 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/16/2004 3:22 PM (GMT -6) |   | | | |
 |
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/16/2004 5:38 PM (GMT -6) | | I got this far:
"Some precommitments: Before I start proper, I want to spell out some of my precommitments: God is lord of all - that includes time; Creator and creation are distinct; God is creator of all things; thus time is a creation. I assume these points and shall argue form them"...
laughed, and stopped reading.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/16/2004 5:56 PM (GMT -6) | | That was very "fair" and "objective" of you, Tom ---- NOT!
Anyone skimming down through the article will see that a lot of different views are presented side by side.
But if one is unwilling to see any view different from one's own (numerically, when six or seven views are presented, and one only holds to one view, then a majority of the views will not be one's own -- DUH!)
I hope that the next reader will be more balanced.
:-(
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Truth Aficionado
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2003
Total Posts : 1544
| Posted 7/16/2004 6:56 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by PotOnWheel
That was very "fair" and "objective" of you, Tom ---- NOT!
Anyone skimming down through the article will see that a lot of different views are presented side by side.
But if one is unwilling to see any view different from one's own (numerically, when six or seven views are presented, and one only holds to one view, then a majority of the views will not be one's own -- DUH!)
I hope that the next reader will be more balanced.
:-(
Sorry POW  , I started to read "What Is Time" but I soon ran out of it. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/17/2004 3:21 AM (GMT -6) | | The author assumed without argument what is the point of debate: God's relationship to time. That much he admits to. I'm just not interested. If he wants to defend his openning assumptions, I'm very interested. If not. I just don't have the time.
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/17/2004 5:41 AM (GMT -6) | | I remember it not having much by way of arguement at all. I just thought that the "chart" trait of placing a lot of things side-by-side or in contrast was handy.
Not unworth a look.
BUT I HEAR WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING, AND WOULD AGREE. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/17/2004 5:52 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 7/17/2004 5:57 AM (GMT -6) | | POW, You said to me on the theology thread: "Maybe that is why it is so refreshing to read the Early Greek Fathers who DID read lots of scripture, and quote scripture, and let scripture guide their arguementations. They spoke and read GREEK -- which Augustine COULD NOT DO. And their influence, promunlgating the message of scripture within their culture was huge; while the influence of Augustine traveled olong the linguistic paths of Latin speakers.
That explains why the "East" jumped on and attacked heresies as soon at they threatened the message and rule of scriptural revelation and the Gospel it preaches, while the "West" did not, could not recognize threats as easily, and by-and-large got bamboozled by just about all the man-centered philosophies that blew down those ancient Romand roads.
THEN here you direct to a sight that both begins and ends with referring to Augustine.
_________________________________________________________________
"In Smolin's honesty we can hear echoes of Augustine when he wrote:"
This is the traditional view of God. God is outside of time. It is the position advocated by Augustine (AD 354-430), Boethius (c. AD 475-525), Anselm (1033-1109) and Aquinas (1225-1274) among others.
One objection is its neo-platonic origins. Swinburne states: ‘the doctrine of God's timelessness seems to have entered Christian theology from neo-Platonism, and there from Augustine to Aquinas it reigned'.[13]
Further reading
Augustine Confessions chapter XI
__________________________________________________________________
This argument against the historical fact that the Church BOTH East and West adopted Greek Pagan Philsophy is stated in the very sight you directed to. It's stated over and over and over and over again, in thousands of references, from encyclopedias to Church histories, to untold numbers of writings just like this. That is, it's not just CRAZY ME saying it, I am just repeating what they admit time and time again in thousands of references and history through out.
The truth is that those they call THE EARLY FATHERS of the Church ALL adopted Greek philosophy, it's theology and it's mysticism in how it worshiped it's gods and taught it as how to believe in and worship Christ. Then 2000 years down the line, we were born and unknowingly have fallen for this deception as the truth.
That is why Jesus warned and said not to call any man FATHER upon the earth. For he also said that MANY would come in his name and deceive many. As Peter also said that there would be false teachers among us who would stethily bring in damnable heresies and many would follow their ways, by way of whom the real way of truth would be evil spoken of.
This is not a contest between you and I on who's right. God's people should seek the truth FIRST from the Word of God, when Paul said to BEWARE of Philsophy they did not take heed, adopted it, and were led into corrupting the understanding of the Word of God, through their philosophic interpretations in endeavoring to reconcile the beliefs of Christ, with that of paganism.
God just wants us to recognize the truth of this historical fact, and then get cleaned out from it, and learn the truth from his Word, with him as the guide not all the writings of these men.
In truth what is TIME? Time is what we have right now to repent and come out of darkness and seek the Lord while he may be found. For the TIME is running out.
Rev. 10:5 And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, and sware by him that lives for ever and ever, who created heaven and earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, That thre should be TIME NO LONGER:
Time is running out from God's house to repent and renouce Greek philsosophy and theology.
In the love of Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/17/2004 6:11 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by larris
The truth is that those they call THE EARLY FATHERS of the Church ALL adopted Greek philosophy, it's theology and it's mysticism in how it worshiped it's gods...
If you say so, larris. You seem so convinced. | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/17/2004 6:13 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
larris
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2004
Total Posts : 181
| Posted 7/17/2004 6:26 AM (GMT -6) | | FROM THAT SIGHT
Religious language
Most discussions also fail to distinguish between human and divine perspectives. We are doing our theology/ philosophy from below.
One objection is its neo-platonic origins. Swinburne states: ‘the doctrine of God's timelessness seems to have entered Christian theology from neo-Platonism, and there from Augustine to Aquinas it reigned'.
This is the online journal of CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY, they know and teach and admit what they do. It is only those who follow them in lay positions who refuse to see and take heed and acknowldge this truth. At least THEY admit it, see no problem with it, and activly apply it. But why you would refuse to admit it, shows me, that you know that if this is true much of what you could hold as truth is tainted with paganism.
No one, especially a Christian that believes they are mature in Christ and have a knowledge of the truth, likes to think that maybe all they know just might not actually be founded on the real ROCK. But again God is calling those men who have the heart for him and the courage to renouce and repent and let HIM build them on the true foundation of Christ as revealed in his written Word.
In the love of Christ,
larris
"If you continue (abide and live) in my word, then you shall be my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free." Jesus Christ. (John 8:31) | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/17/2004 7:52 AM (GMT -6) | | So the author of the God, Time and Eternity website is objective and does not gloss over or attempt to hide facts. That's GOOD.
But I'd like to recommend that we not turn real people into strawmen! I don't personally know anyone who accepts everything that Augustine says. Neither, by that matter, do I know anyone who is condemnatory of Augustine as a person, nor, for the most critical, do they disagree with everything the Blessed Augustine says. His Christ-like character prevented any of the condemnations of his work to bear his name along with them.
I don't like strawmen!
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/17/2004 9:50 AM (GMT -6) | | As per this thread, Steve Bishop's concluding section says:
quote:
. . . .
Most discussions also fail to distinguish between human and divine perspectives. We are doing our theology/ philosophy from below.
Back to precommitments
If God is lord of time, then it is difficult how he can be subject to time.
If God is creator of all, then time is a creature. If God were subject to time, then it would blur the distinction between Creator and creation.
It is the PAGAN element that caused Arias to say some of the things he did. Arias tried to restrict the Son from being truly God, and he, Arias, thought of the Son as a creature-above-all-creatures.
It is Athanasias, in his "Against the Pagans" and "On the Incarnation" that focuses on THE CROSS as what overcomes the gap between transcendence and immanence.
Paganism builds on the flesh's dominance. The cross restores the rule of the will over the body that it should be master of, and enables us to submit all to Christ. That is the difference between paganism and the Gospel.
Read Athanasias here www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-04/Npnf2-04-12.htm#P1570_526894... with www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-04/Npnf2-04-13.htm#TopOfPage and...www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-04/Npnf2-04-14.htm#TopOfPage, ...and here www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-04/Npnf2-04-16.htm#P1830_678055
Notice the opening of the last one:
quote:
On the Incarnation of the Word
§1. Introductory. —The Subject of This Treatise: the Humiliation and Incarnation of the Word. Presupposes the Doctrine of Creation, and that by the Word. The Father Has Saved the World by Him Through Whom He First Made It.
And notice the opening of the first--against paganism:
quote:
Against the Heathen
Part I.
§1. Introduction:-The Purpose of the Book a Vindication of Christian Doctrine, and Especially of the Cross, Against the Scoffing Objection of Gentiles. The Effects of This Doctrine Its Main Vindication.
Happy reading!
PoW | | Back to Top | | |
|
Bobber
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 199
| Posted 7/18/2004 7:59 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Time is running out from God's house to repent and renouce Greek philsosophy and theology.
Ive heard many people quote from ones who are called the church fathers, Augustine, or this one or that . Well I think that's fine but it means absolutely nothing. We have the manuscripts ourselves and I don't care what any of those individuals had to say...we're required to study the Bible ourselves and not look to other sources as being the detirmining factor of whether we believe something or not. Some say if the church fathers believed such then I'll believe it, but the church fathers were not the original Apostles...so we see what these men had to say but weigh it ourselves with the scriptures. I think that's the best way to go 
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 7/18/2004 8:32 PM (GMT -6) | | Bobber: ...the church fathers...Well I think...it means absolutely nothing. We have the manuscripts ourselves and I don't care what any of those individuals had to say...so we see what these men had to say but weigh it ourselves with the scriptures. I think that's the best way to go.
Tom: I'm totally confused. The church fathers mean "absolutely nothing" to you and you "don't care what any of them had to say" but yet you think the best way to go is to "see what they had to say and weigh it with the Scriptures"? Is this logic akin to traveling backwards in time? 
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
Bobber
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 199
| Posted 7/18/2004 9:04 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Tom: I'm totally confused. The church fathers mean "absolutely nothing" to you and you "don't care what any of them had to say" but yet you think the best way to go is to "see what they had to say and weigh it with the Scriptures"? Is this logic akin to traveling backwards in time?
From the standpoint of letting them define what I believe as an absolute no I don't care what they say. I did say in my post we do read what they say and weigh it but we check it with the scriptures ourselves. Didn't Paul say that after he left or after he died there would be grevious wolves which would come in and not spare the flock? How would you know for sure that some of these church fathers say were not a wolf. Well you have to check and weigh what they say with the scriptures. | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/19/2004 2:21 AM (GMT -6) | | When I posted Athanasias sensitivity to what in the issue of transcendence and imminance drove Arias to invent certain heresies, THAT fits this thread title. It just shows that issues like this keep cropping up, and we have to address them.
As to Bobber's antique thoughts about how there is a conspiracy in everything written by anyone who happens to be dead (A shame for Christians to marginalize those in the Body of Christ just because they've gone to be with the Lord--like my mother and grandparents.), well... There are conspiracies and there are those who see conspiracies everywhere.
As to Athanasias, HIS definition of theology is when you take the Biblical record and you draw from it for public preaching that which is consonant with the life, death, and resurrection of God who became man to save us. He attacked heretical ideas that denied that gospel. But he preached the gospel to those in his place and time.
Bobber, maybe what you are wanting is to become a Quaker. Then you can distribute Bibles to everyone and just have everyone sit and read. But if you are going to have a preacher, he must read and proclaim the word, AND apply it!
The "Fathers" did not put eachother above Scripture -- exactly to the opposite. They even decided which books to put in the Bible and which to leave out. And they did not put eachother above scripture either.
It is scandelous for YOU to claim otherwise. You lied about them. (See the Ends and Means thread.)
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Bobber
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 199
| Posted 7/19/2004 5:02 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
As to Bobber's antique thoughts about how there is a conspiracy in everything written by anyone who happens to be dead (A shame for Christians to marginalize those in the Body of Christ just because they've gone to be with the Lord--like my mother and grandparents.), well... There are conspiracies and there are those who see conspiracies everywhere.
Nonsense POT! All I stated was you have to judge with the scriptures whether whatever church father was in line with the teachings of the Apostles.
quote:
The "Fathers" did not put eachother above Scripture -- exactly to the opposite. They even decided which books to put in the Bible and which to leave out. And they did not put eachother above scripture either.
Well its funny depending on what group of people you're talking about they all have a different view on who are church fathers. Read their writings fine, but weigh them with the scriptures. Have A Nice Day
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 7/19/2004 6:06 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Bobber
All I stated was you have to judge with the scriptures whether whatever church father was in line with the teachings of the Apostles. ... Read their writings fine, but weigh them with the scriptures. Have A Nice Day
We can AGREE there.
I have to admit that I confused your remarks with other remarks by someone else recently. Please forgive me!
| | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 6:22 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 |
|
|