Meta-narrative

@fmf said
"Meaningless"?

If a "meta-narrative" provides someone with a finished "jigsaw puzzle" or a "complete picture" or a "real picture" or a subjective opinion about the "absoluteness to it all" ~ your expressions, one and all ~ how can it be "meaningless"?

Are you not kind of contradicting yourself?

Or does the "meta-narrative" have to be the same as the one YOU believe in if it is to avoid being "meaningless"?

There is opinion and truth; our opinions can be about things that are false or true.
The truth about the universe that is outside of us is just that outside of us; when
we speak about different things, our opinions of them reside in us, always, but the
truth about them is only as they align with what we are talking about. If we are
talking about a duck only as our words and thoughts accurately speak about the
duck, are we correct. When we leave our accurate speaking about the duck, we are
in error; still, both opinions about the duck reside in us.

God in the meta-narrative is unlike that; He pursues us, He calls us, He reaches
down to us, and unlike our thoughts about ducks, He comes into us. Anyone
who has religion and doesn't have Christ in them has a godless religion; I would
have to say Christianity is no different; it is possible to call one's self a Christian
and not have Christ.

The meta-narrative has God creating the universe and everything in it; there was
a fall when we wanted our way. There is a beginning now and a predicted
end of this universe. There is meaning throughout the whole, while you can, if
possible, speak to these if you can, how it began and why, what is the natural
state of it all now, and what will happen next.

A relative view of the universe doesn't have a meta-narrative; it has opinions.

@kellyjay said
Yeah, my version if it doesn't line up with scripture is meaningless as is yours.

Your version:

- Jesus saves the stated “few” who find the narrow path (Matt 7:4 what you quoted at me several times)

- Satan deceives the rest, I.e. the vast majority (by default)

- Jesus then oversees the burning alive all those all alive for eternity. (Rev 14:10)

This is YOUR version KellyJay ~ make some sense out it!

@kellyjay said
A relative view of the universe doesn't have a meta-narrative; it has opinions.

Your "meta-narrative" is just your opinion too, though, right?

@kellyjay said
God in the meta-narrative is unlike that; He pursues us, He calls us, He reaches
down to us, and unlike our thoughts about ducks, He comes into us. Anyone
who has religion and doesn't have Christ in them has a godless religion; I would
have to say Christianity is no different; it is possible to call one's self a Christian
and not have Christ.

All this stuff you are asserting ~ about how your particular God figure "pursues us, calls us, reaches down to us, and comes into us" etc. ~ is just a set of subjective opinions rooted in your speculations and aspirations, and this is not altered by you slapping the label "meta-narrative" on it.

@kellyjay said
The meta-narrative has God creating the universe and everything in it; there was
a fall when we wanted our way. There is a beginning now and a predicted
end of this universe. There is meaning throughout the whole, while you can, if
possible, speak to these if you can, how it began and why, what is the natural
state of it all now, and what will happen next.

If this "meta-narrative" lends meaning to your life, then so be it.

@fmf said
All this stuff you are asserting ~ about how your particular God figure "pursues us, calls us, reaches down to us, and comes into us" etc. ~ is just a set of subjective opinions rooted in your speculations and aspirations, and this is not altered by you slapping the label "meta-narrative" on it.

Unlike our talking about Him, which only carries on with our opinions being the
author of the universe from the smallest molecule to the grandest galactic object
He can be known. If all you have are opinions about Him, then you have missed
Him. Opinions are all you will ever have about anything; they will be all you ever
hear too, but to experience Him is something that an opinion cannot give you;
only He can.

@kellyjay said
Unlike our talking about Him, which only carries on with our opinions being the
author of the universe from the smallest molecule to the grandest galactic object
He can be known.

This is an article of faith for you and therefore just a subjective opinion.

@kellyjay said
Opinions are all you will ever have about anything; they will be all you ever
hear too, but to experience Him is something that an opinion cannot give you;
only He can.

Opinions are all you have about supernatural beings and phenomena, KellyJay. Even your assertion that you "experience Him" is just an opinion and an expression of your subjective religious beliefs. Meanwhile, I have no doubt your belief, your faith, and your religion have very real effects on your life.

@fmf said
This is an article of faith for you and therefore just a subjective opinion.

Unless true.

@kellyjay said
Unless true.

You can only speculate about whether it's "true", KellyJay.

@fmf said
You can only speculate about whether it's "true", KellyJay.

Correct, only the truth matters not our opinions about it.

@kellyjay said
Correct, only the truth matters not our opinions about it.

And all you and I have are our opinions about it.

@fmf said
And all you and I have are our opinions about it.

No, I have the Lord in my life, you have an opinion.

I’ve been asking myself what my “meta-narrative” might be – in a metaphysical or epistemological sense. This is the best I could come up with:

“I do not expect that the grammar of human consciousness exhausts, or will exhaust, the syntax of the universe which we inhabit.”

If there is some being whose consciousness is so exhaustive, I doubt that whatever such being might try to communicate to us would end up being more than gobbledygook* when translated into our limited “grammar.” But some might be so bewitched by the translations, that they assign that gobbledygook, not only meaning, but – infallible truth.**

__________________________

* Or so dumbed down as to be fundamentally inaccurate – which would inflict its own type of illusion on “believers”.

** Such gobbledygook can take the form of perfectly grammatical sentences with ordinarily well-defined terms, viz:

The red cow is justice.
All planets rattle spiritually.
Fleeing orchids scream for mercy.
Glockenspiel transcends logic.
“Etcetera” is the one true God.

@vistesd2 said
I’ve been asking myself what my “meta-narrative” might be – in a metaphysical or epistemological sense. This is the best I could come up with:

“I do not expect that the grammar of human consciousness exhausts, or will exhaust, the syntax of the universe which we inhabit.”

If there is some being whose consciousness is so exhaustive, I doubt that whatever such being migh ...[text shortened]... orchids scream for mercy.
Glockenspiel transcends logic.
“Etcetera” is the one true God.

The meta-narrative would be the truth; all the pieces would fit, and nothing
unreal or a lie would be a part of it. All of the gibberish would be our failure
to grasp reality as is. When we look to confirm what we think, we do it by
looking for truth, and when the pieces don't fit or the numbers don't add up,
we look elsewhere.