Comments on: Rationally Irrational (but Simply Irresistible)

By: Lane Sheldon

Lane Sheldon — Mon, 31 May 2010 13:20:25 +0000

Haha I am actually the only comment to your great read?

By: Quixote

Quixote — Mon, 07 May 2007 17:54:53 +0000

A noble concern. You are right that I intended no slight on Mr. Wimber. I met him and have a high respect for him. In fact, about 15 years ago I realized that at the time he was the ONE prominent evangelical leader I implicitly trusted. (I can’t say that about anybody these days.) So a cheap shot it was not. It is true, however, that the notion of transrationality was indeed forwarded by Wimber in his widely-disseminated teachings on the Kingdom of God, a notion I don’t reject, only question as a practically meaningful term.

Thanks for developing your previous comment. I now better understand your response to the post.

By: eutychus

eutychus — Mon, 07 May 2007 17:43:31 +0000

Hmm. I certainly believe you have considered the idea of “transrationality” to a satisfactory extent; but your lumping Wimber in with a notion you disagree with came off as a cheap shot. Had you simply dismissed “transrationality” it would have been just that–a dismissal–but your connection of Wimber to an idea you have obvious disdain for comes off as disdain for and a dismissal of Wimber… which may or may not be what you intended. I will say that I heard Wimber speak on a couple of occasions and can say that he spoke with an authority that I have rarely heard anyone speak with. Disagree with him or not, I would think the fruit of his life indicates his thinking should be treated with tremendous respect.

With much respect…

Eucalyptus.

By: simplychristian

simplychristian — Sat, 05 May 2007 17:20:16 +0000

I agree, distinguishing between irrational and transrational is an important point. I’ve never been completely at ease with the term “transrational,” which is an attempt to say that just because something is beyond our understanding doesn’t mean that it is irrational.

It would seem, as Kierkegaard stated, that belief in anything – even that the chair you are about to sit on will hold you up – is something beyond the purely rational. Our reason brings us to the chair; our choices, however, are always little leaps. But now I’m sounding like Morpheus talking to the Merovingian.

By: Quixote

Quixote — Sat, 05 May 2007 05:50:49 +0000

Au contraire, my fine island contemplative! My discussion of “transrationality” was in anticipation of a predictable objection to my thesis. I knew if I didn’t bring it up, somebody else probably would. I didn’t want somebody to suggest that “transrational” was a better term than “irrational.” The fact that I discussed it at all would suggest my dismissal was not “off hand” or “pejorative” but considered, though I readily admit that I find the term “transrational” virtually empty of meaningful content.

Besides, as a welcome visitor to this site, you should know by now that nothing is beneath me. I’m shameless.

By: eutychus

eutychus — Sat, 05 May 2007 04:51:51 +0000

Some really good thoughts. However, the sidetrack into “transrationality” was distracting and detracted from your main thesis. Furthermore, your off hand dismissal of “transrationality” seemed subjectively pejorative, and beneath your considerable intelligence and skill as a thinker and writer.