(urth) More on Frog and Fish & Ymar
Stanislaus B.
sbocian at poczta.fm
Tue Jun 14 10:36:34 PDT 2011
Engineering is a rather interesting discipline. It must take into
account both perspectives:
- it absolutely depends on the Platonic world of mathematical formulas,
which order the behaviour of the matter,
- but it also must take into account that matter doesn't follow
perfectly the patterns. Parts are designed with tolerances - how far can
they diverge from standard; machines wear out in predictable and
unpredictable ways. Chaotic matter disturbs the perfect mechanism of
celestial wheels
But it is true that the default Western worldview puts much more trust
into the superior patterns than.did Greeks and Romans. For them, the
material world was irreparably corrupt; the reflections of the perfect
heavenly system were rare, and were more often than not stifled by
random chaos of matter. For us, everything goes according to
mathematical patterns, and even random and chaotic events are ruled by
the rules of probabililty, quantum waves etc.
But there is also a third worldview - also perfectly known to Wolfe, who
indeed explained it best. It is the eastern worldview, according to
which reality is not an imperfect reflection of the perfect original -
but one which resembles it in large extent, but a random concatenation
of unconnected factors, mostly having to do with emotions, which hides
the true reality. It is the worldview of Buddhism, and also of the most
part of the modern philosophy. In it, the true reality is unknowable
(transcendental, to Kant), and the scientific rules of the universe
which we can learn are only artefact of our own mind - and have nothing
to do with things in themselves.
This worldview, as I said, is popular in modern philosophy, for various
reasons - it is both absolutely sceptic, because it holds that true
reality is absolutely unknowable, and it also in effect identifies
humanity - represented by philosophers - with God. Since everything we
can know and experience are creations of our own mind, our mind creates
everything which matters. We (or rather, I - because in reality every
man is the same) are the creators of the universe. And we do not need to
learn - since our mind creates the world, we can deduct it from the
first principles, or assume it to agree with our wishes.
For obvious reasons, this way of thinking is not very consistent with
engineering. Engineers certainly can learn true laws of physics - this
is how they make bridges which do not fall down. And they must confirm
those laws by experiment - Kantian assumptions won't keep the ship
afloat. "The comets do not follow my theories? So much the worse for
comets!", or "Give me matter, and I will construct a world out of it!" -
those are not principles of a successful engineer.
And, returning to the Neoplatonic worldview, with perfect originals and
imperfect copies, there is an interesting variant of it. Generally,
originals are held to be earlier than copies. Originals are arches,
principles, or, as it is called now, archetypes. But in Bible, the
final, perfect originals will come at the end of the world. Until than,
we have to do with a series of types, imperfect shadows thrown before
the great events.
http://www.bible-researcher.com/type.html
The following article on the typology of Scripture by William G.
Moorehead is reproduced from /The International Standard Bible
Encyclopedia/, ed. James Orr (Chicago: Howard-Severance Co., 1930), vol.
5, pp. 3029-3030.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TYPE
The Bible furnishes abundant evidence of the presence of types and of
typical instruction in the Sacred Word. The New Testament attests this
fact. It takes up a large number of persons and things and events of
former dispensations, and it treats them as adumbrations and prophecies
of the future. A generation ago a widespread interest in the study of
typology prevailed; latterly the interest has largely subsided, chiefly
because of the vagaries and extravagances which attended its treatment
on the part of not a few writers. Pressing the typical teaching of
Scripture so far as to imperil the historical validity of God's word is
both dangerous and certain to be followed by reaction and neglect of the
subject.
1. Definition of Type
The word "type" is derived from a Greek term tupoV (/tupos/), which
occurs 16 times in the New Testament. It is variously translated in the
King James Version, e.g. twice "print" (John 20:25
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=John+20:25>);
twice "figure" (Acts 7:43
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Acts+7:43>;
Romans 5:14
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Romans+5:14>);
twice "pattern" (Titus 2:7
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Titus+2:7>;
Hebrews 8:5
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Hebrews+8:5>);
once "fashion" (Acts 7:44
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Acts+7:44>);
once "manner" (Acts 23:25
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Acts+23:25>);
once "form" (Romans 6:17
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Romans+6:17>);
and seven times "example" (1 Corinthians 10:6,11
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1Corinthians+10:6-11>;
Philippians 3:17
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Philippians+3:17>;
1 Thessalonians 1:7
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1Thessalonians+1:7>;
2 Thessalonians 3:9
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=2Thessalonians+3:9>;
1 Timothy 4:12
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1Timothy+4:12>;
1 Peter 5:3
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=1Peter+5:3>).
It is clear from these texts that the New Testament writers use the word
"type" with some degree of latitude; yet one general idea is common to
all, namely, "likeness." A person, event or thing is so fashioned or
appointed as to resemble another; the one is made to answer to the other
in some essential feature; in some particulars the one matches the
other. The two are called type and antitype; and the link which binds
them together is the correspondence, the similarity, of the one with the
other.
Three other words in the New Testament express the same general idea.
One is "shadow" (skia, /skia/, Hebrews 10:1
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Hebrews+10:1>),
"For the law having a shadow of the good things to come"--as if the
substance or reality that was still future cast its shadow backward into
the old economy. "Shadow" implies dimness and transitoriness; but it
also implies a measure of resemblance between the one and the other.
The second term is "parable" (parabolh, /parabole/, Hebrews 9:9
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Hebrews+9:9>);
the tabernacle with its services was an acted parable for the time then
present, adumbrating thus the blessed reality which was to come.
The third term is "copy" or "pattern" (upodeigma, /hupodeigma/), a word
that denotes a sketch or draft of something future, invisible (Hebrews
9:23
<http://www.biblegateway.com/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Hebrews+9:23>);
the tabernacle and its furniture and services were copies, outlines of
heavenly things.
Types are pictures, object-lessons, by which God taught His people
concerning His grace and saving power. The Mosaic system was a sort of
kindergarten in which God's people were trained in divine things, by
which also they were led to look for better things to come. An old
writer thus expresses it: "God in the types of the last dispensation was
teaching His children their letters. In this dispensation He is teaching
them to put the letters together, and they find that the letters,
arrange them as they will, spell Christ, and nothing but Christ."
In creation the Lord uses one thing for many purposes. One simple
instrument meets many ends. For how many ends does water serve! And the
atmosphere: it supplies the lungs, conveys sound, diffuses odors, drives
ships, supports fire, gives rain, fulfills besides one knows not how
many other purposes. And God's Word is like His work, is His work, and,
like creation, is inexhaustible. Whatever God touches, be it a mighty
sun or an insect's wing, a vast prophecy or a little type, He perfects
for the place and the purpose He has in mind.
2. Distinctive Features
What are the distinctive features of a type? A type, to be such in
reality, must possess three well-defined qualities. (1) It must be a
true picture of the person or the thing it represents or prefigures. A
type is a draft or sketch of some well-defined feature of redemption,
and therefore it must in some distinct way resemble its antitype, e.g.
Aaron as high priest is a rough figure of Christ the Great High Priest,
and the Day of Atonement in Israel (Leviticus 16) must be a true picture
of the atoning work of Christ. (2) The type must be of divine
appointment. In its institution it is designed to bear a likeness to the
antitype. Both type and antitype are preordained as constituent parts of
the scheme of redemption. As centuries sometimes lie between the type
and its accomplishment in the antitype, of course infinite wisdom alone
can ordain the one to be the picture of the other. Only God can make
types. (3) A type always prefigures something future. A Scriptural type
and predictive prophecy are in substance the same, differing only in
form. This fact distinguishes between a symbol and a type. A symbol may
represent a thing of the present or of the past as well as of the
future, e.g. the symbols in the Lord's Supper. A type always looks to
the future; an element of prediction must necessarily be in it.
3. Classification of Types
Another thing in the study of types should be borne in mind, namely,
that a thing in itself evil cannot be the type of what is good and pure.
It is somewhat difficult to give a satisfactory classification of
Biblical types, but broadly they may be distributed under three heads:
(1) Personal types, by which are meant those personages of Scripture
whose lives and experiences illustrate some principle or truth of
redemption. Such are Adam, who is expressly described as the "figure of
him that was to come" (Romans 5:14), Melchizedek, Abraham, Aaron,
Joseph, Jonah, etc. (2) Historical types, in which are included the
great historical events that under Providence became striking
foreshadowings of good things to come, e.g. the Deliverance from the
Bondage of Egypt; the Wilderness Journey; the Conquest of Canaan; the
Call of Abraham; Deliverances by the Judges, etc. (3) Ritual types, such
as the Altar, the Offerings, the Priesthood, the Tabernacle and its
furniture. There are typical persons, places, times, things, actions, in
the Old Testament, and a reverent study of them leads into a thorough
acquaintance with the fullness and the blessedness of the word of God.
2011-06-14 14:26, David Stockhoff wrote:
> Yes. Wolfe would be a pretty bad engineer if he believed our physical
> laws to be mere shadows of the True Laws that rule a higher existence.
> (Consider how you would feel if your doctor told you that.) Or so I
> would think.
>
> In fact, one might argue that to even attempt to "realistically"
> depict a "higher" universe is to bring it down to our level to begin
> with, putting them on a par with one another. The Celtic/pagan
> otherworld is a far more useful fictional mode than the Christian,
> however much they have in common. So this "equal validity" is crucial
> to Wolfe's fiction in more than one way.
>
> On 6/14/2011 8:16 AM, Lee Berman wrote:
>>> Stanislaus B: The mythical worldview is that there is one superior
>>> world of gods
>>> - the True World, and the Secondary World in which we live. The true
>>> patterns
>> >from the True World are repeated many times in the Secondary World -
>> but
>>> each time they are distorted by the matter and accidents, so the
>>> repetitions are never exact. For that reason Poetry is more true
>>> than History.
>>
>> This sentiment claws to the heart of the Sun Series for me,
>> especially BotNS.
>>
>> It may be that Wolfe considers the problem of which world to consider
>> "superior"
>> and "True" to be relativistic. That is, from a religious/mythological
>> perspective,
>> the world of God(s) is the true one and our human world is a shadowy
>> created
>> reflection of that true world. While from a humanistic/scientific
>> view, our world
>> is the real one and the stories of God and gods is a shadowy
>> reflection of our
>> reality.
>>
>> The circularity Wolfe gives humans and Hierogrammates in BotNS
>> suggests to me he
>> considers both perspectives to have equal footing and validity.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Urth Mailing List
>> To post, write urth at urth.net
>> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Urth Mailing List
> To post, write urth at urth.net
> Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net
>
----------------------------------------------------------------
Doladuj telefon przez Internet!
Sprawdz >> http://linkint.pl/f29ba
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20110614/a511f16a/attachment-0003.htm>
More information about the Urth
mailing list