposition both God and I know. Incomprehesibility means that God knows all things that can be said about the meaning of the proposition. He knows David thoroughly, eternally. This is usually what is meant when theologians will say “God knows infinitely more.” It does NOT mean that God's knowledge of David is still in process, or that he is still increasing his information about David. It means that he knows David “perfectly” or “absolutely” because he knows him “wholly”. This is the typical way “infinity” is used in the attributes of God. It is not used in the Greek sense.
I have been accused, for example, of “limiting God” to human thinking. But, let's think about this. If infinite procreation is as WE think it is (endless baby making), then who is applying the HUMAN understanding of infinity to what God MUST do? I mean, if we define eternity according to our experiences – human experiences – and then turn around and say, “this is what eternity must be, or else God himself will come to an end”, then who is applying human understanding? However, by saying eternity is a quality of life I know not, then I am saying we CANNOT apply human definitions to this deep mystery. However, I am not imploring paradox in order to do it. It is when humans use their own understanding, their own meanings, that the paradox arises. Eternality is not “infinity” in the human conception of the term. We cannot comprehend eternity. We can utter a few propositions about it, like “eternity is not endless quanititative division” or “eternity is timelessness” but that's about it. We cannot fathom what eternity is aside from a few statements. But, neither do we have to settle for the non sense of paradox.