I do not try, Lord, to penetrate into your depth: under no circumstances does my intelligence conform to it, but I want at least to understand your truth, which my heart believes and loves; I really don’t try to understand to believe, but I think to understand. Yes, because if I didn’t, I wouldn’t understand. Anseelmo of Canterbury (1033-1109). [1]
The desire to know is an attribute of the human being, I believe that it is a magnificent remnant of our condition of image of God, though disfigured [2]. Man is a moral being who can know, choose and decide, is wonderful. Sin, which has prevented us spiritually, has not made our knowledge impossible.
- What we seem to have lost is the ability to unify knowledge.
- Constituting a synthesis that designates God as the author of all knowledge.
- In this way we can have a lot of fragmented knowledge.
- Which is far from irrelevant.
- Yet we cannot develop and link them in a great coherent and coherent system that has God as Lord.
Moreover, and most tragically, we have largely lost our ethical sense. Unethical knowledge is often very dangerous. Ethics has no autonomy, is consciously or unconsciously based on theology [3]. That is why the break with God causes man to build his ethics from secular and oolather references, not revelation. [4] If “Christian ethics are the science of human conduct determined by divine conduct”, as Brunner interprets (1889-1966), [5] God in his nature and revelation must be the foundation of human morality [6].
Returning to our point, we highlight Aristotle’s famous phrase (384-322 BC): “All men, by nature, have a desire to know. “[7] Centuries later, Comenio (1592–1670) added as an expression of faith: “There is nothing in the world that man, endowed with meaning and reason, cannot learn. “
Aristotle’s observation can be observed since childhood, when the child asks endless questions about issues for which adults have long been introduced into the world of knowledge, we do not always have satisfactory answers.
Man carries with him the desire to know; and this desire accompanies him throughout his life, as omniscience escapes him. It is precisely through knowledge that we discover our limits. To part with this desire is, in a way, to separate from life.
Man, eager to know, embarks on the search for truth. The truth has its own attractions that fascinate us and, in a way, we always want it close, but not always for the noblest purposes.
It turns out that as we seek absolute truth, most of the time we have to settle for the certainly significant crumbs and fragments of the “Truths. “Of our time or, representing only a particle of the universe. This is one more reason that should humbly lead us to our apprehension and dialogue about the truth. Ignorance is often bold and arrogant. The right judgment makes us modest. [10]
Because we believe in the existence of absolute truth, this does not mean that our knowledge is absolute. [11] Just as believing that there is a God does not necessarily mean that I am in a relationship with him.
Aristotle (384-322 BC) understood the dialectic of ease and difficulty in finding the truth, but did not yield to this ambiguity, but sought a path he considered relevant to this research:
Speculation about the truth is, in one sense, difficult, in another, easy: the proof is that no one can reach it completely, or depart completely from it, and that every [philosopher] has something to say about nature, without adding anything or little. to the truth, even if a good harvest is done of all. (?)
It is therefore right that philosophy is also called the science of truth.
Elsewhere, Aristotle shows his optimism: “Men, by nature, are sufficiently inclined to truth and, in most cases, attain the truth. “
We assume that the desire to know is essential to human nature, as evidence of its condition of necessity and limitation What can be more human than desire?Philosophy is a human activity, carried out by all those who are aware of its limitation but who, at the same time, commit themselves to overcoming it, knowing that the path of knowledge is the path of anguish [14] and hope, the growing eloquent awareness of our ignorance. [15] But, as Augustine observed (354-430): “What we do not desire cannot be the object of our hope or despair. “
To know is to interpret the facts, to identify clues, to discover signs to decode, so that, paradoxically, we will emit other signs, which other knowledge learners will interpret, also leaving their way, which, like ours, will not necessarily be good with another learner of knowledge. That is why we can say that life is an existential and living interpretation of what we see and feel. I’m the way I feel. I feel like I am. The feeling is to be like being to feel it. The fact is, for the most part, our behavior and our lives are in response (not alone?Reaction?) What we see, when we read the world.
The way we see the world, our world view, is reflected in the way we live and are. In practice, denying a professed worldview does not mean not having a worldview, but supporting another that, veiledly, justifies the world’s vision. public worldview that I profess, however, this is part of my internal canon, the infrastructure of my being, this in general I do not publish at least, not consciously.
This may be what contributes to man being alien to himself and others. [Not in vain does the poet E. Young (1683–1765) call man “incomprehensible” [18] and Augustine (354-430) calls him “abyss”, [19] Chesterton (1874–1936) finds it moving, [20] Bavinck (1854–1921) calls it the “crown of creation” [21] and Schaeffer (1912-1984) calls it “wonderful”. [22] “Only man is miserable”, [23] because he knows his misery. His greatness is knowing, realizing he’s miserable.
Man is above all creation; is perhaps the most fragile of all that has been created; However, he knows who and what he is; it is a “thinking rose” [24]; Man is therefore the greatest miracle of all: [25] it is God’s masterpiece [26].
Man, as a thoughtful being, translates into his life the need to satisfy his vital desire to know, and it is precisely in this gap that he reveals his strength again: to want to know is to realize that one does not know and, at least at the same time, that one can know.
In the next article, we’ll talk about Adam and Eve
[1] Saint Anselmo of Canterbury, Prosl Rel’gio, Sao Paulo: Cultural April, (Os Pensadores, v. 7), 1973, p. 107.
[2] See: Alvin Plantinga, Science, Religion and Naturalism: where is the conflict?Sao Paulo: Vida Nova, 2018, p. 240.
[3] See: André Biéler, Calvin, the prophet of the industrial age: foundations and method of Calvinian ethics of society, Mexico, D. F. : United House of Publications, 2015, p. 27.
[4] When we ask what is right, what is moral, we answer the question not using an independent moral standard, as if there might be a standard for anything outside of God, but by appealing to the will and nature of Himself. God, is that exactly what God is and reveals to us?(James M. Boice, Fundamentals of the Christian Faith: A Theology Manual Available to All, Rio de Janeiro: Editora Central Gospel, 2011, p. 112).
[5] Emil Brunner, The Divine Imperative: A Study of Christian Ethics, 6. Imp. London: Lutterworth Press, 1958, 86.
[6] See: James M. Boice, Fundamentals of the Christian Faith: A Theology Manual Available to All, Rio de Janeiro: Editora Central Gospel, 2011, p. 112.
[7] Aristotle, Metaphysics, Sao Paulo: Cultural April, (Os Pensadores, v. 4), 1973, I. 1. P. 211.
[8] J. A. Coménio, Magna Didctica, 3rd ed. Lisbon: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, [1985], V, p. 105.
[9] See John Knox’s relevant commentary on the relevance of each?Bit? In fact. (John Knox, The Integrity of Preaching, Sao Paulo: ASTE. 1964, p. 35-36).
[10] See: Joel Calvino, The Gospel according to Joo, Sao José dos Campos, SP. : Faithful Editor, 2015, v. 1, (Jn 3. 25), p. 140; Joel Calvino, As Pastorais, Sao Paulo: Paracletes, 1998, (1 Tim 3. 1), p. 81.
[11] See Truth, Nature of: Norman Geisler, Encyclopedia of Apologgetics: Responses to Criticisms of the Christian Faith, Sao Paulo: Editora Vida, 2002, p. 865-866.
[12] Aristotle, Metaphysics, São Paulo: Cultural April, (Os Pensadores, v. 4), 1973, II. 1. P. 239.
[13] Aristotle, Ret-rich Art, Rio de Janeiro: Editora Tecnoprint, (s. d. ), I. 1. 3. 11. P. 30.
[14] I applied my heart to scan (vrD) (darash) and inform myself (rWT) (tur) (investigate, explore, examine carefully) wisely everything that happens under the sky; this boring work ([r;) (ra’) (bad) God imposed on the children of men, to afflict them (hfnf () (?Anh)? (Ec 1. 12).
The basic idea of the term (vrD) (darash) is to search diligently:?Moses diligently sought (vrd) (darash) the goat for the sin offering?(Lev 10. 16). The word look beyond this meaning (Sal 22:26; 24. 6 [twice]; Ps 53. 3), can be translated as: require (Dt 23. 22; Salt 9. 12); (Deuteronomy 11. 12); Investigate ($10. 4); take care (Ps 10. 13); sweep (Salt 10. 15); Search (Salt 77. 2); Consider (Salt 111,2); struggle (Salt 119. 45); (Ps 142. 4).
The Hebrew word (hfnf() (? He has the sense of ‘anguished’, ‘oppressed’, with a sense of helplessness, aware that his rescue depends only on God’s mercy. This word contrasts with pride, which is believed powerful in solving all its problems, relegating God to the background, being indifferent to him.
hfnf ([?nh) also presents the idea of being humiliated by another person: (Gen 16. 6; 34. 2; Ex 26. 6; Deut 22,24,29; Jz 19. 24; 20,5).
[15] Blaise Pascal (1623–1662), with his usual sensitivity and insight, advises us: “Let us know our strengths; we are something and not everything; what we must be deprives us of the knowledge of the first principles that are born out of nowhere; and how small we must be prevents us from seeing infinity (?) Does the simple comparison between us and infinity overwhelm us?(B. Pascal, Pensamentos, Sao Paulo: Cultural April (Os Pensadores, v. 16), 1973, II. 72. P. 57 and 59).
[16] Agostinho, Apud Jurgen Moltmann, Theology of Hope, Sao Paulo: Herder, 1971, p. 11.
[17] CGJung, Psychology and Religion, Petrapolis, RJ. : Voices, 1978, 140, p. 87. Significant is the title of Rollo May’s work (1909-1994), Man in Search of Himself, Petrapolis, RJ. : Voices, 1971, 230p.
[18] Edward Young, Nocturnal Thoughts: En: Gabriel V. do Monte Pereira, red. International Library of Famous Works, Lisbon: Sociedade Internacional, (s. d. ), v. 13, 6231.
[19] Augustine, Confessions, 9. Ed. Porto: Apostolate of the Press, 1977, IV. 14. P. 102.
[20] Should the simple two-legged man, as he is, move us more than any music moves us and impress us more than any caricature impresses us?(GK Chesterton, Orthodoxy, 5th ed. Porto: Livraria Tavares Martins, 1974, p. 83).
[21] Herman Bavinck, Systematic Theology, Santa Barbara d?West, SP. : SOCEP. , 2001, p. 187.
[22] Will we never be able to treat people as human beings, to attribute to them the highest level of true humanity, unless we really know their origin? who are these people. God tells man who he is. God tells us that he created man in his own image. So is man a wonderful thing? (Francis A. Schaeffer, The death of reason, São Paulo: Christian culture, 2002, p. 34). In fact, is man a wonderful creation of God? (Francis Schaeffer, The consumable work of Christ, São Paulo: Editora Cultura Cristã, 2003, p. 74). “The Bible says that you are wonderful because you were created in the image and likeness of God, but you are imperfect, because in a certain time-space in history man fell. (Francis A. Schaeffer, The death of reason, São Paulo: Christian culture, 2002, p. 34). Although for other reasons Shakespeare uses the same expression for the man: “What a masterpiece man is! What noble reason! How infinite in college! In form and movement, how expressive and wonderful! In action, it looks like an angel! In intelligence, how it resembles a god! The wonder of the world! Animal prototype !? (William Shakespeare, Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, São Paulo: Cultural April, 1978, II. 2).
[23] Blaise Pascal, Pensamentos, Sao Paulo: Cultural April, (Os Pensadores, v. 16), 1973, VI. 399, p. 136.
[24] B. Pascal, Thoughts, VI. 347, p. 127
[25] Sophocles, Antigone, 2nd ed. Petrapolis, RJ. : Voices, 1968, 330.
[26] W. Shakespeare, Hamlet, Sao Paulo: Cultural April, (Masterpieces), 1978, II. 2.