 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > Not a T & D discusion -- about creativity | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/10/2008 2:59 PM (GMT -6) |   | | Repost from another thread...
1/5/2008 2:35 PM
----------
Tom: D wants a human EVERYTHING, in every way, nothing left out, nothing, nada, zilch, zippo. And he thinks Chalcedon actually advocates this.
D: Man...
"The Chalcedonian Fathers went on to reason that in the Incarnation all of the constitutive parts of a human being had to be assumed, because whatever was not assumed was not redeemed. This became a rallying principle for all orthodox Christology."
Tom: Man what?  There’s nothing in that quote that says Christ is a human hypostasis. It says exactly what I’ve been agreeing with, that all of the constitutive parts of a human being had to be assumed. What are the constitutive parts of human being, the kind-essential properties of human being? It can’t include a human hypostasis because the Chaledonian fathers denied a human hypostasis of Christ. So the constitutive parts being described here can only be properties constitutive of human ‘being’ (i.e., ‘nature’).
Bro, your reading of Chalcedon is historically impossible. You have the Greek fathers denying of Christ what they all as a matter of fact denied of all human beings, viz., a human ‘hypostasis’, as if they all held your theory on the non-existence of created hypostases. That makes “one hypostasis, two natures” trivial and pointless. You do see this don’t you? Nesteruk, Ware, Florovsky, et. al., all believe that Chalcedon denies in the case of Christ what they affirmed in the case of all other human beings—viz., that the nature in question (human) is personified (personalized, hypostacized) by a human, created, non-divine hypostasis. This doesn’t entail “inherent personhood” on the part of human persons (which I deny with you, D). But instead of responding to this by denying the inter-hypostatic nature of our relationship to God (as you do), it seems better to me to say that we derive our being, existence, and personal fulfillment via interpersonal relationship with God (that is, via hypostatically inhering in Christ, viz., becoming fully realized persons through an interpersonal relationship with Christ). We cannot, like God, generate our own personhood. That would make us self-existent. We’re persons in Christ, not as Christ.
So this has to influence “whatever is not assumed is not redeemed.” If the Fathers believed in the existence of human hypostases, if they believed that human nature in our case is personified by created, non-divine hypostases (which they did), AND if they also said Christ was “one hypostasis, two natures,” then it follows that they posit a human reality NOT assumed by Christ, namely, a human hypostasis. But on my view that doesn’t screw up redemption. God doesn’t have to assume a separate, individual human ‘person’ in order to save human persons. He can assume their nature into his person and in that act redeem us. It is with respect to NATURE and not HYPOSTASIS that the saying “what is not assumed is not redeemed” is true. That has to be the case if Chalcedon (a) affirms the existence of human hypostases (or persons), and (b) denies Christ a human hypostasis.
I don’t know what else to say, except that you are right in characterizing my view as denying of Christ a human spirit (as long as everybody realizes that as far as I can tell ‘human spirit’ = ‘human hypostasis’; if that’s not the case then I’m open to discussing it further), and that you deny that human spirits are ever inherently “persons.”
---------------------------------
If you still have the belief above...we are going to keep running into issues.
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
Post Edited ("I am-in-I Am") : 3/10/2008 3:12:19 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
 |
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/10/2008 3:03 PM (GMT -6) | | The stuff above DIRECTLY AFFECTS the answer to your question...
We’ll be:
non—divine centers of experience,
thinking, feeling, choosing beings,
self-determining/self-disposing in the freely creative expression of love,
self-perceiving in our apprehension of all of the above,
stand, in all of the above, in relationship to God.
But you deny any of this constitutes personal existence. There's no human person here. So my question is, if we wanted to say such beings are also persons, D, what would we need to add to the above?
If to you "human spirit" = "human hypostasis"...then...do you see where we will CONTINUE to have issues?
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
Post Edited ("I am-in-I Am") : 3/10/2008 3:12:46 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/10/2008 3:09 PM (GMT -6) | | |
More Meyendorff from Bruce...
In Christ, the union of the two natures is hypostatic: they "concur into one person [prosōpon] and one hypostasis," according to the Fathers of Chalcedon. The controversies which arose from the Chalcedonian formula led to further definitions of the meaning of the term hypostasis. While Chalcedon had insisted that Christ was indeed one in His personal identity, it did not clearly specify that the term hypostasis, used to designate this identity, also designated the hypostasis of the pre-existing Logos. The anti-Chalcedonian opposition in the East built thus its entire argument around this point that Byzantine Christology of the age of Justinian committed itself very strongly to excluding that interpretation of Chalcedon, which would have considered the "prosōpon, or hypostasis," mentioned in the definition as simply the "prosōpon of union" of the old Antiochian School— i.e., the new synthetic reality resulting from the union of the two natures. It affirmed, on the contrary, following Cyril of Alexandria, that Christ’s unique hypostasis is the pre-existing hypostasis of the Logos; that is, in the term used in Christology with exactly the same meaning as in the Trinitarian theology of the Cappadocian Fathers, one of the three eternal hypostases of the Trinity "took flesh" while remaining essentially the same in its divinity. The hypostasis of Christ therefore pre-existed in its divinity, but it acquired humanity by the Virgin Mary.
This fundamental position has two important implications:
(a) There is no absolute symmetry between divinity and humanity in Christ because the unique hypostasis is only divine and because the human will follows the divine. It was precisely a "symmetrical" Christology, which was rejected as Nestorian in Ephesus (431). This "asymmetry" of Orthodox Christology reflects an idea which Athanasius and Cyril of Alexandria stressed so strongly: only God can save while humanity can only cooperate with the saving acts and will of God. However, as we have emphasized earlier, in the patristic concept of man, "theocentricity" is a natural character of humanity; thus asymmetry does not prevent the fact that Christ is fully and "actively" man.
(b) The human nature of Christ is not personalized into a separate human hypostasis, which means that the concept of hypostasis is not an expression of natural existence, either in God or in man, but it designates personal existence. Post-Chalcedonian Christology postulates that Christ is fully man and also that He is a human individual, but it REJECTS the Nestorian view that He is a human hypostasis, or person.
A fully human individual life was en-hypostasized in the hypostasis of the Logos without losing any of its human characteristics.
The theory associated with the name of Apollinaris of Laodicea and according to which the Logos in Jesus had taken the place of the human soul is systematically rejected by Byzantine theologians since it implied that the humanity of Christ was not complete. Cyril’s celebrated formula — wrongly attributed to Athanasius and, in fact, uttered by Apollinaris — "one nature incarnate of God the Word" was accepted only in a Chalcedonian context. Divine nature and human nature could never merge, be confused, or become complementary to each other; but in Christ, they were united in the single, divine hypostasis of the Logos: the divine model matched the human image.
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/10/2008 3:17 PM (GMT -6) | | Breaking it down for you, Tom.
Meyendorff (and others) believe that Jesus was a full human INDIVIDUAL, complete with human SPIRIT, SOUL, and BODY. And this individualized, particularized hypostatic unity (sensible/intelligible) was ENHYPOSTASISIZED by the Logos.
Jesus WAS a human individual.
Jesus WAS NOT a human person.
I bet you still don't like it, huh? 
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 3/10/2008 3:36 PM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/10/2008 5:35 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
"as far as I can tell ‘human spirit’ = ‘human hypostasis’; if that’s not the case then I’m open to discussing it further..."
Orthodox Christianity says that it is NOT the case that " 'human spirit' = 'human hypostasis' ". Hypostasis is NOT an expression of natural existence.
So...
...are you still open to discuss this further? 
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/10/2008 9:50 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom,
Please understand, dude. I love you. Dearly and deeply. You are my brother for real. And my friend. We are one in Christ. But I'm asking you.... Please just think about...THINK about...changing your mind on some stuff. Particularly the whole Jesus having a human spirit thing...
It's you and me, homie. The SAME CAT that had Long Islands with you at TGIF's. The SAME CAT that you went to Greg's with. Brothers of the Hooka!  This stuff is real and true, man. Hesychasm. Theoria. Dark Nights of Soul and Spirit. EPIKLESIS! And it's REALLY, REALLY important to the PRACTICAL MATTERS OF FAITH for the heresies of Nestorianism and Apollinarianism to be avoided... For REAL!!! Do you hear me, friend Tom??
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 3/11/2008 12:23 AM (GMT -6) | | Sure, I follow you D. I don't NOT understand what you're saying.
So do I get an answer to that question there? We agree that humans are:
non—divine centers of experience,
thinking, feeling, choosing beings,
self-determining/self-disposing in the freely creative expression of love,
self-perceiving in our apprehension of all of the above,
stand, in all of the above, in relationship to God.
You deny any of this constitutes personal existence; there's no person here.
So D, IF, IF we wanted to say a being that was the above was ALSO a person, what would we need to add to the above? Being a person must mean something that does NOT appear here. What is that? You want me to understand, right? So, what is 'personhood' over and against these activities and this way of relating?
Tom
Post Edited (Tom) : 3/11/2008 12:53:36 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 7:22 AM (GMT -6) | | | Ok, Tom. I know that you don't like to read other pages...but I really...REALLY...think this should be an exception!
If ANYONE has this stuff on lock, he does.
I'm asking you for patience and endurance, demonstrated in reading and understanding this paper.
I feel like after you've digested the material there, then I can answer.
I'd read the NOTES too. Here's an example...
[54] It is characteristic that according to the Fathers every baptized person becomes “Christ.”
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
Post Edited ("I am-in-I Am") : 3/11/2008 7:45:21 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 9:27 AM (GMT -6) | | Please?
Pretty please?
Pretty, pretty, please?
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 3/11/2008 9:29 AM (GMT -6) | | D: I'm asking you for patience and endurance, demonstrated in reading and understanding this paper.
Tom: After 3 months of devoting all my spare time to this, spending hours and hours on it, and nearly 200 pages of threads, you want me to demonstrate patience and endurance before you'll answer me? Dude, if I don't qualify in your eyes for a straight up answer right now, as I am, then let's just scratch it. In spite of the fact that I have the paper and have read it (and come back to it), that's cool. I was just looking for your answer.
Tom
Post Edited (Tom) : 3/11/2008 10:38:28 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 11:43 AM (GMT -6) | | Ok. You've read it. Good. Then you will understand what I'm going to say.
-----------------------------------------
So do I get an answer to that question there? We agree that humans are:
non—divine centers of experience,
thinking, feeling, choosing beings,
self-determining/self-disposing in the freely creative expression of love,
self-perceiving in our apprehension of all of the above,
stand, in all of the above, in relationship to God.
You deny any of this constitutes personal existence; there's no person here.
So D, IF, IF we wanted to say a being that was the above was ALSO a person, what would we need to add to the above? Being a person must mean something that does NOT appear here. What is that? You want me to understand, right? So, what is 'personhood' over and against these activities and this way of relating?
-------------------
Answer:
The human potential for "personhood" is fully released in "the hypostasis of ecclesial existence" meaning "epicletic life in Christ-the-Logos"
Christ didn't have "ecclesial existence" because Jesus IS the Incarnate Word, THE Divine Human. He is the Archetype and Image of whom we are "images". We are adopted into CHRIST-THE-LOGOS HIMSELF via the perichoretic indwelling of our human spirit with the Holy Spirit. As we integrate our personhood in God in Christ, we become whole persons...not merely human individuals, empowered by human "soulishness", driven by socialized cultural, familial, and individual ego matrices of capacities and defenses.
I believe that this is why it's said "No salvation outside of the CHURCH" [Church being "Christ's Body"]
Now, given you've read Zizy's paper there...you should be able to understand what I've said.
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
Post Edited ("I am-in-I Am") : 3/11/2008 11:50:16 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 12:02 PM (GMT -6) | | Make sense, Tom?
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 12:10 PM (GMT -6) | | I like this way of saying things...
It's like saying...
"Father, compose Your World through my being!" [Father, glorify Your Name!]
and He says...
"Son (you ARE in Christ, you know), compose your world (which you freely choose to be My World) through My Being (which is inseparable from My Holy Spirit)." [I have glorified it, and will glorify it again.]
And via the Holy Spirit, God's Gracious Empowering Presence, this happens at every moment of one's human existence.
Just a passing back and forth of PERSONAL self-giving, experienced by humans who are epicletically IN Christ.
Make sense?
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
Post Edited ("I am-in-I Am") : 3/11/2008 12:13:15 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 7:56 PM (GMT -6) | | Making sense, Corey?
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 7:59 PM (GMT -6) | | | In the ongoing interplay between the human spirit and the Holy Spirit, there is is a vital exchange--continuously alive, bringing forth fundamentally new orders of being and understanding. Yet the new orders do not violate or contravene the paradoxical unity of the two spirits. The kinetic moments of convergence presupposed by the model are a kind of epiclesis--the moment in the celebration of the Eucharist when by an act of the Holy Spirit the elements become the body and blood of Christ. Repeatedly enacted, the moment is a "leap" between the human and the Divine, the Divine and the human, which in all situations brings forth transformation--if not a transubstantiation--of the fallen orders of mind, life, and creation.
The final point to be stressed here is the twist [I am's note: of the Mobius Strip, Tom ] As a physical model of the decisive kinetic moment, the twist depicts a temporal event via spatial terms but without spatializing it. Thus, the twist in the model bears a fundamental truth about the relationship between the two spirits: in this interplay time eludes space and all its presumed determinants, and via transformation a new order of fundamental determinants emerges. In the context of irreversible thermodynamics it is not time per se that is irreversible, but time's determinants. The fallen and shattered teacup can't reassemble itself on the table; the filmstrip of events does not run backward. However, time stripped of its determinants (as can only happen in reflective human consciousness, an inveterably "open system") appears to be reversible in the spontaneous creation of a new order of determinants.
Theologically, the experience of that "reversibility" in faith is a new being in Christ. However, as we will see, this notion involves "God's time." In this context, what appears to be reversibility may instead be highly accelerated motion toward the eschatological future in Christ--a wrinkle in time and foretaste of the redemption of all things.
James Loder, Knignt's Move. 121-122.
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
Post Edited ("I am-in-I Am") : 3/11/2008 8:06:17 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 9:43 PM (GMT -6) | | Jeff. Corey. Sahid. Bruce. Selah. Any others.
Y'all still ridin' with me on this or what?
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 10:04 PM (GMT -6) | | I'd like to take this time to praise Christ, the Lord.
Approximately 3 years ago, I was Sir Mephistopheles, the Eternal One...the Devil's Advocate.
I'd been that since...what...Fall 1999. Literally. Whenever Greg's website first started. This moniker was evidential of my despair. Hence my own self perception as God's Whore...the very reluctant Abject Servant of God, the Theistic Bootlicker. (I know the OLLLD timers remember this!!) (RELIGIOUS STAGE A, Corey??  )
Now... I'm in transition... I believe...REALLY BELIEVE... That... "I am-in-I Am"This is not just a name to me. This is my ultimate reality. My ultimate belief about "myself".
My personhood is inherent in Christ-the-Logos.
"I, not I, but Christ-the-Logos"
The Apostle Paul.
For real. From "MephEternal" to "I am-in-I am" Well... Jesus replied, "What is impossible with human beings is possible with God." Praise the Bride-Groom! 
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
Post Edited ("I am-in-I Am") : 3/11/2008 10:49:08 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 10:10 PM (GMT -6) | |
Turtle? The Scissortail will NOT proceed without you. Friend. Speak up. 
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 3/11/2008 11:49 PM (GMT -6) | | I asked "Is Jesus a 'son' in the 'Son'"? I think I heard, "No, he's not a 'son' in the 'Son'."
It seems you answered only because I had read Zizioulas' article, still wanting me to demonstrate patience and endurance by reading it before you'd answer. And that's frustrating after all this time, but whatever. I got an answer, so thanks.
Anything I'd say in response I've already said before. It's not my view, but I love and respect you.
Tom
Post Edited (Tom) : 3/11/2008 11:53:29 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 11:55 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I asked "Is Jesus a 'son' in the 'Son'"? I think I heard, "No, he's not a 'son' in the 'Son'."
Yessir.
*************************
Tom:
It seems you answered only because I had read Zizioulas' article, still wanting me to demonstrate patience and endurance by reading it. And that bothers me. But whatever. I think I got my answer, so thanks.
Tom, given all of the misunderstandings I've perceived us to have in the past, I wanted to make sure that the context was there for you to understand my answer. Zizy's paper pretty much had what I wanted to say...and I figured that if you read it, you'd get my point. I wasn't attempting to insinuate anything negative through what I was asking. I just knew that you didn't like to read other pages (you've mentioned as much before)...and I asked for your patience and endurance by reading this someone's else webpage INSTEAD OF my own personal synopsizing view...which is what you told me ON THIS THREAD you didn't want to do. I intended to ask for continued grace on your part.
So, my apologies if what I said offended you. There was no intent for that.
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
Post Edited ("I am-in-I Am") : 3/12/2008 12:01:38 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/11/2008 11:58 PM (GMT -6) | | Did you really take that much offense at what I said?
Man...I guess I have to watch that!
Whoever knows and recognizes how near God’s Kingdom is to him may say with Jacob, “God is in this place, and I knew it not.”
Meister Eckhart, "The Nearness of the Kingdom"
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you.
| | Back to Top | | |
| 154 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Tuesday, November 10, 2026 12:33 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|