 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > Maximus Online | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 12/10/2009 6:21 PM (GMT -6) |   | For the record...
I could give a damn if sex exists in heaven. If it does, cool. If not, cool. I just wanna see Jesus. I just want Him. Nuthin' else.
Real talk.
I Don't Give A F____ about anything but Christ. On my life, yo.
(Whole thread)
Maximus got his hand cut off and his tongue took out for the Lord's Church. I pray that God graces me with courage like that.
Yah. 
I. D. G. A. F.
Christ is All. Post Edited (One Love) : 12/10/2009 5:28:49 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 12/10/2009 7:28 PM (GMT -6) | | Andrew Louth replies:
I find this just as puzzling as Torstein does. Maximos’ doctrine of the inviolability of the logoi of creation, combined with his belief that each of us has his own unique logos, makes it quite clear to me that Maximos does not believe that we are overwhelmed and cease to exist as individuals in the eschaton.
What might Thunberg mean? I can only think of two possible meanings: 1) There is an idea that Thunberg may have picked up, though I don’t particularly associate it with him, that applies the notion of ‘enhypostasia’ in a cosmic sense, so that finally the whole cosmos is ‘enhypostatized’ in the Logos. That would, I think, entail that individuals lose their identity in that final state. But the whole notion of enhypostatization is a misunderstanding, and the rare phrases (which don’t I think occur in Amb 41) that could support this are being misinterpreted. 2) By ‘ego’ Thunberg doesn't mean ‘self’ but construction of self, in something like the psychoanalytical sense. That, I think, would be lost when persons discovered their true reality. But I doubt that is what Thunberg means, and can’t see how he would derive it from Amb. 41.
-------------------
That's good news and bad news. Good (that it's likely that Moore is fundamentally mistaken). Bad (for D maybe?) that the notion of being "enhypostatized in the Logos" is believed by Louth to be misconstrued (as I've read elsewhere also).
T
"Man is a person not by nature but by spirit. By nature he is only an individual." Nicolas Berdyaev | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 12/10/2009 7:43 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
That's good news and bad news. Good (that it's likely that Moore is fundamentally mistaken). Bad (for D maybe?) that the notion of being "enhypostatized in the Logos" is believed by Louth to be misconstrued (as I've read elsewhere also).
Nah. Not bad for me. Leron Shults in a book talked about the misunderstanding with enhypostasis...like Louth's sense. I got that. Alexei Nesteruk's viewpoint talks about being "enhypostasized in the Logos" but not in the same sense as Louth does. Torrence's language comes close to it (ie the "personalizing person", etc)
At any rate, with what we've been talking about lately (deified humans freely choosing from God's possibilities via logoi in theosis), there ain't no issue of any Logos pantheism.
I. D. G. A. F.
Christ is All. Post Edited (One Love) : 12/10/2009 6:46:15 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 12/10/2009 7:58 PM (GMT -6) | | I definitely think there's enough sustanance for an well-rounded defense of the open view in Maximus the Confessor's stuff, man. Especially with the Logos/logoi stuff. And it fits so well with Greg's dispositional stuff, it's stupid. And you got all the relevant people in contact. And freedom, personhood, and love, are all inherently involved. (Love requires Freedom, etc)
Kill it. Heck, you could bring East and West together at the same time. Ha! 
I. D. G. A. F.
Christ is All. | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 12/10/2009 8:03 PM (GMT -6) | | First, we need some Long Islands!
I. D. G. A. F.
Christ is All. | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 12/10/2009 10:15 PM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 12/11/2009 2:37 PM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 12/13/2009 9:25 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 12/17/2009 9:29 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 12/17/2009 4:35 PM (GMT -6) | | | Seems like a big both/and to us, right? at Wouldn't we say the "willing surrender" or the "voluntary handing over of our self-determination to God" would be exacly what we talk about below...
T: I remember Moore saying he admits that there are passages in Maximus where he says the human person doesn't lose his own self-identity and unique hypostatic creativity, but that the FUNDAMENTAL tenor and direction of Maximus' most cherished convictions undermined this freedom. In the end, we're overwhelmed.
D: Maximus' "fundamental tenor" is satisfied by saying this: When deification happens, the choices with which deified humans may exercise personal freedom...are all GOD'S options presented to the person via the logoi, empowered via divine activity.
T: Precisely. The individual is overwhelmed perhaps in the sense that ONLY the divine logoi constitute the perceived scope of possible actions.
D: Yeppers.
Dispositional language: Using the power of self-disposition, humans (by Grace through faith) self-dispose themselves into their God-provided eschatological essenses, where they only express God's subjective aims for their existence in all activity.
I. D. G. A. F.
Christ is All.
"God resists the proud, and give His grace to the humble." Post Edited (One Love) : 12/17/2009 3:41:53 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 12/17/2009 5:07 PM (GMT -6) | | "I did not do away with the natural activity of those who undergo this experience as though its natural activity had ceased...But I did show that the power that is beyond being is alone capable of bringing about deification in those who by grace are deified."
Maximus
If this is one of Maximus' "most cherished convictions", then I'd say that it is fully compatible with what we are saying:
When deification happens, the choices with which deified humans may exercise personal freedom (no "doing away" with human free will) ...are all GOD'S options presented to the person via the logoi, empowered via divine activity (God ALONE capable of bringing deification).
I. D. G. A. F.
Christ is All.
"God resists the proud, and give His grace to the humble." Post Edited (One Love) : 12/17/2009 4:11:29 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 12/17/2009 6:07 PM (GMT -6) | | Refraining "from willing anything other than what God wills" (Maximus) for oneself.
<=>
Refraining from transgressing the "range of beautiful expression" (Tom) given by God's logoi for oneself.
I. D. G. A. F.
Christ is All.
"God resists the proud, and give His grace to the humble." | | Back to Top | | |
| 219 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 6:32 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 |
|
|