I cannot say how lovely it is to me to be able to read PPS responding to someone else without me having to reply...
And I am not surprised that AMR is former Jesuit trained...
And I love you guys!
Arsenios
Well...we'll see how it goes.Yes, I can't even image the daunting task of clinging to opera ad intra and attempting to defend it, especially with valid lexicography and exegesis.
Shhh! :rain:Jesuit? Eek. I hope not.
Back at you both.My love for you both as Brothers is unquestioned and unconditional.
It may seem redundant because it's necessary to re-categorize it from the common misconception that it's sempiternity rather than eternity. That's the fault of the Patristics, who never delineated the distinction.
Eternity = uncreated. God only.
Sempiternity (Everlastingness) = created. ALL invisible and visible initial creation; heaven and the cosmos.
Temporality = the cosmos earth age that onset with Edenic spiritual death and sin.
Orthodoxy combines the first two, presenting the last as creation and claiming heaven was also created but without accounting for it.
No, you're still not getting it completely.
I'm quite sure he doesn't, but we'll see. This isn't compatible with belated post-procession/post-creation multiple hypostases, which is impossible without a multi-minded God and unison speaking to create triplicate creation.
That's yet another issue I've not gotten to. You're confusing what I've said so far and you're still not recognizing the basic created heavenly realm where the angels dwell.
And that mystery is overwrought and has led to the West's many foundations and tangents of error.
It's not mystery when I can illustrate and apologetically delineate it with a white board.
The Fathers differentiate absolutely between temporality and a-temporality, and within temporality between fallen and eternal life.
Well, we proclaim the timeless God, the eternal creation of the timeless God, and the temporary condition of fallen man.
Your corrections would help...
You may be mis-caricaturizing Orthodoxy as much as you think I am mis-caricaturizing you... The three uncreated hypostases that are God are neither post-creation nor post-procession.
You have, I think, the ontological procession of the Holy Spirit twisted together in apposition with the ekonomia of the creation of the Word of God, and you seem to think that Mind = God Who has Thought/Logos Which when spoken creates creation in multi-level phenomena...
The Angels are the first-created, and in their realm, time is perhaps both fluid and specific - Specific in their interactions with fallen man, yet fluid in its experience... They are bodiless powers that can appear but normally do not... Their appearance is noetic normally, but not always...
And again, it is not enough to assert my confusion of what you said without showing how I have done so and correcting it...
The mess in the West is directly traceable to 10th century Papalism proclaiming the authority of the human Latin Patriarch OVER the Body of Christ on earth. It had nothing to do with doctrines or their lack regarding time in the angelic creation...
Do you start by drawing a circle and calling it a REALM of TIME?
Gotta run...
Arsenios
Edited to add:
I just looked and realized that this is not in the "Our Triune God" thread, so please forgive my intrusion...
I was in a hurry prior to services this morning and lost track...
It is happening more frequently these days...
Lapses, I say...
A.
My love for you both as Brothers is unquestioned and unconditional.
God's incommunicable attributes include...
Eternity (Timelessness)
Infinity (Non-Quantifiability)
Immensity (Non-Spatiality)
Immutability (Non-Changeability)
Simplicity (Non-Divisibility/Non-Compoundability)
Necessity (Non-Contingency)
Aseity (Self-Existence, including Self-Consciousness)
Impassability (Non-Passionality)
Immateriality (Non-Materiality)
Opera ad intra cannot include ek-/ex- procession, which is going from one place to another
By this do you assume God cannot act within Himself? That is, are you arguing all all acts of God be confined to ad extra?
AMR
Not really.
Those are the attributes that come from Aristotle's Greek Philosophy for the "unmoved mover".
Try the Bible next time for the real attributes of God.
No, they really are not represented in scripture in any manner near the distortions of the Reformation affirmations.These attributes are represented in scripture and ascribed as Reformation affirmations.
I have perused scripture, which is how I know that your distortions of God's attributes, as stated in the list you presented, are distortions.If you'd peruse scripture, you'd find these are represented.
Immutability is a concept from Aristotle, not the Bible.Immutability (Non-Changeability)
Malachi 3:6 6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. |
No, they really are not represented in scripture in any manner near the distortions of the Reformation affirmations.
I have perused scripture, which is how I know that your distortions of God's attributes, as stated in the list you presented, are distortions.
Take this one:
Immutability is a concept from Aristotle, not the Bible.
Here is what the Bible states:
Malachi 3:6
6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
The Septuagint translates the word used for "change" as "ἠλλοίωμαι" which is nothing like any Greek word for change.
Since you are a Greek scholar, find out what ἠλλοίωμαι means.
I'm familiar with sanah, the verb meaning to change, to disguise, to be different. It means to become something different or to change an attitude or character.
It can also mean to repeat, to do again. It indicates doing something over a second time (like striking an enemy twice, etc.).
Er, no. The “god” of the philosophers was lonely, isolated, and compassionless.Not really.
Those are the attributes that come from Aristotle's Greek Philosophy for the "unmoved mover".
I read your attempts to use Philosophical arguments against the truth of Open Theism.Er, no. The “god” of the philosophers was lonely, isolated, and compassionless.
Since you challenge folks to read the Bible on the matter, perhaps you should take your own advice...
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1532512#post1532512
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1532973#post1532973
AMR
Then you are aware that the verse used to make the claim that God is immutable is actually a statement by God that Israel is not destroyed because He will not go back on His Word, not a statement of immutability.
I am a student of Biblical prophecy, and the fulfillment (and non-fulfillment) of prophecy shows that the future is open and the way God is able to fulfill prophecy is by actively using His power to make things happen, not from having to follow the script of an unchangeable future.No, what I've become aware of is the fact that you're an Open Theist; and I can't tell you how disappointing that is, as I had considered you to be well beyond such a lack of understanding God's timelessness interfacing with all created time.
I am a student of Biblical prophecy, and the fulfillment (and non-fulfillment) of prophecy shows that the future is open and the way God is able to fulfill prophecy is by actively using His power to make things happen, not from having to follow the script of an unchangeable future.
I am a student of Biblical prophecy, and the fulfillment (and non-fulfillment) of prophecy shows that the future is open and the way God is able to fulfill prophecy is by actively using His power to make things happen, not from having to follow the script of an unchangeable future.