It was more about looking at the other side of the logic. I didn't put nearly as much thought into the question as you did into your answer, but I'll expand on it now!
We'll quickly be walking around definitions so I'll say what I think you mean and work from there. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong or misunderstood!
I believe your idea stands in defining "eternal meaning" as a sense of existence that is immortal. In essence I see your thesis as:
life = meaning
death = no meaning
Thus eternal life is the only way to find meaning in a cold, uncaring universe.
That then sparked the pithy thought of redefining "meaning" in opposition to that axiom. Death as the defining factor for eternal meaning in an abstract sense. I didn't go further into what that could actually look like or feel like though so don't feel bad having trouble to grasp my sloppy reasoning!
If I were to make a more sound argument it would be in how "death" inherently has meaning by allowing "life" to have a definition. I.e. "life" can only mean something or have value if it's placed in a context where "the opposite of life" exists.
I'm getting more and more into navel gazing territory, but I think you'll appreciate the wandering thoughts and winding emotions!
You will be happy to hear that I deal with that thought a little in the next letter!
One key thought: Life is not the opposite of death. Life without any reference to death is still life, but death without any reference to life has no meaning.
Using the language of logic, assigning meaning to death would be like saying the "not" operator has meaning, rather than the entity "life" the operator works on. I don't think they even operate in the same realm.
However, if death is more than the cessation and non-existence of life... then it could have meaning.
But I might go back to the beginning and call that eternal(ish) life. 😂
Your view on legacy really challenges my view on it. I have wanted to leave a great legacy but what will legacy do for me? Jesus did not come to leave a legacy but to proclaim the kingdom and be the substitute for God's wrath. His life is an example of living for a higher being.
I appreciate the audio. It allows me to look through the beautiful artwork, is it original? All amazing stuff. Please keep going.
Thank you, Frank! I really appreciate the encouragement. ☺️
The artwork is original, it's done by my wife who often uses generative AI except in some special cases like THE DESERT AND THE GATE where she does everything by hand: https://open.substack.com/pub/longingforbelonging/p/the-desert-and-the-gate?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4zjx2
Does death then have meaning for life?
Meaning in what way?
In this letter, I said things that don't exist have no meaning, so death that causes something to stop existing takes away its meaning.
But I think the act of choosing to die, such as a sacrifice, can have a meaning.
And knowing that we will die also forces us to consider what has meaning.
Is there another way you mean?
It was more about looking at the other side of the logic. I didn't put nearly as much thought into the question as you did into your answer, but I'll expand on it now!
We'll quickly be walking around definitions so I'll say what I think you mean and work from there. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong or misunderstood!
I believe your idea stands in defining "eternal meaning" as a sense of existence that is immortal. In essence I see your thesis as:
life = meaning
death = no meaning
Thus eternal life is the only way to find meaning in a cold, uncaring universe.
That then sparked the pithy thought of redefining "meaning" in opposition to that axiom. Death as the defining factor for eternal meaning in an abstract sense. I didn't go further into what that could actually look like or feel like though so don't feel bad having trouble to grasp my sloppy reasoning!
If I were to make a more sound argument it would be in how "death" inherently has meaning by allowing "life" to have a definition. I.e. "life" can only mean something or have value if it's placed in a context where "the opposite of life" exists.
I'm getting more and more into navel gazing territory, but I think you'll appreciate the wandering thoughts and winding emotions!
Ha, I love it!!
I see your logical shenanigans now. 😂
You will be happy to hear that I deal with that thought a little in the next letter!
One key thought: Life is not the opposite of death. Life without any reference to death is still life, but death without any reference to life has no meaning.
Using the language of logic, assigning meaning to death would be like saying the "not" operator has meaning, rather than the entity "life" the operator works on. I don't think they even operate in the same realm.
However, if death is more than the cessation and non-existence of life... then it could have meaning.
But I might go back to the beginning and call that eternal(ish) life. 😂
Maybe next letter will spur some more thoughts!
Your view on legacy really challenges my view on it. I have wanted to leave a great legacy but what will legacy do for me? Jesus did not come to leave a legacy but to proclaim the kingdom and be the substitute for God's wrath. His life is an example of living for a higher being.
I love it! I think you're spot on. He certainly left a mark by not pursuing a legacy directly. :)
Thanks for your vulnerability, Nick! ♥️