Whole thread

***********************************

Tom:
But at the same time the universe declares the glory of God. How’s it do that IF it also shows itself to be incapable of providing us any ground for our enduring meaning and significance; the universe ITSELF is on the same journey as we are. Is the glory of God that’s revealed in the universe something only the eye of faith can see? Something evidence AFTER you’re on the inside of faith? Wouldn’t Rom. 1. 18ff suggest that some knowledge of God is available to all human beings through mere observation of the universe?

From what I see, the passage is saying that there is more than enough "evidence" in Creation to testify to an infinitely wise Creator behind it...and that we are NOT that Creator.

None of this means that Creation has any inherent meaning outside of this testimony.

Post Edited (One Love) : 4/27/2010 11:03:56 AM (GMT-5)

Irenaeus’ understanding of salvation is revealed in light of his biblical theology, especially within his doctrine of recapitulation. He believed that as the culmination of redemptive history, the incarnate Son of God recovered what was lost in the first Adam. Some theologians erroneously declare that Irenaeus is articulating a view of universalism in his doctrine of recapitulation. However, Irenaeus held recapitulation to be the “summing up” of all history and humanity in Christ Jesus as the conclusion of the drama of redemption. Furthermore, his belief is that in Christ, the saved are justified through his eschatological work as he is “both waging war against our enemy, and crushing him who had at the beginning led us captives in Adam, and trampled upon his head.”  Thus he draws a parallel with Christ and the promised seed of Adam and Eve in the book of Genesis. Therefore, the summing up of all things is the fulfilling victory of Christ, the reverse of the curse, and the salvation for those who are covenantally in Christ as opposed to Adam. This understanding of the soteriological and eschatological elements within redemptive history was Irenaeus’ evangelical, apologetical, and theological emphasis. Irenaeus used this doctrinal understanding within his ministry to spread the gospel and to edify and defend the early church.

Post Edited (One Love) : 4/27/2010 7:20:29 PM (GMT-5)

I got some tight quotes from Alexei Nesteruk on this, too.

Post Edited (One Love) : 4/27/2010 7:38:16 PM (GMT-5)

Post Edited (Daniel M) : 4/27/2010 11:51:19 PM (GMT-5)

Breaking it all down, as I get it:

Mistaking the temporal/finite (Anatta, Impermanence, false self) for the eternal/infinite (Buddha nature, Diamond Reality, true self) in such a way that one prioritizes the former over the latter leads one to endless suffering, because the temporal/finite can never satisfy our desire for the eternal/infinite that we have being created, conditioned beings.

It's the same principle as what Jesus talked about.

Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.  Sell your possessions, and give to the needy. Provide yourselves with moneybags that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys.  For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

and...

Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal.  For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

Meister Eckhart was on point...

But wherein does sin consist? Not in the finiteness, which is never removed from the soul (3S7, 3; 500, 1 1), but in the direction of the will toward the finite and its pleasure therein (476, 19; 674, 17). The possibility of sin, however, is based in finiteness, taken together with the free will of the creature. If it is the destiny of the soul to be the resting-place of God, then the direction of the will toward the finite makes this impossible; and it is this that constitutes sin.

and...Nothing hinders the soul so much in attaining to the knowledge of God as time and place. Therefore, if the soul is to know God, it must know Him outside time and place, since God is neither in this or that, but One and above them. If the soul is to see God, it must look at nothing in time; for while the soul is occupied with time or place or any image of the kind, it cannot recognize God. (Excerpt from sermon: "The Nearness of the Kingdom," translated by Claud Field, Christian Classics Ethereal Library)

All he was saying, Tom, is that we needed to "enter the heart" where our sonship of God is personally confirmed to us...but that's impossible if the inward "self-denial" moment doesn't occur...because people are so caught up in "world composition."

"We (Tom and One Love) AGREE that a human being's identity as a PERSON doesn't come from the memories she has, the actions and behavior she engages in with her context, her relationships with other human beings, nor from anything else in the created realm. Nothing in creation and tell me WHO I am. Only God can do that. So there has to be a place, a moment, an experience where God and I get this done, where I experience God in Christ through the Spirit telling me that I'm a priceless beloved son, that the very sustaining core of my existence, where the potential for fulfilling my 'logos' resides, is an indestructible grace-gift from God that doesn't derive from anything in the created order."

How does all this tie?  Well, given that we KNOW about the impermanence of the universe (and the correspoinding meaninglessness), it really does press the point above home, doesn't it.   It really IS the case that NOTHING in creation can tell the enduring, significant story about who we are.  Only GOD can do that.  Period.

Post Edited (One Love) : 4/28/2010 1:07:57 AM (GMT-5)

Post Edited (Tom) : 4/29/2010 6:37:27 AM (GMT-5)