The motivation (wanting to be the intermediary) is inferred from the particular honor given to certain texts and writings in the territorial domains of Christian assemblies (whether Catholic, Calvinist, Orthodox, Mormon or whatever) so as to recognize the Person of Jesus Christ, Himself - indirectly through those honored scripts rather than directly - One on one - without filters, veils, intermediaries, etc.
Which was hosepipe's point here:
The inference is that assemblies per se seem to want to look at the image rather than the Person and thus there are dogmas, traditions, etc. Also related to post 5923, i.e. the dogma and tradition are a 'vail' like the one which was wanted to obscure His glory from Moses' face.
In mitigation, though, I do want to mention the frequent disparaging of the Catholic Church as bound by tradition and dogma. For us they, that is teachings and the things handed down to us by our predecessors, are not veils but conduits and signposts leading directly to the Vision of God (if we let them).
But yeah and sho' 'nuff! The peril of theologians is to prefer theology to God.
What you said...
Taking this very thing for granted (He is alive) trumps opinion.. or dead letters.. God(Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is/are alive.. NOT a formulaic human observation..
For the philosophers among us the difference is between the image (or artifacts) of the person and the Person.
The inference is that assemblies per se seem to want to look at the image rather than the Person and thus there are dogmas, traditions, etc. Also related to post 5923, i.e. the dogma and tradition are a 'vail' like the one which was wanted to obscure His glory from Moses' face.
Taking this very thing for granted (He is alive) trumps opinion.. or dead letters.. God(Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is/are alive.. NOT a formulaic human observation..
For the philosophers among us the difference is between the image (or artifacts) of the person and the Person.
The inference is that assemblies per se seem to want to look at the image rather than the Person and thus there are dogmas, traditions, etc. Also related to post 5923, i.e. the dogma and tradition are a 'vail' like the one which was wanted to obscure His glory from Moses' face.
Taking this very thing for granted (He is alive) trumps opinion.. or dead letters.. God(Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is/are alive.. NOT a formulaic human observation..
For the philosophers among us the difference is between the image (or artifacts) of the person and the Person.
The inference is that assemblies per se seem to want to look at the image rather than the Person and thus there are dogmas, traditions, etc. Also related to post 5923, i.e. the dogma and tradition are a 'vail' like the one which was wanted to obscure His glory from Moses' face.
Taking this very thing for granted (He is alive) trumps opinion.. or dead letters.. God(Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is/are alive.. NOT a formulaic human observation..
For the philosophers among us the difference is between the image (or artifacts) of the person and the Person.
The inference is that assemblies per se seem to want to look at the image rather than the Person and thus there are dogmas, traditions, etc. Also related to post 5923, i.e. the dogma and tradition are a 'vail' like the one which was wanted to obscure His glory from Moses' face.
Taking this very thing for granted (He is alive) trumps opinion.. or dead letters.. God(Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is/are alive.. NOT a formulaic human observation..
For the philosophers among us the difference is between the image (or artifacts) of the person and the Person.
The inference is that assemblies per se seem to want to look at the image rather than the Person and thus there are dogmas, traditions, etc. Also related to post 5923, i.e. the dogma and tradition are a 'vail' like the one which was wanted to obscure His glory from Moses' face.
= = =
Very accurate, imho.
Thanks.