patman
Active member
:chuckle:
Oh right, right. She was going to accuse you for God making you do something or 'nother about something bad that you couldn't help but to do.
atrol:
Discussion - Enyart vs. Ask Mr Religion (One on One)
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
:chuckle:
Oh right, right. She was going to accuse you for God making you do something or 'nother about something bad that you couldn't help but to do.
atrol:
Arsenios
Well-known member
There are some profound philosophical presuppositions in this quote from AMR:
The knowledge being presupposed here is epistemological, relying on a correlation between concepts in the mind and the things to which they refer that are not in the mind. This is not Biblical, but instead is Platonic and/or Jungian, depending on whether one means by archetypes the Ideal Forms of Plato, the "real reality", of their psychoanalytic counterparts in Jung...
The reason they are not biblical is because the knowledge understood in the Bible is not such knowledge, because knowing God, which IS Eternal Life, is ontological, and is neither analogical nor archtypical, but is instead UNION with God, a union that is analogous to sexual relations within a marriage between man and woman, but is instead infinitely beyond it...
The reason why analogy come to mind is because revelation by God is ontological, and is then put into human language by the person to whom God has revealed it...
HENCE...
What AMR calls analogy is instead actually simply description, describing that which is indefinable... As Paul says of the 3rd Heaven, he saw things of which it is not lawful to speak. [John was not so shy, and wrote Revelation]
But if theological knowledge is union with God, then it is direct and ontological and in-FORM-ative of man, to the extent that the man to whom it is revealed by God is ontologically prepared to receive and then to hold it...
AMR, I would like to hear your reply to this...
Arsenios
AMR said:
The knowledge being presupposed here is epistemological, relying on a correlation between concepts in the mind and the things to which they refer that are not in the mind. This is not Biblical, but instead is Platonic and/or Jungian, depending on whether one means by archetypes the Ideal Forms of Plato, the "real reality", of their psychoanalytic counterparts in Jung...
The reason they are not biblical is because the knowledge understood in the Bible is not such knowledge, because knowing God, which IS Eternal Life, is ontological, and is neither analogical nor archtypical, but is instead UNION with God, a union that is analogous to sexual relations within a marriage between man and woman, but is instead infinitely beyond it...
The reason why analogy come to mind is because revelation by God is ontological, and is then put into human language by the person to whom God has revealed it...
HENCE...
What AMR calls analogy is instead actually simply description, describing that which is indefinable... As Paul says of the 3rd Heaven, he saw things of which it is not lawful to speak. [John was not so shy, and wrote Revelation]
But if theological knowledge is union with God, then it is direct and ontological and in-FORM-ative of man, to the extent that the man to whom it is revealed by God is ontologically prepared to receive and then to hold it...
AMR, I would like to hear your reply to this...
Arsenios
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Arsenios,
I know you are angling always for the theosis doctrines underpinning Eastern Orthodoxy, hence your quibble with my words above, which are more cogently stated as follows:
I would hope you actually agree that we cannot know things as God knows things. Hence, a bit of pre-reading is in order:
http://heidelblog.net/2009/02/what-can-we-know-and-how/
AMR
I know you are angling always for the theosis doctrines underpinning Eastern Orthodoxy, hence your quibble with my words above, which are more cogently stated as follows:
Alongside of the archetypal knowledge of God, found in God Himself, there is also an ectypal knowledge of Him, given to man by revelation. The latter is related to the former as a copy is to the original, and therefore does not possess the same measure of clearness and perfection. All our knowledge of God is derived from His self-revelation in nature and in Scripture. Consequently, our knowledge of God is on the one hand ectypal and analogical, but on the other hand also true and accurate, since it is a copy of the archetypal knowledge which God has of Himself.
—Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology
—Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology
I would hope you actually agree that we cannot know things as God knows things. Hence, a bit of pre-reading is in order:
http://heidelblog.net/2009/02/what-can-we-know-and-how/
AMR
Arsenios
Well-known member
I must say that i did not notice the date of the last post in this thread until after I sent it... 2008... Not that the issues are dated, mind you - They are timeless, as you so understatedly appreciate...
We indeed cannot know things as God knows them, so we have no disagreement on that score - The term for God's knowledge as archtypal is a quibble in part, but the Church has always regarded God's Self-knowledge as absolutely unknowable to man, which translates to ANY human knowledge of any kind of His Essence. And at the same time, we hold that we CAN and DO know God in terms of the Energies/Actions that come forth from that Essence and create creation timelessly...
So I am looking for an acknowledgement from you that the knowledge of God which is Life Eternal is ontological, and indeed energetical, union with Him, and is not mere ektypal ideation ABOUT God, but ontological interpenetration BY God [eg the bestowal of God's Grace, which is the Gift of himself to us BY God] that itself informs such ektypal ideation in such a way that the expression of the thinking that comes forth from it in concepts is descriptive, which you are calling analogy...
You see, the problem with analogy is that it is a term of intellectual speculation that leads to fairly endless rabbit trails of pursuits that normally end where the analogy "breaks down", as we all, of course, mind you, very well are keenly aware, etc etc... And in this, we can become self assured that we are exploring the Nature of God, Theology, as Biblically grounded 'theologians'... And the greatest intellectual minds are the one capable of becoming the greatest theologians...
In Orthodoxy, we prefer to see the greatest theologians as those like the Evangellist Matthew in Ethiopia, where he transformed into such light when the Ethopian Prince came to seize him for torture and death, that the Prince was blinded, much like Paul on the road to Damascus... And of course, Matthew then healed him of his blindness, and the Prince then seized and killed him... [That story goes on, and the Prince did end up getting baptized and becoming a great Christian Ruler of Ethiopia taking the name Matthew...]
But the point here is that theology is nothing if only in words, but everything if enfleshed in deeds, and Matthew was only following Christ... So that while we cannot know God at all in His Essence, we CAN become One with Him in His Creative Energies, and THEN only can we claim theological knowledge, which real theologians seldom if ever do...
In a word, to know ABOUT God [say... analogically] is NOT theological KNOWLEDGE, which is union with God in this fallen and fleshly life... Where "imputation" actually means God "put into" man Himself, even as the Bible records in the Acts of the Apostles... And does not mean mere attribution without human foundation... For human foundation as God originally created man [in Adam] is now seen in fallen man in an earnest by God's Grace implanted into man following Christ...
Arsenios
We indeed cannot know things as God knows them, so we have no disagreement on that score - The term for God's knowledge as archtypal is a quibble in part, but the Church has always regarded God's Self-knowledge as absolutely unknowable to man, which translates to ANY human knowledge of any kind of His Essence. And at the same time, we hold that we CAN and DO know God in terms of the Energies/Actions that come forth from that Essence and create creation timelessly...
So I am looking for an acknowledgement from you that the knowledge of God which is Life Eternal is ontological, and indeed energetical, union with Him, and is not mere ektypal ideation ABOUT God, but ontological interpenetration BY God [eg the bestowal of God's Grace, which is the Gift of himself to us BY God] that itself informs such ektypal ideation in such a way that the expression of the thinking that comes forth from it in concepts is descriptive, which you are calling analogy...
You see, the problem with analogy is that it is a term of intellectual speculation that leads to fairly endless rabbit trails of pursuits that normally end where the analogy "breaks down", as we all, of course, mind you, very well are keenly aware, etc etc... And in this, we can become self assured that we are exploring the Nature of God, Theology, as Biblically grounded 'theologians'... And the greatest intellectual minds are the one capable of becoming the greatest theologians...
In Orthodoxy, we prefer to see the greatest theologians as those like the Evangellist Matthew in Ethiopia, where he transformed into such light when the Ethopian Prince came to seize him for torture and death, that the Prince was blinded, much like Paul on the road to Damascus... And of course, Matthew then healed him of his blindness, and the Prince then seized and killed him... [That story goes on, and the Prince did end up getting baptized and becoming a great Christian Ruler of Ethiopia taking the name Matthew...]
But the point here is that theology is nothing if only in words, but everything if enfleshed in deeds, and Matthew was only following Christ... So that while we cannot know God at all in His Essence, we CAN become One with Him in His Creative Energies, and THEN only can we claim theological knowledge, which real theologians seldom if ever do...
In a word, to know ABOUT God [say... analogically] is NOT theological KNOWLEDGE, which is union with God in this fallen and fleshly life... Where "imputation" actually means God "put into" man Himself, even as the Bible records in the Acts of the Apostles... And does not mean mere attribution without human foundation... For human foundation as God originally created man [in Adam] is now seen in fallen man in an earnest by God's Grace implanted into man following Christ...
Arsenios
Arsenios
Well-known member
Here is a quote from the article:
To be an image bearer is to be like God, it is not to be (or become) God. If we are or become God, then we’re not image bearers any longer are we? An image bearer is an analogue. It’s like the sacraments. The sacraments are not salvation themselves, they are signs and seals of salvation. The Passover supper was not the actual deliverance out of Egypt, it was a sign and seal of deliverance.
The first sentence is false, because Satan did not destroy Adam, but only enslaved him with death... The fact is that he did not destroy the image of God in man, but he WOUNDED it without destroying it. The result is that we are ALL in the Image of God, but the LIKENESS is darkened and degraded...
And while the author is right, in that we do not become God, we can become GODDED by God, and in this we regain significantly the likeness of the Image in which God created us... Paul calls it an "earnest"... Glorification is the Divinization of man by God. "And these He also glorified..."
So that the Image was darkened in the loss of the likeness in the fall of Adam, because now death is the shadow in which we walk, and we do both good and evil, which makes us evil in God's eyes...
The "sacraments" are not "signs and seals of salvation" - They are Holy Mysteries that treat the sickness of our souls by the healing presence of God... The Good Samaritan gave Wine and Oil to treat the half-dead man grievously wounded by demons on the road, and then He took him to the Inn, and instructed the Inn-Keeper there to continue the healing from his injuries... The Church is the Hospital of our souls, where the mendicants of Salvation are given to the wounded... And when they heal, they are Justified, and whom God Justifies, these He also Glorifies... But Justification, the healing from the doing of sin, comes first, and the latter is Salvation in this life - "I will drink of the Cup of Salvation, and call on the Name of the Lord..." The two are linked, and those who imagine themselves "saved" because Christ pulled them out of the gutter of sin err, because they have only been called and bandaged, and are now ready for the healing that comes AFTER they enter the Inn [Church]...
And the Passover Meal was not a Sign of their deliverance from the bonds of Egypt - It was PREPARATION for it, for the fasting they would undergo in their 40 years of wandering in the wilderness...
So the bottom line of all this is that in Christianity, and the more-so in Christ, to KNOW is to BE... One knows one's brother by becoming him - Empathy is the TYPOS, and God gives to us the actual becoming, and those to whom He has given it are called God-bearers... Where their very shadow can pass over the sick and heal them... Or an article of clothing... Walking in works fore-ordained unto them from before the world was created...
To know is not to have thoughts about, but to BE...
Knowledge is not an intellectual grasp of, but an ontological entry into, the thing known...
So I guess I could SAY that I am "always angling toward" this great IDEA that I have ABOUT theosis or divinization in my postings here, and it is sort of true I reckon... But western Christianity under the Latins and their scholasticism, and the Reformers under their neo-scholasticism, has devolved into a glut of isms that nobody cares about except the gifted intellectuals who hold themselves above the rabble of the hoi polloi, imagining that the best ideas will eventually prevail...
To these the Orthodox Faithful sing:
Let God arise!
Let His enemies be scattered!
Let them that hate Him flee...
From before His Face!
Thank you for being my friend here...
And please keep me in your prayers...
Arsenios
I'll read Bob's posts. The rest will be a waste (or no more profitable than Dr. Lamerson's posts were anyway). Just my opinion.
I had almost forgoten about this one on one going on. I just skimmed through most of it, actually taking the time to read Bob's full posts and AMR's responses thereafter.
I'm encouraged to find out that my long standing opinion of AMR was dead on correct. It's been years since I've had any direct correspondence with him as he has done me the great favor of completely ignoring me, no matter what I say (its been some source of fun trying to goad him into saying something to me). Its been so long since I've had to deal with him directly that I had begun to wonder whether I had over reacted to him back when he first showed up here on TOL. This one on one has reassured me that he is as despicable a person as I have ever come across.
I still have a very difficult time believing that he is or has ever been a professor of anything in any school of any sort. I think he lies through his teeth and does not actually believe half of what he claims to believe but rather simply spouts it because that's what he's always done. He's nothing but an expert at spouting a doctrine that resides in his head and hasn't touched his heart since he was much younger, if it ever did at all. I wouldn't be half surprised to find out one day that he no longer considers himself a Christian.
That's all complete speculation, of course, but I've grown to trust my intuition in such things. Whether I'm even close to being right about that at all or not, the fact is that I have exactly zero respect for AMR as a human being and believe strongly that men such as Jeffery Dahmer and Hitler will have a better time of it in Hell than the likes of AMR who makes it his hobby to blaspheme the God of Justice.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Desperately seeking the attention of someone whose attention you claim to disregard. I guess that's one way to spend the gift of life.
Okay, inordinately concerned.
I've insulted your hero, haven't I?
Nah. You're just being a lout to an otherwise decent human.
I know ... it's The Way of The Bob. :chuckle:
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I love the Lord with my very life. This is what gives the love I have for myself meaning and I love my neighbor as I love myself.
In fact, it is my doctrine (i.e. free will) that gives anything I do meaning. AMR and those who agree with him can't complain about anything. If he doesn't like what I have to say, the only reason he has to read it, according to his doctrine, is because God predestined that he read what I wrote.
Last edited:
Sounds like more than one TOL member. The former king of posting the robot himself.
I'm not following you here.
godrulz, the king of obfuscation.
- Status