 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
|  Posted 5/7/2008 10:21 PM (GMT -6) |   | | Trinity as "Eternal Love Song"
Father="Singer"
Spirit="Singer's Voice"
Son="Singer's Note/Lyric/Word"
The Eternal Love Song of Divine Being as the "Singer" (inseparable from the "Singer's Voice") who ever "begets" Himself in "Note/Lyric/Word."
The One Triune God's always been singing...and enjoying his song.
"I Am (that I Am)"
But God freely chose to change things up a bit...
A variant "song" of God's eternal self-sharing and self-glorification.
Creation's Song.
The Song's called...
"I Am...Immanuel"
----------------------------------------
This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah came about : His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit.Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.
But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."
All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: "The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" (which means "God with us").
When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.
--------------------------------------
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all people. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
There was a man sent from God whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.
The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only [Son], who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
(John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, "This is he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' ") Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God, but the one and only [Son], who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
---------------------------
Craziness?
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") : 5/7/2008 10:27:16 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
 |
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/7/2008 10:43 PM (GMT -6) | | The Nicene Creed
I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. (Singer?)
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. (Singer's Note/Lyric/Word?)
Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets. (Singer's Voice?)
And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
Maybe? 
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 5/7/2008 11:11 PM (GMT -6) | | | The Bridegroom beckons...
Ribbon in the Sky
Stevie Wonder
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-58Np7s95u0
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 | | |
|
feelinahole
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 754
| Posted 5/7/2008 11:18 PM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/7/2008 11:30 PM (GMT -6) | | Maybe this will help, Feelin.
God is "I Am" without Creation.
God cannot be "I Am...'God with us' " without Creation.
Creation is the context for the "with us"
and...
"God with us" is the Incarnation of God in the Anointed One, Jesus. Get it? 
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") : 5/7/2008 11:38:45 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/8/2008 7:22 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
The only criticism of the singer/song/voice is that only one of them (singer) is, technically speaking, a person. The other two, so far as the analogy goes, are not persons, whereas with God each of the three is a 'person'. That's why I prefer the eternal 'dance' analogy. The mutuality is interpersonal. As far as our experience of dancing goes--we grant that 'persons' dance; the movement is interpersonal. But the movement/relationality between a singer and her voice and her song isn't interpersonal as such, so in that sense your analogy comes up a bit short for me.
"Perichoreuein", right? (Perichoresis)
Fine. Let's put 'em together.
The Eternal Song is the "score" to which the Divine Persons eternally "dance" with each other.
How about 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 | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/8/2008 10:05 AM (GMT -6) | | Corey:
I still prefer the metaphor of "jazz improv" over "score"... I don't think the movements in the song were set in advance. The players aren't reading off of some script.
אהיה אשר אהיה
Ehyheh asher ehyeh
"I be that I be"
or...
"I will be that I will be"
Unceasing creative free self-knowing, self-willing, self-enjoying, and self-expression.
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") : 5/8/2008 10:09:23 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/8/2008 10:14 AM (GMT -6) | | God "will be" what God "will be"...WITH US.
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 5/8/2008 10:56 AM (GMT -6) | | |
Wanna see something trippy?
Ask this question?
Is there a "silent presence" undergirding the entire Eternal Song and Dance?
Like unto the "silent presence" of an opera singer we experience right before he or she sings.
The "silent presence" that empowers the whole process.
Could this "silent presence" be what Meister Eckhart is talking about when he talks of "Deity"?
Talking through Eckhart's trinitarian process...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The absolute, unqualified being of the Deity Eckhart also calls unnatured nature. This unnatured nature, however, manifests itself in the natured nature, the three persons. The Trinity is the self-revelation of the Deity (540, 31; 390,12-22). In it God comprises himself. Accordingly, Eckhart attributes to the Father a sort of genesis; only the Deity is absolutely without any progression and reposes everlastingly in itself. The Father was made through himself (534, 17). This self-revelation of God Eckhart designates as a cognition, a speaking, or a demeanor. The Father perceives the whole fullness of the Deity (6,S); or, what is the same, he speaks a single word, which comprises everything (70, 25). He procreates the Son (284, 12); for the Father is father only through the Son. The Son, however, is in everything like the Father, only that he procreates not (337, 3). The essence of the Father is also that of the Son, and the essence in both is no other than that of the Deity. From the pleasure and love which both have for each other springs the Holy Ghost (497, 26). Eckhart leaves no doubt that the entire trinitarian process must not be conceived of as a temporal one, but as a process extending throughout eternity (254, 10). Wilhelm Preger thought that Eckhart's distinction between Deity and God should be interpreted as a distinction between potentiality and actuality. To this interpretation Denifle (ALKG, ii. 453 sqq.) has strongly objected and cited Eckhart's Latin writings, in which he, with Thomas Aquinas and others, designates God as actus purus, thus excluding all potentiality. Denifle is right, in that Eckhart does not consciously and deliberately make any such distinction; but it can not be denied that his conception leads to it. Especially significant is Eckhart's explanation in 175, 7 sqq. where he tries to illustrate the relation between the fatherhood as it is determined in the Deity and the paternity of the person of the Father by the relation between the maternity peculiar to the Virgin as such, and the maternity which she acquires by bearing. But this is exactly the relation of potentiality and actuality (cf. also the peculiar passage 193, 33). It must be admitted that Eckhart here expresses two views which can not be harmonized with one another, though the second is not fully developed. Eckhart had a wealth of ingenious ideas, but he was unable to systematize them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meister Eckhart didn't have dispositional ontology. Let's try something...
Background. Long story short. According to Doc's Trinity and Process, (page 113) there are two types of dispositions: definitional and constitutive. Definitional dispositions are those that defines a things "essence", ie. those aspects without which it couldn't be itself. Constitutive dispositions are those that a thing can possess, but not as inherent to what it means to be that thing. In other words, a existent could either possess or not possess a constitutive disposition with no fundamental change to its "essence". Not so with a definitional disposition.
Here goes nuthin...
Eckhart's "Deity" <=> Uncreated Consciousness grounding the definitional disposition/capacity to be Divine Song/Dance of "I Am"
Eckhart's "Trinity" <=> Uncreated Consciousness eternally actualizing the definitional disposition/capacity to be Divine Song/Dance of "I Am"
And this Song/Dance of "I Am" is NOT actus purus...but is open to contingency. So....
Eckhart's "Creation" <=> Uncreated Consciousness continually actualizing the constitutional disposition/capacity to be Divine Song/Dance of "I Am...Immanuel"
That's what I'm seeing. What do you think, Tom?
Crazy yet?
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") : 5/8/2008 10:59:51 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/8/2008 11:06 AM (GMT -6) | | Interesting...more from the same wiki page...
Relation of the Soul to God
The unqualified Deity, the Trinity (birth of the Son or of the Eternal Word), and the creation of the world are to him three immediate moments, which follow each other in conceptual, not temporal sequence. All creatures have part in the divine essence; but this is true of the soul in a higher degree. In the irrational creature there is something of God; but in the soul, God is divine (230, 26; 2,31, 4). Though God speaks his word in all creatures, only rational creatures can preserve it (479, 19). In other words, in the soul, where he has his resting-place, God is subjective, while in the rest of creation he is merely objective. The soul is an image of God, in so far as its chief powers, memory, reason, and will, answer to the divine persons (319, 1). This accords with the view of Augustine. Just as there is the absolute Deity, which is superior to the persons of the Godhead, so in the soul there is something that is superior to its own powers. This is the innermost background of the soul, which Eckhart frequently calls a "spark," or "little spark." In its real nature this basis of the soul is one with the Deity (66, 2). When Eckhart sometimes speaks of it as uncreated (286, 16; 311, 6), and then again as created, this does not involve a contradiction. While, on the one hand, it rests eternally in the Deity; on the other it entered into the temporal existence of the soul, i.e., it was made or created through grace. But it is not in this original unity with God that the soul finds its perfection and bliss. As it has a subjective being, it must turn to God, in order that the essential principle implanted in it may be truly realized. It is not enough that it was made by God; God must come and be in it. But this has taken place without hindrance only in the human soul of Christ (67, 12). For all other souls sin is an obstacle.
-------------------------
My mind goes back to Thomas Merton...
At the center of our being is a point of nothingness which is untouched by sin and by illusion, a point of pure truth, a point or spark which belongs entirely to God, which is never at our disposal, from which God disposes of our lives, which is inaccessible to the fantasies of our own mind or the brutalities of our own will. This little point of nothingness and of absolute poverty is the pure glory of God in us. It its so to speak his name written on us, as our poverty, as our indigence, and our dependence, as our sonship. It is like a pure diamond , blazing with the invisible light of heaven. It is in everybody, and if we could see it we would see these billions or points of light coming together in the face and blaze of a sun that would make all the darkness and cruelty of life vanish completely…The gate of heaven is everywhere.
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 5/8/2008 12:10 PM (GMT -6) | | Corey: I still prefer the metaphor of "jazz improv" over "score"... I don't think the movements in the song were set in advance. The players aren't reading off of some script.
Tom: Exactomundo. The themes of love (what love IS) can only be defined by God. But its free expression extends to self-determining agents. Improv baby.
D: Unceasing creative free self-knowing, self-willing, self-enjoying, and self-expression.
Tom: That much covers GOD. And few will disagree that this is an appropriate description of God as freely loving. The question is US in-relationship-to this God. Corey and I are extending your description to US as well. WE become self-determining, freely self-expressive persons-in-relation as well. That's the point (a point I'm no longer discussing or arguing for--still signed on the dotted line!).
Tom
Post Edited (Tom) : 5/8/2008 12:19:33 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/8/2008 12:21 PM (GMT -6) | | D: Unceasing creative free self-knowing, self-willing, self-enjoying, and self-expression.
Tom: That much covers GOD. Corey and I are extending it to US. WE are self-determining, self-expressive agents of love.
Human beings, by our original design, have the capacity for self-knowing, self-willing, self-enjoying, self-expressive existence because we are created in the IMAGE of God.
This capacity is fully exercised only when Christ-the-Logos indwells the human "heart" via the Holy Spirit. When, as Eckhart says, God comes to "be" in the contrite human soul. Then, we are in the LIKENESS of God.
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 7:21 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
Oh yeah, the EO distinction in Genesis between 'image' and 'likeness'...can you make an exegetical case for the distinction between these D? I say they denote one and the same reality, typical Hebrew doubling up.
I'm not fighting that fight. As I see it, the concept is rooted in Traditional (capital "T" ) interpretation of the passage, undergirded by Christian experience. This will not be suitable for you, I already know. As I see it, the main distinction being made is between 1) the innate capacities granted to all human beings by God and 2) the acquistion of divine life by the consistent, right use of those innate capacities. Basically, the image/likeness distinction is of latency/potential and the full exercise of that potential.
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 7:31:08 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 5/9/2008 7:29 AM (GMT -6) | | Cool stuff, T! I'm assuming you are referring to this...
HU: A Love Song to God
The Light and Sound of God
Actual "HU" Music. (GREAT!!)
Love it!! 
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 7:40 AM (GMT -6) | | |
Or how about...
Aauuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmm.
From the site linked above...
The Music of Om
Om is not a word but rather an intonation, which, like music, transcends the barriers of age, race, culture and even species. It is made up of three Sanskrit letters, aa, au and ma which, when combined together, make the sound Aum or Om. It is believed to be the basic sound of the world and to contain all other sounds. It is a mantra or prayer in itself. If repeated with the correct intonation, it can resonate throughout the body so that the sound penetrates to the centre of one's being, the atman or soul.
There is harmony, peace and bliss in this simple but deeply philosophical sound. By vibrating the sacred syllable Om, the supreme combination of letters, if one thinks of the Ultimate Personality of Godhead and quits his body, he will certainly reach the highest state of "stateless" eternity, states the Bhagavad Gita.
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 7:43 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I'm just arguing that the text be RESPECTED, and you don't respect it in this case. Siding the Tradition where the Text (capital 'T' too) permits competing interpretations is one thing. But you don't have that here. There's nothing whatsoever in the text to suggest the distinction. Quite the contrary.
I think it was Ireneaus (130-200 AD?) who first argued the distinction. I guess those early guys had one distinct advantage over us. If you can be wrong about something EARLY ENOUGH in the game you have a good chance of obtaining orthodox status the longer you go without being challenged. But you can be absolutely correct about something and be dismissed if you're TOO LATE.
A strange approach to truth indeed.
Note. I don't debate that human beings have innate natural capacities or that we acquire new attributes over time. I don't know anybody who would deny this much. The question is being consistent with the text. Make the distinction IF YOU WANT, but do so on the proper grounds, and the text of Genesis is not the place to do it. To try just shows how willing one is to constrain the text to one's preconceived beliefs, and that doesn't say a lot for the one making the argument.
Wesleyan QUADRILATERAL.
You and I have different approaches to those 4 points.
And since the MAJOR POINT is agreed to ( " human beings have innate natural capacities or that we acquire new attributes over time" ) then...so be it.
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 | | |
| 688 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:48 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 |
|
|