To the mentioning I did at the latter half's introduction of 28, I'd address to do again.

Intuitionism of Mathematics in terms of princeple of theory, they professed Formalism's extreme strictly conservative stance's implicit criticism and the movement top leader Brewer was either Topologist.

Meanwhile Formalism was persisting in no contradiction persuit and necessarily Analytical Philosophy even now depends on that idea. Because both circles are standing on evidencing theory. That very strict stance otherwise has similarity with Protestantism as representative at Luther and Calvin.

Computer science's circle's internal circumstanced ideological stance has been left by Formalists, against it, Intuists has been at more liberal idea abiding stance.

After all, internet social technological progress's Computer scientific advancement was dragged by also bcsic structural indispensable 'Compiler''s progress.

These days, Brewer's rear guard is inhered to e.g. Per Erik Rutger Lof(1942-).

Then, Intuitionism's ideas dependind circle's typical example is obviously Phenomenology's own stance.

If upper those ideas could be referred there, Luther was rather depended on Intuitionism. Meanwhile, Calvin did on Formalism.

Referring those preliminary theory dogma hypothesis, next Luther's text's parts should be analyzed.

Because my stance is based on the idea that determinism relies on Formalism abiding stance, meantime, Indeterminism relies on Intuitionism abiding one. And my idea is that Luther was fundamentalist around Christianity and Bible's interpreting and these stances were Indeterminism abiding and next sentences obviously shows them all. Then, subsequently from 28, Luther's sentences will be dealt now.

                     

"What infantile children's pleading date will be decided previously for them who are never able to decide by themselves can be done by ones is truly correct, isn't it? What makes 80 years old one's doing is effective, meanwhile 10 or 12 years old one's doing is ineffective? And also at getting 18 years old or 20 them old, they feel carnal desire, that idea is not so identified. Because even if 20, 30 years old ones have almost no feeling stronger ones, and even the 30 years old ones who can feel stronger rather than those days of 20years old, if those are the truths, how can we interpret those facts? What makes us have in Bible that honest poverty and obedience have no age limitation? Even the most spiritual people can never admit these emotions, none the less, how can human being decide the times human feel greed and arrogance? Like those, we'd be spiritual, and until we'd easily articulate that we need no pleading, any pleading is incomplete and ineffective. Though, pleading is not certain thing, rather so dangerous, that all should be comprehended. Once upon a time, as people did so, we should be free from pleading, and have noble life way, not depending on pleading, but doing leaving ghost in keeping our own life is the correctly wholesome road, you know."(Omission)

These Luther's own Indeterministic ideas are signified with that to our own life, merely our iIndividually occasionally reactive subjective constant revisionism abiding own correcting unenviable running stance. And just that indicating attitude means contemporary social necessary our own personal mindset in obviously confirmable principle's universality.

And, I'd like to address to emphasizing that Bible words' originating INCARNATION certainly signifies ONTOLOGICAL INDICATION around our life's substance as our grappling theme and theory around Luther.

For providing it, Michael Henri's description first and Gabriel Marcel's it second, I display subsequently (INCARNATION and BEING AND HAVING) Afterward, Luther's regularly used text and some other references will be subsequently done.

❇️《 My these references stance is caused from my own Philological methodizing(or methodological) stance and partially applicable around Rhetrics. 》

✴️Henri's mentioning means that INCARNATION ROOTED AT(OR ORIGINATING IN) BIBLE'S WORDS IS JUST "ONTOLOGICAL MATTER".

"Every flesh experiences as method, at own flesh experiencing ourselves, these mention abled one alive transcendental 'myself' abiding advent at life, that is given birth. Thereby, given birth signifying is, as simply imagined so, not on one body-object so-called, form made advent in world. Because at the case, any alive individual body could never exist, that consequence outcome is dragged, minimally existing thing can one thing and matter's emerging, inner-world one object as material's appearing which obeys several laws of world. This material is obtained, at to its phenomenological several features, its spatial nature, its time abiding nature in synthesis and their own cause and result, by emerging of world, nevertheless this object is lack of what emerges only at life. What emerges only at life is transcendental possibility as original and transcendental empirically done at one flesh abiding alive pathological experiencing things. These possibilities are located at absolute 《alive》《original-receiving emotional nature》. Being given birth meaning thing is in one flesh every meat is coming up to own-self,  in《alive》《originally-meat》." 

Simply summarized interpreting could be like next.

Because, our body by itself must be tangibly sensed with merely spatially cognitive our mind's own interpreting and our spatially extent positioned located and our mind's axis own standing consciousness, though

its our sensing and sensed mind's arbitrary awakened idea and our bodily physiological sensed mind as pain and ease in knowing are all through Epistemological measuring and directly given sensing in synthesis, though necessarily to us, ONTOLOGICAL SENSING NECESSARILY MEANS MATERIALIZED SENSING and OBJECTIVELY JUDGING at OWN INTERACTION abiding MIND'S  FIXATION.

Though, Ontological conscious mind means also implied at New Testament abiding INCARNATION's own our ACCEPTABLE MIND in RELIGIOUS DECISION dimentional term attending mind.

Meanwhile, Marcel mentions at his "BEING AND HAVING" like next.

"Incarnationーthe central 'given' of metaphysic. Incarnation is the situation of a being who appears to himself to be, as it were, bound to body. This 'given' is opaque to itself:  opposition to the cogito. Of this body, I can neither say that it is I, nor that it is not I, nor that is for me(object). the opposition, treating it as fundamental, I shall find no trick of logical sleight of hand which lets me get back to the original experience, which will inevitably be either eluded or(which comes to the same thing) refused. We are not to object that this experience shows a contingent character: in point of fact, all metaphysical enquiry requires a starting-point of this kind. It can only start from a situation which is mirrored but cannot be understood."

"This is the reason why I cannot thank of my death, but only of the standstill of that machine(illam, not banc). It would perhaps be more accurate to say that I cannot anticipate my death, that is, I cannot ask myself what we will become of me when the machine is no longer working."

"My ideas are hardest for me to grasp where they are impenetrable to me. The problem I am setting myself is to find out whether this applies to thad whole of reality impenetrable to me just in proposition as I am involved in it."

"When I try to make clear to myself the nature of my bond with my body, it appears to me chiefly as something of which I have the use (as one has the use of a piano, a saw, or a razor); but all these uses are extensions of the initial use, which is simply the use of the body. I have real priority to my body when it is a question of active use, but none whatever when it is a question of knowledge. The use is only possible on the basis of a certain felt community is individual; I cannot validly say 'I and my body'. The difficulty arises from the fact that I think of my relation with my body on the analogy of my relation with my instrumentsーwherereas in fact the latter presupposes the former."

 

At the matter of fact, Marcel's own view has certainly similarity not only Hideggar but also with Jean Paul Sartre and Maurice Melreau-Ponty and Michael Henri too.  However, as Marcel describes, except God's presence in our own mind, to us, persistence around being ourselves as no introspective mind as Kant criticizes harshly in any text (specifically at Kritik der practischen Vernunft), having mind could have been owned (formally we'd say authorized, but that definition means a little bit socially carnal dimensional interpreting, though its properness is controversial for the present) by Lord, at least at the way for us to be should be so.  None the less we are constantly prone to be attached at our own-self in sinking blindly. Kant criticizes also "Reason". That his stance necessarily has common consciousness to Luther as his criticizing churches' power's own conceit around rescuing people's mind's delusion. Its nature could have been inhered to K ant's claiming 'Reason's Conceit'.

In fact, selfishness and egoistic consciousness are apt to overshadow our mind and thinking. Just because those proneness in awareness tells us that Kant claiming instructive ethical mentioning in ordinary being as us has the same claiming structure.

Actually, at our own necessity around measuring or inspecting any social occasionally necessary case, that self-conceit mind must drag our mind to have error and misunderstanding or miscalculation or so. Through, to us, any mental and spiritual dimensional thing must have bodily reactive things' indirect impacting and contrary vector either.

Again, returning to Luther's text's claiming, we'd have next conclusion.

With those all referable materials caused from several texsts, we could deduce like next sequentially logical truths in our bodily tangible schemable procedure through sensing of perceptive awakening and totally consciousness abiding judgement in mind and consequential inducted one truth abiding one hypothesis.

TO US, ONLY NEXT DISTANCING CONSCIOUS MIND'S OPTION is GIVEN AS MIND'S NECESSITY

1️⃣ ATTACHED MIND ー CLOSENESS,

                                        NOT  FREEDOM ABIDING,  

                                           BOUND RELEVANCE

       OTHERWISE, TRIBAL SOCIAL FOOTRINT FOUND

2️⃣ DETACHED MIND ー DISTANCED

                                        BOUNDARY UNCONSCIOUSLY  

                                        SET IN REMOTELY PUTTING 

                                          CONSCIOUSNESS

    HIGHLY CIVILIZED SPATIALLY SCHEMED IDEA

In frank, my last mentioning hypothesis means otherwise that sociological scheming idea could be found.

But biblical theological interpreting should be more pious spiritually coverable mindset immanently is demanded at Christianity. Thus, these summarized propositional supposition means some wicked demoniac mind set on reality could be invited. 

However, these days, to us, Luther's ethological approach is seen so purely genuineness abiding acting thing, we'd assess so plainly. But essentially those eras' commonsense must have been another featured compalsive socially overshadowed realities. In other words, not half latter displayed modernized philosophers' texts mentionings are simply very these days' own interpretable strategy, though, between these mutual eras' decisive gaps are laid. That realities recognition must be mobilized there.

Tribal community necessarily given attached mind at any human relevance was probably done in Luther's 16 centry's medieval ages. And these seen his harshly  done stance was to be rebuffed, his rebutting objective church's dangerous constitution. 

Though essentially, our ages' close nature by H enri and Marcel, Levinus or so and Kant, or L uther otherwise should be discriminated consciously, nevertheless at some intrinsic dimensional demanding, we should treat them all so equivalently. Because these are never natural scientific propositions. And ethological and ethical proposition should not regarded merely objectivism abiding object or so. Because there questioned items' features are intrinsically immanently metaphysical and very universally subjective issue.

Though we should have positively treat 'epoche' philosophical judgement suspension.

However these questions are not so easily concluded matter, though either from now on, we should regard it so carefully.

(Irregularly continued)

Jan. 17th.     2023