<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Fear_and_trembling on George&#39;s Blog</title>
    <link>https://blog.georgefabish.com/tags/fear_and_trembling/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Fear_and_trembling on George&#39;s Blog</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-US</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://blog.georgefabish.com/tags/fear_and_trembling/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Fear and Trembling</title>
      <link>https://blog.georgefabish.com/reviews/fear-and-trembling/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:30:43 -0500</pubDate>
      <guid>https://blog.georgefabish.com/reviews/fear-and-trembling/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Umph old baby Kierkegaard really stops you in your tracks and makes you look closely at a story you&amp;rsquo;ve heard a million times but points out that you&amp;rsquo;ve never actually understood it.  As you can probably tell from the cover the story is of Abraham and Isaac. The main question of the book is what makes Abraham the &amp;ldquo;Father of Faith&amp;rdquo; and not a murderer? That question is so obvious but why has it never been talked about in any sermon other than the cursory &amp;ldquo;God said so?&amp;rdquo;. Kierkegaard wonders this as well. He spends the first section of the book elaborating on the insanity of request. He then describes his version of what faith is and why he&amp;rsquo;s never found anyone (including himself) that has it. Clearly, I can&amp;rsquo;t convey an accurate picture of what he was trying to explain in a couple lines but the gist of it (as I understood it) is that true faith requires a dual movement of the soul. The first movement is that of infinite resignation. That is to say releasing attachments that you have. The second movement is the infinite expectation by means of the absurd. This sort of reminds me of Schrodinger&amp;rsquo;s cat situation. In which one has given something up but at the same time has complete confidence that they will get it back, but that expectation never gets old or inhibits the resignation. Needless to say, it&amp;rsquo;s a complex idea which I am sure that I am bungling. The book then continues in a short investigation on the ethics of what Abraham did. In the epilogue of the book, he wraps up things nicely where he is talking about his belief that faith is &amp;ldquo;the highest passion of man&amp;rdquo; and that perhaps like love is an end to itself. Thus moving past faith, he thinks is part of the human tendency to always ask &amp;ldquo;what&amp;rsquo;s next?&amp;rdquo;. He illustrates this with this story at the very end of the book that has really stuck in my head:&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
