Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: count-your-change; Alamo-Girl
Sound like doublespeak. Both hot and cold, both square and round, up and down.

I can certainly understand getting that impression. I sometimes have a similar reaction to the Chalcedonian definition: One person, two natures -- fine, what does THAT mean?

Our side would say that the inadequacy is not that the dogma is wrong, but rather that the reality does not submit to the categories of mind . So what you end up -- as I see it -- is some formulas of expression which (we think) you hagve to maintain to be right about what's going on. If you overstress the inferiority, you fail to remain consisten with Thomas's exclamation, "My Lord and my God!" (or you imply more than one god, also a FAIL) If you do not mention the inferiority, you fail to account for the statement you quoted, and you miss the mystery of the Incarnation - Creator in creation, the greater in the less -- the inside bigger than the outside.

So -- again, as we see it -- you are stuck with, "in this way equal to, in that way less than. Now get me an aspirin, my head hurts." There is some hint of this in our everyday lives. It is my joy that my daughter is now a young woman. On the other hand, my grief was great when she left home to go ACT like a young woman. I really loved having her around. Joy and grief sometimes go hand in hand, and nobody accuses the proud and weeping parent of doublespeak.

46 posted on 08/14/2010 2:03:30 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]


To: Mad Dawg; count-your-change; betty boop
reality does not submit to the categories of mind

Precisely so, dear brother in Christ!

God cannot be put under a microscope, measured with a rod, observed through a telescope.

If a person's concept of God requires that He comply with his own sense of time, space, matter/energy, physical laws and the laws of logic - then he would have a very reduced concept of God, a small 'god' of his own imagination, a false god his mortal mind could comprehend.

That "god" could not be the Creator of "all that there is" because he would have to reside within the creation itself, he would be subordinate to the (multi)universe, not the Creator of it. He would be subject to entropy among other things. He would have a beginning and an end.

He couldn't be "the" God, he'd have to be "a" god.

He couldn't be "the" Creator, he'd have to be "a" creator.

The mortal vision and mind is limited to four dimensional perception - three of space and one of time. Our ability to perceive and reason is highly restricted and I suspect, intentionally so.

Nevertheless, God will hold all of us to account for noticing that He IS "the" Creator.

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: - Romans 1:20

Man is not the measure of God.


51 posted on 08/14/2010 3:45:09 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson