30 Jan 22
@fmf saidThat may be so, but it's still a poor substitute for the real thing.
The best sci-fi clarifies our perception of our state of being in the present.
I can appreciate though good authors that can spin a story and make the unreal seem real. Reading science fiction and fantasy books are a good way to pass the time in the world of the imagination, but I don't have anymore the time to waste on the mirage of imagination as I did in my youth.
Passing the time in pursuit of the truth based in reality is much more rewarding, and pays dividends that have eternal value rather than a temporal gratification that's here today and gone tomorrow.
@josephw saidWhat constitutes "the real thing" is a matter of subjective personal opinion. And sci-fi does not need to be analyzed in terms of being a "substitute" for anything. It stands on its own. It is not pretending to be some genre that it's not.
That may be so, but it's still a poor substitute for the real thing.
@josephw saidFine. But sci-fi is literature; it can be like a parable or an allegory; the fact that it is imaginative in a different way from a historical drama or a police procedural or a romantic novel is not something that counts against it.
Reading science fiction and fantasy books are a good way to pass the time in the world of the imagination, but I don't have anymore the time to waste on the mirage of imagination as I did in my youth.
If we replace "reading science fiction", above, with "reading literature", then one could be forgiven for thinking that you are happy to be seen as a wee bit of a philistine.
Do you view all of Shakespeare as a "mirage of imagination"? I hope not.
30 Jan 22
@fmf saidJesus isn't pretending to be real either. The fact that he rose from the dead is observed objectively.
What constitutes "the real thing" is a matter of subjective personal opinion. And sci-fi does not need to be analyzed in terms of being a "substitute" for anything. It stands on its own. It is not pretending to be some genre that it's not.
Your subjective opinion notwithstanding.
Jesus supersedes everything. Anything else that one uses as a guide for direction is merely a substitute for the real thing, and your opinion in regards to that is only subjective.
30 Jan 22
@fmf saidYou're quoting me out of context.
Fine. But sci-fi is literature; it can be like a parable or an allegory; the fact that it is imaginative in a different way from a historical drama or a police procedural or a romantic novel is not something that counts against it.
If we replace "reading science fiction", above, with "reading literature", then one could be forgiven for thinking that you are happy to be seen a ...[text shortened]... ee bit of a philistine.
Do you view all of Shakespeare as a "mirage of imagination"? I hope not.
I have absolutely nothing against literature, and certainly not against Shakespeare.
I'm not surprised you missed my point since you're looking for confirmation of your own perspectives.
30 Jan 22
@josephw said"Jesus isn't pretending to be real either. The fact that he rose from the dead is observed objectively."
Jesus isn't pretending to be real either. The fact that he rose from the dead is observed objectively.
Your subjective opinion notwithstanding.
Jesus supersedes everything. Anything else that one uses as a guide for direction is merely a substitute for the real thing, and your opinion in regards to that is only subjective.
Was observed objectively, He appeared to many after He rose, but it was all in the past.
@josephw saidSci-fi is not "a substitute" for Christian scripture.
Jesus supersedes everything. Anything else that one uses as a guide for direction is merely a substitute for the real thing, and your opinion in regards to that is only subjective.
If "Jesus supersedes everything" means your faith permeates your life, fine.
But if "Jesus supersedes everything" means that, for you, there is no topic you can discuss unless you declare that discussing Jesus is more important than discussing that topic, what's the point?
31 Jan 22
@kellyjay saidGood point ~ up to a point!
"Jesus isn't pretending to be real either. The fact that he rose from the dead is observed objectively."
Was observed objectively, He appeared to many after He rose, but it was all in the past.
But, of course, the view that "Jesus having risen from the dead was observed objectively" is a subjective one.
31 Jan 22
@fmf saidNot really; if He was and hundreds saw Him after He rose from the dead, it is a historical factual statement. Like all history, we can, as you point out, believe it or not, some people disbelieve in the moon landing; others reject the holocaust, millions the 2020 Presidential election results, and the list can go on and on. Facts don't require belief to be facts.
Good point ~ up to a point!
But, of course, the view that "Jesus having risen from the dead was observed objectively" is a subjective one.
31 Jan 22
@fmf saidIs someone simply putting a thumbs down on all of your posts? If it's the same person, what a childish thing to do that shows how little they are to you. Not that I'm a big fan of much of what you write, but it does have to be content, not personality that warrants a thumbs up or down, in my subjective opinion, of course. 🙂
Good point ~ up to a point!
But, of course, the view that "Jesus having risen from the dead was observed objectively" is a subjective one.
31 Jan 22
@fmf saidBelieve it, or not the NT scriptures were written as historical documents, not just some text to make people believe.
We have no way of knowing if "hundreds saw Him after He rose from the dead". We have no evidence for those alleged "hundreds" of people.
@kellyjay saidWe did land on the moon. Trump lost the 2020 election. Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead. Three facts, I'd say.
Like all history, we can, as you point out, believe it or not, some people disbelieve in the moon landing; others reject the holocaust, millions the 2020 Presidential election results, and the list can go on and on. Facts don't require belief to be facts.