 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > Trinity as "Eternal Love Song": Hey...Why Not? | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/9/2008 7:45 AM (GMT -6) |   | Dude, it's NOT just me. Kallistos Ware and others, buddy. THAT'S why.
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 5/9/2008 7:50 AM (GMT -6) | | I wish I could get you to understand hesychasm, Tom.
When you get back, you and I just have to have a sit down talk about this.
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 5/9/2008 7:53 AM (GMT -6) | | Oy vay...
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 5/9/2008 7:56 AM (GMT -6) | | Hmmmmm...
Oh, well.
Let love reign. 
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 5/9/2008 8:09 AM (GMT -6) | | | By the way, Hesychastic prayer isn't the issue here. Stealing away to one's "closet," quieting one's self in meditation in prayer to experience God, etc., isn't something I "don't understand."
You too quickly synthesize. You simplistically 'equate' this with Eastern forms of prayer/mediation. The "OM" post was a bit surprising to me, NOT BECAUSE IT'S EASTERN (it's not about geography), but because of the theological assumptions behind it (regarding the goodness of the body, and the difference between biblical mediation which is never without content and the chanting of content-less syllables; the underlying assumptions, etc.).
T
Post Edited (Tom) : 5/9/2008 8:12:22 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/9/2008 8:13 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
You too quickly synthesize. You simplistically 'equate' this with Eastern forms of prayer/mediation. The "OM" post was a bit surprising to me, NOT BECAUSE IT'S EASTERN (it's not about geography), but because of the theological assumptions behind it (regarding the goodness of the body, and the difference between biblical mediation which is never without content and the chanting of content-less syllables; the underlying assumptions, etc.)
You callin' me syncretistic, buddy? 
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 5/9/2008 8:21 AM (GMT -6) | | But since we are on the subject...a question...
If it true that Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, and Christian mystics...all end up saying that Absolute Reality (however they've conceived it) is Love...
what does that imply about the image of God in human beings?
What does it imply about the capacities of the created human spirit?
Does it imply anything at all?
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 5/9/2008 9:16 AM (GMT -6) | | |
D: You callin' me syncretistic, buddy?
Tom: Your syncretistic tendencies are now well-known! That much ain’t in doubt.
D: If it’s true that Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, and Christian mystics...all end up saying that Absolute Reality (however they've conceived it) is Love...
what does that imply about the image of God in human beings?
Tom: It doesn’t imply anything about the image of God in us. If everybody in the world ALL “SAID” the same thing about something it wouldn’t imply anything about the nature of human beings per se (except that human beings universally possess the capacity to speak and communicate).
---------------------------
I’m not trying to be difficult, D. Don’t misunderstand me. Here’s the thing about the text. When I take your approach and begin with Tradition (and Experience), and bring that TO the text, I end up reconfirming established views only. I don’t give myself an opportunity to HEAR the text on its own terms. Sometimes (with this or that text) that might not be such a big deal, but as an approach to Scripture it’s a big deal. And you know this is the inherent problem with Tradition; people aren’t given (and they don’t give themselves) the opportunity to hear the text. We SAY we want to construct a theological anthropology based on Scripture, but then we don’t let Scripture speak. Have you let Genesis speak? Have you grappled with the text, looked at the Hebrew, considered the grammar…dispassionately? Evidently not. You read Greek Orthodox guys who impress you a lot and who adopt Ireneaus’s (incorrect) reading of the text and that’s it. You take their word for it. What happened to exegesis?
I’m not arguing a particular anthropology here. It's not about Genesis per se. I’m arguing that we respect the Text and let it judge our traditions. Tradition doesn’t LIKE that, EO included.
T
Post Edited (Tom) : 5/9/2008 9:21:17 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/9/2008 11:00 AM (GMT -6) | | I'm having a struggle listening to you on this, Tom. I must confess. What happened to exegesis, you ask? When I tried to ask you about Jesus actually having a human spirit ( "pneuma" )...you balked all the way down for WEEKS...saying that you couldn't tell whether or not Jesus had a human spirit...even though it was directly in the text.
So when you talk to me about not taking the text seriously...well...
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 5/9/2008 11:14 AM (GMT -6) | | Something else...
Tom:
...and the difference between biblical meditation which is never without content and the chanting of content-less syllables
You claim that biblical meditation is NEVER without content. Ok...please help me with these questions...
1) As YOU understand "heyschastic practice", does it lead to "stillness and emptiness of mind" where there is a cessation of images in the mind? (Yes, No, I don't know)
2) Is hesychasm "biblical meditation", in your view?
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 5/9/2008 11:30 AM (GMT -6) | | I've never denied what a biblical text 'says'. I've questioned what we ought to suppose some texts 'mean', that is, I admitted to not understanding, to questioning your confidence, etc.. That's quite different than claiming positively that a text actually means this or that BASED ON TRADITION without defending that meaning exegetically. I don't do that.
If you can make a biblical/textual argument for viewing meditation as having 'no content' I'm all ears. Point the way. I don't think such a thing can be gotten from the text, but I'm open. Just don't tell me it's SO because Tradition makes it so.
Tom
Post Edited (Tom) : 5/9/2008 11:41:44 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/9/2008 4:43 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I've never denied what a biblical text 'says'. I've questioned what we ought to suppose some texts 'mean', that is, I admitted to not understanding, to questioning your confidence, etc.. That's quite different than claiming positively that a text actually means this or that BASED ON TRADITION without defending that meaning exegetically. I don't do that.
and...
I'm trying to think off the top of my head which texts say Jesus had a "human spirit" where "pneuma" is qualified explicitly with "human." Texts that speak of Jesus' "pneuma," yeah. I'm not disputing this or that, just wanting to be clear on what the texts actually claim.
and...
Sahid:
Translating 'pneuma' as 'human spirit' is hardly exegesis. It wasn't that Tom wouldn't answer your exegetical question. It's that you only posed an eisegetical one: should we add a qualifier to 'pneuma'?
Let me be fair here. Clarity needed...on my part. I was unclear. You never denied that Jesus had a "pneuma" per se. You denied that the spirit that Jesus possessed was a human one.
Background. From 1 Corinthians 2 (particularly 2:11), it seems like Paul associated self-reflective knowledge with a person's "pneuma"...NRSV
For what human being knows what is truly human except the human spirit that is within? So also no one comprehends what is truly God's except the Spirit of God.
"pneuma tou anthropou"..."spirit of man/human"
(Loder picks up on this in his discussion of the human spirit in "Knight's Move"...as does Shults in his work.)
The human spirit, according to Paul, deals with human self-awareness, self-relatedness, and self-knowledge. As the Spirit of God knows the personal depths of God, so does the human spirit "knows" the personal depths of human being. He slso mentions in Romans 8:16, how the human spirit is DISTINCT FROM...and bears the testimony of...the Holy Spirit that we are God's children.
Now, I seriously doubt that, given this scripture (and others like Numbers 16:22 and Proverbs 20:27), anyone will dispute that God has created ALL human beings with a human spirit. To be human MEANS to have a human spirit as part of their makeup. A "pneuma to anthropou"
Now...
We are talking about the "pneuma" that Jesus surrendered to the Father when Jesus was dying on the Cross. (John 19:30; Luke 23:46 ) As I see it, this "pneuma" that Jesus gave up can either be a created human spirit (as Jesus was fully human) or the Uncreated Holy Spirit. Doesn't seem to be too many choices available there. I know what Tom thought before about this...direct quote from last year...
...I see no difference between ‘human spirit’ and ‘human person’. For me, to say “one person, two natures” is to say “one spirit, two natures.” And do you see why you appear Nestorian to me? You posit two such self-disposing evaluating centers of experience in Christ, one divine (Logos) and one human. To me that's the same as saying there are two hypostases or persons in Christ.
In other words, by positing that Jesus had TWO SPIRITS, human spirit and Holy Spirit, you said that I was Nestorian. To you, Tom, Jesus' ONE spirit was pretty much the Holy Spirit through which the God-the-Logos took the place of a normal human spirit, as being the seat of human consciousness and will, right? You are absolutely right that you never denied that Jesus had "a" spirit. You just denied that the ONE spirit that you believed Jesus possessed was a HUMAN spirit. You believed (believe still?) that the ONE spirit in Jesus was ONLY the Holy Spirit who took on two natures AS the Holy Spirit.
So, I did want to clear that 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.
Post Edited ("I am-in-I Am") : 5/9/2008 4:49:06 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/9/2008 5:25 PM (GMT -6) | | Jeff:
If, as you say, Christ had a human spirit as well as the Holy Spirit, which was responsible for what capacities? I'm trying to remember now why the EO finds it important that Christ had a human spirit unless we know which capacities were instantiated by which spirit he possessed. Does that make sense?
The human (NON-DIVINE) spirit of Jesus, as I see it, was responsible for the human capacity of 1) human (finite, limited) self-consciousness and will and 2) faith in and relationship to God. The "organ of faith" through which a perspectivally-limited human being perceives and knows themselves and the Unlimited and Unlimitable God. Again, this is given what I believe Scripture says about the human spirit.
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") : 5/9/2008 5:30:46 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/9/2008 7:27 PM (GMT -6) | | |
Here’s the difference D. I don’t claim (have never, would never) that a particular passage means this or that without at least trying to show why the ‘text’ ought to be understood as meaning this or that based on its language, the culture, grammar, etc.
But when it comes to the ‘pneuma’ of Christ, I’m on record as not wanting to make clear-cut claims (textual, theological, or otherwise). You however are claiming that Genesis really does make a distinction between ‘image’ and ‘likeness’ and the reasons you offer for believing the text makes this distinction are (a) Tradition, and (b) experience, nothing to do with the text itself. And you even ignore invitations by me to have you SHOW me how the text means this. You seem to just believe the text means this because you’re told to believe it and because it seems to “fit” your experience. That’s it.
In my view that’s problematic at best, irresponsible at worst.
It is not however irresponsible of me to admit that I don’t know what texts describing Jesus’ ‘pneuma’ mean, that I’m not confident about making claims in that regard, or that I’m unsure. Those are honest admissions, and they’re part of a more important admission of mine that Jesus DOES indeed possess all kind-essential properties of human nature. How you continue to go back to quotes of mine about the relation between ‘spirit’ and ‘person’ in Jesus’ case, quotes that I qualified, is beyond me.
Again, I’m not interested in debating particular views (about anthropology or Christology or whatever). I just wanted to make the point that your approach to interpreting Scripture was problematic at best. If that matters to you or not, concerns you or not, whatever. Just thought it was important.
Tom
Post Edited (Tom) : 5/9/2008 7:30:40 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/9/2008 7:32 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I just wanted to make the point that your approach to interpreting Scripture was problematic at best. If that matters to you or not, concerns you or not, whatever. Just thought it was important.
Thanks for your concern.
As for your inability to be sure about Jesus' pneuma...I hope you and God work that out.
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 5/9/2008 7:33 PM (GMT -6) | | Now...
As far as I can see...we AGREE on the "Eternal Song/Dance" concept still...right?
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 5/10/2008 11:17 AM (GMT -6) | |
Similtude said...
D: The human (NON-DIVINE) spirit of Jesus, as I see it, was responsible for the human capacity of 1) human (finite, limited) self-consciousness and will and 2) faith in and relationship to God. The "organ of faith" through which a perspectivally-limited human being perceives and knows themselves and the Unlimited and Unlimitable God. Again, this is given what I believe Scripture says about the human spirit.
Jeff: So EO would say that Christ's perfection in right-relating was due to the Holy Spirit? Whereas his human limits in perspective were due to the limits in the capacities of the human spirit?
There is SOMETHING that I wish to post. I've got to lay this out somewhere. Maybe its own thread would be OK. But since this board is about people, I'd rather lay it out where you can see it, and decide how mcu to discuss it with each other. Here it is:
| | Back to Top | | |
| 688 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:02 PM (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 |
|
|