Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: betty boop

The question makes sense if we know what the terms mean. If we reserve the concept of eternity belonging strictly to the divine and only divine--and there is some indication that A. Pole is going in that direction with the Greek--then the concept of eternal life as belonging to human beings suggests to us a possible secondary meaning of eternal. For the Platonist, a metaxy is necessary in a universe of plurality.


146 posted on 10/25/2006 10:33:01 AM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies ]


To: cornelis; Alamo-Girl; A. Pole; hosepipe; FreedomProtector; marron; Quix; metmom
If we reserve the concept of eternity belonging strictly to the divine and only divine ... then the concept of eternal life as belonging to human beings suggests to us a possible secondary meaning of eternal. For the Platonist, a metaxy is necessary in a universe of plurality.

Thanks for elaborating, cornelis. It appears to me that the metaxy is some sort of juncture (if I might put it that way) between the human being as a work of becoming in time, and his true being in (timeless) Eternity -- an intersection between time and timelessness of which a human being can become aware. Still, this does not put God "in" the spatiotemporal order. Were this to happen, God would be reduced to a work of becoming. Moreover, if God were "in" time and space, then the metaxy would collapse.... (I think maybe Hegel was fiddling with this very idea.)

or so it seems to me. What do you think?

154 posted on 10/25/2006 11:00:52 AM PDT by betty boop (Beautiful are the things we see...Much the most beautiful those we do not comprehend. -- N. Steensen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson