Spirituality
08 Nov 14
Originally posted by bbarrYes, it makes sense. And I understand the connection between character traits, personal relationships, memories, etc. and you. But I'm saying there is an aspect of you that does not change, and cannot change and is always you. The you who was self aware and aware of his surroundings at the age of 4 is the same you who is reading this now... and it is this essential you I have apparently failed to explain.
Sorry for the delayed response, I appreciate your patience. Thanksgiving went off without a hitch, in-laws were happy, all is good. Hope your holiday was great!
First, I want to reiterate that questions of personal identity are some of the most challenging issues in philosophy, cutting across metaphysics, philosophy of mind and ethics. An account of perso ...[text shortened]... unter-example would actually show God doesn’t exist.
Does this line of argument make sense?
30 Nov 14
1 edit
Originally posted by bbarrThis might be a better way of explaining what I mean:
Sorry for the delayed response, I appreciate your patience. Thanksgiving went off without a hitch, in-laws were happy, all is good. Hope your holiday was great!
First, I want to reiterate that questions of personal identity are some of the most challenging issues in philosophy, cutting across metaphysics, philosophy of mind and ethics. An account of perso ...[text shortened]... unter-example would actually show God doesn’t exist.
Does this line of argument make sense?
your identity
your character traits
your value systems
your personal relationships
your memories
What these all have in common is the word "your". So instead of saying the 'essential' you let's call it the central you. All of these traits and aspects of personality and memories are attached to a central you. This is more of a mechanical approach to what I mean, but it still works and means the same thing.
So from the age of 4 until now what has changed? Some of it changes and some of it is fixed (nurture and nature) but at the core it's all connected to something I'm calling you. When thinking of myself I call it me... same difference. Sometimes words get in the way, but in spite of the wording your you isn't the same as my me. I'm not self aware of you or aware of your surroundings, and you are not self aware of me or aware of my surroundings.
If you look at this ethereal (and difficult to pinpoint) 'you' as being your lump of clay, then your lump of clay can be influenced and shaped but it never stops being your lump of clay.
30 Nov 14
Originally posted by lemon limeWhat do you claim is left of "you" if the narrative that envelopes and binds together "your identity, your character traits, your value systems, your personal relationships and your memories" is taken away?
your identity
your character traits
your value systems
your personal relationships
your memories
What these all have in common is the word "your". So instead of saying the 'essential' you let's call it the central you. All of these traits and aspects of personality and memories are attached to a central you.
30 Nov 14
Originally posted by lemon limeDoes this reference to a physical substance like a lump of clay ~ that you say never stops being yours ~ mean you are claiming that the thing that unites "you" is a physical thing or substance like your human body or your brain?
If you look at this as being your lump of clay, then your lump of clay can be influenced and shaped but it never stops being your lump of clay.
Originally posted by bbarrAnyway, something like this account has been in the background, informing the questions I’ve been asking you. My worry has been that the psychological changes we’ll undergo upon our Salvation/Damnation will be so abrupt and significant that they might constitute a break in the chain of our psychological connectedness. But, if so, then personal identity won’t be retained in the afterlife. And if that’s the case, then the afterlife wouldn’t be an afterlife at all, but a new life for a new person. And if that’s the case, then there’s no reason we should care about the afterlife. Further, in the afterlife, this new person will be being rewarded or punished for the actions of some other, previous person. Because that would be unjust, it would constitute a counter-example to God’s supposed moral perfection. But because (I’m assuming, correct me if I’m wrong) you take God to be morally perfect by definition, this counter-example would actually show God doesn’t exist.
Sorry for the delayed response, I appreciate your patience. Thanksgiving went off without a hitch, in-laws were happy, all is good. Hope your holiday was great!
First, I want to reiterate that questions of personal identity are some of the most challenging issues in philosophy, cutting across metaphysics, philosophy of mind and ethics. An account of perso ...[text shortened]... unter-example would actually show God doesn’t exist.
Does this line of argument make sense?
Does this line of argument make sense?
I should probably explain what I meant when I said yes, it makes sense. It means I understood your argument. But since I have a different idea of what (or rather who) goes on to their reward or punishment then I have no reason to wonder if God is just or not. In any event, I don't think pondering over this can prove or disprove his existence.
30 Nov 14
Originally posted by lemon limeSeeing as the personal "narrative" we each have is ours and ours alone and cannot be accessed or adopted or duplicated by any other individual, why don't you think these attributes of this unique 'common thread/narrative' that defines each one of us ~ embodying a self awareness that only you can have and that makes you different and separate from me ~ provide us with as good an explanation or description of our personhood as any other?
Some of it changes and some of it is fixed (nurture and nature) but at the core it's all connected to something I'm calling you When thinking of myself I call it me... same difference. Sometimes words get in the way, but in spite of the wording your you isn't the same as my me. I'm not self aware of you and your surroundings, and you are not self aware of me and my surroundings.
Originally posted by lemon limeOk, good. I think we're getting somewhere. Below, I'm going to try and summarize your view. But I could be misunderstanding your view, so please correct me if my summary is inaccurate.
This might be a better way of explaining what I mean:
your identity
your character traits
your value systems
your personal relationships
your memories
What these all have in common is the word "your". So instead of saying the 'essential' you let's call it the central you. All of these traits and aspects of personality and memories are attached t ...[text shortened]... our lump of clay can be influenced and shaped but it never stops being your lump of clay.
According to your view, there is some essential aspect to each of us that remains unchanged over time. Moreover, this essential aspect is what allows us to persist as the same person through time; it is the basis of our personal identity. It's neither our bodies nor any of our psychological properties or characteristics. These may change, yet we remain the same persons. What we are, at bottom, are the subjects of our psychological properties or characteristics. We are, each of us, unique and persisting subjectivities.
Is this your view?
If so, then it seems to follow that we would remain ourselves even if everything about us; all our psychological properties and characteristics, radically changed. My deepest commitments and values could change, my character traits could change, I could forget everyone and everything that ever mattered to me and yet, on this account, remain the same person.
What you've done, in effect, is to render the basis of my personal identity completely empty of content. You have so sharply distinguished between what I am essentially and my psychology that none of what I take to be me remains. It seems to follow that nothing really distinguishes me from anybody else. Who am I essentially? I am merely a persistent consciousness. Who are you essentially? Another persistent consciousness.
But now here's a kind of crazy thought experiment. Suppose that God himself were to play a game of "Musical Souls". Suppose he takes only that which is essentially me and switches it for only that which is essentially you. Since, on your view, we are not essentially any set of our psychological properties or characteristics, all of these would be left behind. But if that's right, then nothing would allow either of us to recognize the switch. That which is essentially me would have all your psychological properties and that which is essentially you would have all of mine. We would each simply go on living the life of the other man as our own, none the wiser.
Are you OK with this implication of your view?
01 Dec 14
1 edit
Originally posted by bbarrWhat you've done, in effect, is to render the basis of my personal identity completely empty of content. You have so sharply distinguished between what I am essentially and my psychology that none of what I take to be me remains. It seems to follow that nothing really distinguishes me from anybody else. Who am I essentially? I am merely a persistent consciousness. Who are you essentially? Another persistent consciousness.
Ok, good. I think we're getting somewhere. Below, I'm going to try and summarize your view. But I could be misunderstanding your view, so please correct me if my summary is inaccurate.
According to your view, there is some essential aspect to each of us that remains unchanged over time. Moreover, this essential aspect is what allows us to persist as the ...[text shortened]... of the other man as our own, none the wiser.
Are you OK with this implication of your view?
This is where we disagree, because I believe you will be aware of yourself just as you are aware of yourself now. You're obviously the same person you were years ago regardless of how you may have changed during that time. But if you only define yourself according to the various traits you have and relationships you've had, and that's all you are, then who is this 'you' who has been with you for all of those years?
I have to admit when you first posed this question it made me laugh, because it sounds like something someone might want to happen when they die. But I really can't imagine how you can become devoid of everything you are to the point that you are no longer you. I have no idea how that could work. I did my own thought experiment, if you can call it that. I imagined a gremlin sitting on my right shoulder and causing me all sorts of problems and grief. I couldn't get rid of him, but I managed to do something so the gremlin would no longer be sitting on my right shoulder and causing me all sorts of problems and grief...
...
I moved him over to the left shoulder.
01 Dec 14
Originally posted by lemon limePerhaps he is the one and only witness to the inaccessible and unduplicable narrative that encapsulates everything he has ever been, done, said and experienced.
But if you only define yourself according to the various traits you have and relationships you've had, and that's all you are, then who is this 'you' who has been with you for all of those years?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Since a picture is worth many words, the profound matter of the transformation of the saved is given to us in "signs". Each sign the Holy Spirit used in Revelation can be pretty much confirmed by plain teaching elsewhere in the Bible.
Transparent stones stand for the believers in eternity. The green of an emerald, for example, is a transparent green. All the precious stones constituting the wall of New Jerusalem are transparent.
This means that when the saved behold each other and the surrounding nations behold the saved, Jesus Christ shines through their personalities as if they are clear and transparent.
"And the foundation of the wall of the city were adorned with every precious stone:
the first foundation was jasper;
the second, saphire;
the third, chalcadony;
the fourth, emerald;
the fifth, sardonyx;
the sixth, sardius;
the seventh, chysolite;
the eighth, beryl;
the ninth, topaz;
the tenth, chrysoprase;
the eleventh, jacinth;
the twelth, amethyst." (Revelation 21:19-20)
The precious stones symbolize the transformed people.
The leading disciple Peter was named a stone. That is what his name means. And the fact that Jesus changed his name signifies that Jesus will change him through regeneration, sanctification, transformation, conformation, resurrection, and glorification.
Natural Simon son of John will be a living stone whose name is changed to Peter. As the leading disciple of Jesus he stands for ALL of the people who are saved by Jesus.
"And Jesus answered and said to him, Blessed are you Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in the havens. And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church." (Matt. 16:17,18)
The changing of Simon Barjona's name to Peter means Christ will change him and all the saved through His salvation. He will be a stone for the building of God's eternal dwelling place in man - the New Jerusalem.
Peter will still be Peter. But he will be so transparent that we will see Jesus Christ manifested in Peter. The same is with everyone who is saved.
Peter reminds the believers that they are all "living stones" to be built up in divine life and divine love into God's living temple.
"Coming to Him [Christ], a living stone, rejected by men but with God chosen and precious,
You yourselves also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house into a holy priesthood to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." (1 Peter 2:4,5)
Transformation leads to building up in oneness.
Transformation also results in transparency.
The personality we were created with transparently manifests the Jesus Christ who lives within the saved.
There is no obliteration of the essential flavor or "color" of the believer.
The opaqueness of the fallen self becomes the transparency of Christ manifested from within.
The entire city of New Jerusalem is as a transparent matter through which God in Christ will radiate out forever.
"And the building work of the wall of the city was pure gold, like clear glass." (Rev. 21:18)
This is Christ manifested in billions of transformed people in a corporate way testifying God's full salvation. The salvation process of Christ living in us is one in which we become clearer and clearer in manifesting the divine life of Jesus within the saved.
As Paul said Christ was being manifested in him more and more thoroughly -
" According to my earnest expectation and hope that in nothing I will be put to shame, but with all boldness, as always, even now Christ will be manifested in my body, whether through life or through death." (Philippians 1:20)
01 Dec 14
Originally posted by sonship... "Transparent stones" ... "There is no obliteration of the essential flavor or "color" of the believer. The opaqueness of the fallen self becomes the transparency of Christ manifested from within."...
Since a picture is worth many words, the profound matter of the transformation of the saved is given to us in [b]"signs". Each sign the Holy Spirit used in Revelation can be pretty much confirmed by plain teaching elsewhere in the Bible.
Transparent stones stand for the believers in eternity. The green of an emerald, for example, is a [i]transp ...[text shortened]... t will be manifested in my body, whether through life or through death." (Philippians 1:20) [/b][/b]
This was an interesting post, sonship. But it comes across as a kind of dystopia.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by FMFThe transformation of the soul is the gaining of the soul.
[b]... "Transparent stones" ... "There is no obliteration of the essential flavor or "color" of the believer. The opaqueness of the fallen self becomes the transparency of Christ manifested from within."...
This was an interesting post, sonship. But it comes across as a kind of dystopia.[/b]
The corrupted self is not the true you is not the true me.
So to submit to the salvation of Jesus Christ is to lose your soul-life that you may FIND IT.
That Jesus comes into us and changes us to reflect Him and manifest Him from within us is to FIND ourselves - to find the true eternal enjoyment of our soul. This paradox is spoken to by Christ in every gospel -
"For whoever wants to save his soul-life shall lose it; but whoever loses his soul-life for My sake shall find it." (Matt. 16:25)
To "save" our soul-life now will lead to us losing it in the end.
To lose our soul-life now allowing Christ to come into us, will end with us finding our true identity as God purposed.
All four gospels record this crucial saying -
"Whoever seeks to preserve his soul-life will lose it, and whoever loses it will preserve it alive." (Luke 17:33)
We were created to manifest the divine life of God through our soul.
To compare to a popular children's tale, look at Pinoccio. The wooden puppet boy got a donkey's ears and tail. He grotesquely also grew a longer and longer nose each time he lied. He became mixed up with a jack ass and ugly with a extended nose representing his lies which came more and more.
At the end the donkey tail and ears were taken and the nose was made normal. Not only so, he became a real live boy. The story has a very happy ending. https://search.yahoo.com/search?p=panocio&ei=UTF-8&fr=moz35
This is an anology. Probably not intended by the author but touching on something of the human predicament. Man, in the fall, became united with God's enemy. The corrupted soul-life is seen as grotesquely damaged in the eyes of our Creator / Redeemer.
First Christ came to manifest the REAL Son. And His salvation saves us from the corrputed Satanification of the human soul and body into the manifestation of the sons of God.
So to be saved in Jesus is journey towards a happy ending of becomming as God originally intended us - sons of the Father - Godmen. He had to pay a tremendous price to redeem us back to God.
Originally posted by sonshipThe entire basis of what you imagine is horrifically pessimistic and misanthropic.
The transformation of the soul is the gaining of the soul.
The corrupted self is not the true you is not the true me.
So to submit to the salvation of Jesus Christ is to lose your soul-life that you may FIND IT.
That Jesus comes into us and changes us to reflect Him and manifest Him from within us is to FIND ourselves - to find the true eternal en ...[text shortened]... ed us - sons of the Father - Godmen. He had to pay a tremendous price to redeem us back to God.