Page 2 of 25 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 250

Thread: The Identity of God.

  1. #11
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    27,209
    Amen (Given)
    2095
    Amen (Received)
    5657
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Incomplete, as far as what I believe, and what I consider that humans may know about God. No, it is unlikely that any one is correct considering the fallible nature of humans and the inconsistency of the beliefs of different religions, it is more likely that no one religion is correct to the degree that they claim.

    You have been around long enough to understand the apophatic view of God.
    Saying that we have an incomplete view of God is not the same as saying these He is unknowable. Of course He is not unknowable, as Christ said, he who sees me sees the Father. So we certainly can know a great deal about God and His character - if not everything.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

  2. #12
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,492
    Amen (Given)
    1737
    Amen (Received)
    1036
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    Saying that we have an incomplete view of God is not the same as saying these He is unknowable. Of course He is not unknowable, as Christ said, he who sees me sees the Father. So we certainly can know a great deal about God and His character - if not everything.
    This does not represent an understanding of the differences between the apophatic versus cataphatic view of the nature of what may be known of God. For example: Defining God as Trinitarian is a cataphatic understanding of God by traditional Christian Doctrine. The Jewish and Baha'i view that God's nature is unknowable to the extent that God cannot be defined as Trinitarian is an apophatic view of God.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-28-2014 at 02:03 PM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  3. #13
    tWebber robrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Kingdom of God
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    6,865
    Amen (Given)
    896
    Amen (Received)
    1576
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    This does not represent an understanding of the differences between the apophatic versus cataphatic view of the nature of what may be known of God. For example: Defining God as Trinitarian is a cataphatic understanding of God by traditional Christian Doctrine. The Jewish and Baha'i view that God's nature is unknowable to the extent that God cannot be defined as Trinitarian.
    The Christian dogma of the Trinity is in some senses kataphatic, but in other senses apophatic. Speaking of three persons of the Trinity is kataphatic, perhaps even anthropomorphic for some, but it is certainly apophatic in nonetheless affirming the complete monotheistic mystery of the simplicity (incomprehensible, unable to be defined) of God.
    βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
    ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

    אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

  4. #14
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,492
    Amen (Given)
    1737
    Amen (Received)
    1036
    Quote Originally Posted by robrecht View Post
    The Christian dogma of the Trinity is in some senses kataphatic, but in other senses apophatic. Speaking of three persons of the Trinity is kataphatic, perhaps even anthropomorphic for some, but it is certainly apophatic in nonetheless affirming the complete monotheistic mystery of the simplicity (incomprehensible, unable to be defined) of God.
    Yes, Christianity may have apophatic (mysteries) beliefs concerning God, but the difference between the apophatic view and kataphatic view is the basis of the difference between traditional Christianity and other beliefs. The Islamic view of God, Buddhist view of the unknowable 'Source', the Taoist view of the Tao, and Hindu view of the Brahman all represent apophatic views of a 'Source' some call God(s). All these views acknowledge that the attributes of the 'Source,' such as love, wisdom and justice, may be known as well as revealed laws, but the 'Source' itself remains unknowable and undefinable by Doctrine and Dogma.

    Also the exclusive beliefs of Christianity, and even to the point as God may be exclusively 'personally known' or 'saved' through their Doctrines and Dogmas of belief of individual churches remains a distinct Kataphatic extension of the belief in the Christian Trinity.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-28-2014 at 02:24 PM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  5. #15
    tWebber robrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Kingdom of God
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    6,865
    Amen (Given)
    896
    Amen (Received)
    1576
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Yes, Christianity may have apophatic (mysteries) beliefs concerning God, but the difference between the apophatic view and kataphatic view is the basis of the difference between traditional Christianity and other beliefs. The Islamic view of God, Buddhist view of the unknowable 'Source', the Taoist view of the Tao, and Hindu view of the Brahman all represent apophatic views of a 'Source' some call God(s). All these views acknowledge that the attributes of the 'Source,' such as love, wisdom and justice, may be known as well as revealed laws, but the 'Source' itself remains unknowable and undefinable by Doctrine and Dogma.

    Also the exclusive beliefs of Christianity, and even to the point as God may be exclusively 'personally known' or 'saved' through their Doctrines and Dogmas of belief of individual churches remains a distinct Kataphatic extension of the belief in the Christian Trinity.
    I guess it depends on how you define 'traditional Christianity'. I would not define it so narrowly and I'm in pretty good company on this in terms of traditional Christian thinkers through the past couple of thousand years.
    βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
    ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

    אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

  6. #16
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,492
    Amen (Given)
    1737
    Amen (Received)
    1036
    Quote Originally Posted by robrecht View Post
    I guess it depends on how you define 'traditional Christianity'. I would not define it so narrowly and I'm in pretty good company on this in terms of traditional Christian thinkers through the past couple of thousand years.
    I have no problem with the Trinity being the foundation Doctrine of traditional Christianity, including the Roman church, Orthodox churches and most Protestant churches. This by no means that all denominations believe in the Trinity, nor does it assume all Christians believe in the trinity.

    To make one thing clear is that the apophatic concept of the unknowable God concerns the nature of God from the human perspective, and not that humanity cannot have knowledge of the attributes of God.

    The belief that salvation and knowledge of God is exclusively Christian or of one church or another primarily based on the Trinity and the Apostles Creed is the most common view in history, and reflects specifically the Doctrine and Dogma of The Roman church, which holds that salvation is for only the sincere ones within the church, the sincere ones who have no knowledge of the Church, and those sincere who die below the age of consent. This does not assume all Christians believe this, but it is the dominant teaching throughout most of Christianity.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-28-2014 at 06:47 PM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  7. #17
    tWebber robrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Kingdom of God
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    6,865
    Amen (Given)
    896
    Amen (Received)
    1576
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    I have no problem with the Trinity being the foundation Doctrine of traditional Christianity, including the Roman church, Orthodox churches and most Protestant churches. This by no means that all denominations believe in the Trinity, nor does it assume all Christians believe in the trinity.

    To make one thing clear is that the apophatic concept of the unknowable God concerns the nature of God from the human perspective, and not that humanity cannot have knowledge of the attributes of God.

    The belief that salvation and knowledge of God is exclusively Christian or of one church or another primarily based on the Trinity and the Apostles Creed is the most common view in history, and reflects specifically the Doctrine and Dogma of The Roman church, which holds that salvation is for only the sincere ones within the church, the sincere ones who have no knowledge of the Church, and those sincere who die below the age of consent. This does not assume all Christians believe this, but it is the dominant teaching throughout most of Christianity.
    That is no longer the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, and it never was the view of many, including some of the bright lights that I look to for the best insights into the history of Christian thought. In my opinion, in evaluating the theology of Christianity, or any other religion or philosophy, it is better to fully grasp the thought of a few representative figures of great insight rather than looking for the least common denominator of the many. I would be the very first to agree that there is a lot of bad theology out there. But, more importantly, Christianity and all other religions, are more than theology. Myth is deeper than theology and praxis embodies and animates an even more comprehensive and dynamic worldview. The best parts of Christianity, and every other worldview, is active love and respect for our fellow man and all creation. In my opinion.
    βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
    ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

    אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

  8. #18
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,492
    Amen (Given)
    1737
    Amen (Received)
    1036
    Quote Originally Posted by robrecht View Post
    That is no longer the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, and it never was the view of many, including some of the bright lights that I look to for the best insights into the history of Christian thought. In my opinion, in evaluating the theology of Christianity, or any other religion or philosophy, it is better to fully grasp the thought of a few representative figures of great insight rather than looking for the least common denominator of the many. I would be the very first to agree that there is a lot of bad theology out there. But, more importantly, Christianity and all other religions, are more than theology. Myth is deeper than theology and praxis embodies and animates an even more comprehensive and dynamic worldview. The best parts of Christianity, and every other worldview, is active love and respect for our fellow man and all creation. In my opinion.
    'Your opinion' does not count much in the face of the Doctrine and Dogma of the Roman Church that has not changed and actually cannot be changed, despite the superficial nicities spoken Profoundly by Pope Francis. The next post will cite directly the Doctrine of the Roman Church concerning the exclusivity of salvation as defined by the church. I may follow up with citations from other churches as well. More liberal views of some churches do broaden their view of salvation to those that believe sincerely in the Apostles Creed.

    Again, I cannot speak for ALL Christians, only the Doctrine and Dogma of the churches.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  9. #19
    tWebber robrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Kingdom of God
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    6,865
    Amen (Given)
    896
    Amen (Received)
    1576
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    'Your opinion' does not count much in the face of the Doctrine and Dogma of the Roman Church that has not changed and actually cannot be changed, despite the superficial nicities spoken Profoundly by Pope Francis. The next post will cite directly the Doctrine of the Roman Church concerning the exclusivity of salvation as defined by the church. I may follow up with citations from other churches as well. More liberal views of some churches do broaden their view of salvation to those that believe sincerely in the Apostles Creed.

    Again, I cannot speak for ALL Christians, only the Doctrine and Dogma of the churches.
    I am not merely speaking of my opinion, but I will be happy to look at your posts.
    βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
    ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

    אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

  10. #20
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    15,492
    Amen (Given)
    1737
    Amen (Received)
    1036
    Quote Originally Posted by robrecht View Post
    I am not merely speaking of my opinion, but I will be happy to look at your posts.
    I studied to be Priest of the Roman church for about a year when I finished High School, and concept of what it is to be save was of interest to me. The following a brief reference concerning which I will cite more, including Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus

    Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominus_Iesus

    A Catholic dogma, Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus (literally "no salvation outside the Church") has sometimes been interpreted as denying salvation to non-Catholic Christians as well as non-Christians, though Catholic teaching has long stressed the possibility of salvation for persons invincibly ignorant (through no fault of their own) of the Catholic Church's necessity and thus not culpable for lacking communion with the Church. In the 20th century this inclusive approach was expressed in the condemnation of Feeneyism and in the declaration of the Second Vatican Council, which said that "the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator," although this is ambiguous and numerous interpretations have arisen. Vatican II further affirmed that salvation could be available to people who had not even heard of Christ (cf. Acts 17:23)— but that all who gain salvation do so only by membership in the Catholic Church, whether that membership is ordinary (explicit) or by extraordinary means (implicit).[1]

    While affirming the teaching of Lumen Gentium (the 1964 Dogmatic Constitution on the Church that came out of the Second Vatican Council) that the Roman Catholic Church "is the single Church of Christ"[2] and that "[t]his Church, constituted and organized as a society in the present world, subsists in (subsistit in) the Catholic Church,"[3] Dominus Iesus offers further comments on what it means for the true Church to "subsist in" the Roman Catholic Church. The document states that, "[w]ith the expression subsistit in, the Second Vatican Council sought to harmonize two doctrinal statements: on the one hand, that the Church of Christ, despite the divisions which exist among Christians, continues to exist fully only in the Catholic Church, and on the other hand, that 'outside of her structure, many elements can be found of sanctification and truth.'

    © Copyright Original Source



    The bolded is what I acknowledged as possible salvation outside the church as defined within the church.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-29-2014 at 11:28 AM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •