 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/19/2008 5:46 AM (GMT -6) |   | |
D-
If you read Congdon’s post which you mention on another thread (his post about the analogia entis), you’ll see how narrow his acceptance of the analogia entis is (following Jungel). And if you follow the discussion that follows that post and note Millinerd’s responses, you’ll see where I stand (with Millinerd). I do think the analogia entis, understood apart from faith, is useful and makes “a” knowledge of God available (contra Congdon). But I agree that this knowledge is mediated by the Son (who is the sole mediator between God and Creation). We just don’t ‘know’ it’s the Son. That’s what we need the gospel for.
The ‘revelation’ about the ‘analogy of being’ I spoke of having while jogging yesterday was pretty simple. It might not strike you or anybody else. Essentially is starts with the claim that “God” is that “in whom we live, move, and have our being,” he who “holds all things [all being] together,” etc. Then, taking into consideration evil as a “privation of being” we simply conclude that “being” is continuous and singular, and if continuous then open to explanation (if only partial) from anywhere within it. That grounds the analogy of being, even if one’s not reasoning toward or contemplating God from “within faith.” So the analogia entis isn’t only effective from within Barth’s analogia fidei (as Congdon says). I appreciate his point. We don’t want to say that there’s knowledge of God available outside of Christ. But if, as Millinerd says rightly, we don’t limit ourselves to the Christ of history but understand all creation as a ‘gift’ of grace through the divine Logos/Son, then ALL creation IS revelation and all knowledge regarding God or personal experience of God is mediated through the Son. That’s not to say the gospel is available outside the story of Christ. It’s not. But it is to say that a humble and thoughtful reflection upon created reality can lead reason uninformed about the gospel to suppose that a personal God exists. And if human beings are by definition (as you and I agree) egos desperate for permanence of personal identity, then reason can conclude apart from the gospel that whoever the ultimate personal explanation is for creation (and for me own longing for personal identity) must also be the ultimate ground for my own identity. So the analogia entis has legitimate applications apart from the analogia fidei, if only to prepare us to recognize in Christ what creation teaches us to anticipate and imagine. And that’s something. In short, if the Trinitarian persons are to define 'personhood' for US, and if we are to 'participate' as persons in the gift of divine personal being, it can only be because there's a shared context, and that shared context is 'personal being' itself. Sure, I can explain it better on the other side of analogia fidei. But what I also understand is that a whole lot of what people think, imagine, long for, and spend their lives in search of prior to faith is explainable only by positing the loving mediation of divine being prior to faith.
One objection would be to say (as so many do), that God is “beyond ‘being’ itself,” so that no knowledge whatsoever which is available to reason through created being apart from Christ can ground any of our God-talk. The problem is that we can’t extract the Incarnation from this as hard as those who make this objection may try. We can’t say God is “absolutely beyond ‘being’ itself” and mean that none of our categories apply to him in ANY sense and then also say God unites himself to created being in the Incarnation. All we can mean (as Hart pointed out in that radio lecture we discussed) by saying God is “beyond being” is something like God is “not reduced to the limitations of ‘created’ being,” that God is “not himself a created being,” and that “nothing exists which does not owe its existence to God.” I’m fine with all that. It still leaves the analogia entis in tact.
Tom Post Edited (Tom) : 7/19/2008 5:52:30 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
 |
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/19/2008 9:28 AM (GMT -6) | | balance
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/hopko
ONE MORE -- PART #4 -- I COMING IN A FEW DAYS...
How We Speak Of God - Part 3
Posted Thursday, July 17, 2008
 This time, Fr. Thomas speaks of the Activities and Actions of God.
How We Speak Of God - Part 2
Posted Monday, July 14, 2008
Fr. Tom continues his discussion, this time focusing on the Divine Attributes of God.
How We Speak Of God - Part 1
Posted Thursday, July 10, 2008
Fr. Thomas begins a four-part series on naming God and the language and words we use in the process.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/19/2008 10:30 AM (GMT -6) | | I guess that means you don't think my view is balanced! ;o)
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/19/2008 10:32 AM (GMT -6) | | Just so you know, POW. I don't have time to download and listen to programs. Every once in a blue moon, if it's exceptional, and if 100 people write me and tell me I 'have' to listen to it, I'll find time to download and listen. If there's something in all that programing you want me to hear, I suggest you boil it down and post it.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 11:28 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
In short, if the Trinitarian persons are to define 'personhood' for US, and if we are to 'participate' as persons in the gift of divine personal being, it can only be because there's a shared context, and that shared context is 'personal being' itself.
Wouldn't "consciousness" be the ultimate "shared context" of which you speak? Consciousness precedes personal being, right? Personal being cannot be separated from the self-reflective event, which deals with consciousness.
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/19/2008 11:30 AM (GMT -6) | | No criticism intended. Sorry. The "balance" word popped into my head as I saw YOU demonstrating it. Kudos!
As to the audio, when the whole thing is up I might find a few phrases to pull up, and ask a question or two.
Maybe others will like listening to them!
Again, no crit intended.
-B
Tom said...
I guess that means you don't think my view is balanced! ;o)
Tom
(o) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 11:31 AM (GMT -6) | | | And isn't all this just Romans 1?
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of human beings who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal human beings and birds and animals and reptiles.
Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
Post Edited (Shekinah) : 7/19/2008 12:53:06 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 11:52 AM (GMT -6) | | Hmmm...without excuse...
I'm thinking about a term that came up in the talk with Greg last week.
What if Creation is a "fractalization" of the Triune God's own infinite (free, loving) being, freely sustained sustained by God's free gracious choice as an expression of God's own infinite love?
Self-similarity is everywhere, right? Could this "point" to God's infinity?
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
Post Edited (Shekinah) : 7/19/2008 11:59:20 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:02 PM (GMT -6) | | | Hart brilliantly reverses this line of thought, so that “the analogy of being finds truth in the ever greater particularity of each thing as it enters ever more into the infinite that gives it being” (p. 247). Or, to put it more sharply: the analogy of being describes the triumph of the infinite over every kind of totality."
There is INFINITY in every becoming of particularity.
Does this make sense...or am I formally loony now?
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:03 PM (GMT -6) | | That's cool POW. I didn't take it in a bad way!
T | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:04 PM (GMT -6) | | Another thought. Self-replication. Everything replicates after it's kind.
Humans bear humans.
Fish bear fish.
Bears bear bears. (heh...)
And God bears "gods".
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:09 PM (GMT -6) | | No doubt you're loony!
I never saw the big deal over analogia entis and the vestigia (like Rm.1).
I don't see how the fractilization idea defines WHAT the continuity is. It just shows that it makes sense to posit some such continuity or similarity.
My other problem with viewing creation as divine fractilization is that it (a) reduces creation to being a mere repetition of divinity (shades of Plotinus), and (b) looks EXTREMELY deterministic. Everything down the line, as far as you go, is determined in every particular by the Original.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:10 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
In short, if the Trinitarian persons are to define 'personhood' for US, and if we are to 'participate' as persons in the gift of divine personal being, it can only be because there's a shared context, and that shared context is 'personal being' itself.
Maybe the question can be asked this way: What is the "shared context" for human spirit-to-Holy Spirit communion with God? Biblically speaking, that's our target. To be able to worship the Father in spirit and truth because God is Spirit (and Truth).
My thoughts...
Personal being could work here. But could "consciousness" (which deals with awareness and perception) be the ultimate context here? I believe that even before the "personhood" of a human child emerges, God's Spirit is already in "communicato" with that child's human spirit...even as the child's ego development may be quite low functioning.
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:14 PM (GMT -6) | | D: Self-replication. Everything replicates after it's kind. Humans bear humans. Fish bear fish. Bears bear bears. (heh...) And God bears "gods."
T: I'm figitting in my seat.
Humans bearing other humans is not "self" replication. The human that comes to be is not the same self as the self that procreates. That's important to me. I have to say it. Whatever is procreated, giving away from God as creation, it's not "who" God is. Like (crap, what's his name?) said, "Even if there's a sense in which we can say God is WHAT we become, we can never say God is WHO we become."
T | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:16 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I don't see how the fractilization idea defines WHAT the continuity is. It just shows that it makes sense to posit some such continuity or similarity.
Right. It gives us REASON TO BELIEVE that there IS continuity and/or similarity between us and God. Good reason.
******************************************
Tom:
My other problem with viewing creation as divine fractilization is that it (a) reduces creation to being a mere repetition of divinity (shades of Plotinus), and (b) looks EXTREMELY deterministic. Everything down the line, as far as you go, is determined in every particular by the Original.
Think about it. Repetitions of "infinite freedom" emerging into in an "open" creational web of God's divine energies.
Yeah. that's terrible.
Freedom is built into the SYSTEM, man! I think this is what Meister Eckhart knew...but couldn't articulate...
“The free man is, if he is really free, freedom itself, yet only insofar as he is free.”
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:18 PM (GMT -6) | | D: I believe that even before the "personhood" of a human child emerges, God's Spirit is already in "communicato" with that child's human spirit.
T: I'm not touching that with a hundred foot pole. Is this communication 'personal'? Volitoinal? Is it mutually reciprocally free? Responsible? How's the communication made? How's it 'perceived' by the human spirit?
Lots of problems there.
I'm NOT GOING INTO THAT! Don't even try!
T | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:20 PM (GMT -6) | | Dude,
All I'm really trying to say is that "consciousness" seems to logically precede "personal being". Actually, consciousness grounds all living becoming and being that we see (personal or otherwise).
We could even say this...
The ONE God is the ONE Uncreated, Unboundable Consiousness who is tri-personal (3 Persons) in his Eternal Personal Being (The Trinity)
Make sense?
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
Post Edited (Shekinah) : 7/19/2008 12:23:24 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:20 PM (GMT -6) | | D: Think about it. Repetitions of "infinite freedom" emerging into in an "open" creational web of God's divine energies.
Yeah. that's terrible.
Freedom is built into the SYSTEM, man!
T: Where's the freedom in fractilization? There's no freedom emerging in the infinite repetition of fractilization. You gotta be kidding me.
Oh brother.
T | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:24 PM (GMT -6) | | D: All I'm really trying to say is that "consciousness" seems to logically precede "personal being".
T: That's a different question altogether. If that's all you're saying, fine. I'm not sure Zizzy wouldn't complain that it doesn't restrict divine freedom to posit ANYTHING logically prior to personhood. Zizzy even says the freedom of the person is beyond logical necessity. God doesn't exist necessarily. He chooses to exist, freely. He chooses freely to be a trinity. So positing 'consciousness' before God's own free choice to exist as a person is a problem for him.
I think he's wrong (so do a lot of Orthodox), but that's what he'd say.
T | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:24 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
D: Self-replication. Everything replicates after it's kind. Humans bear humans. Fish bear fish. Bears bear bears. (heh...) And God bears "gods."
T: I'm figitting in my seat.
Humans bearing other humans is not "self" replication. The human that comes to be is not the same self as the self that procreates. That's important to me. I have to say it. Whatever is procreated, giving away from God as creation, it's not "who" God is. Like (crap, what's his name?) said, "Even if there's a sense in which we can say God is WHAT we become, we can never say God is WHO we become."
Would it be better to say "like comes from like"?
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:32 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I'm not sure Zizzy wouldn't complain that it doesn't restrict divine freedom to posit ANYTHING logically prior to personhood. Zizzy even says the freedom of the person is beyond logical necessity. God doesn't exist necessarily. He chooses to exist, freely. He chooses freely to be a trinity. So positing 'consciousness' before God's own free choice to exist as a person is a problem for him.
Actually, I don't think it would be. Here's a tossup thought. What if he'd say that the Trinity is Uncreated, Unbounded Consciousness' FREE CHOICE to answer the "Who am I?" question presented to itself at all times? In freely "answering the question" eternally presented to God's consciousness, the ONE God "is" eternally 3 Persons (Father/Source, Son/Agent, Spirit/Fulfiller), in the "eternal act" of God's self-knowledge, self-will, and self-love.
Could that work?
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
Post Edited (Shekinah) : 7/19/2008 12:44:11 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:34 PM (GMT -6) | | | "It's the question that drives us, Neo..."
Trinity from "The Matrix"
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
Post Edited (Shekinah) : 7/19/2008 1:01:57 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:45 PM (GMT -6) | | Maybe this is how God's "eternal act" involves eternal SELF-DISCOVERY.
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 12:49 PM (GMT -6) | | | Reposting...
***************************************************
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"
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 7/19/2008 1:12 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
But if, as Millinerd says rightly, we don’t limit ourselves to the Christ of history but understand all creation as a ‘gift’ of grace through the divine Logos/Son, then ALL creation IS revelation and all knowledge regarding God or personal experience of God is mediated through the Son.
Creation as "theophany", baby. 
Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;
"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them."
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Look! God's dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God."
| | Back to Top | | |
| 28 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:10 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 |
|
|