Divine Simplicity and the eternality of God's Decree

[atpollard]

Modalism is heresy, is it not?

So is pantheism.

 

[Jonaitis]

So is pantheism.

I agree, but not panentheism:

"One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all."
- Ephesians 4:6

Edit: in case you need a reminder from Scripture.

 

[atpollard]

Even the early church struggled to find a word. While they ultimately chose “persons” for the creeds, they acknowledged that “persons” implied too great a separation. The problem was any alternative implied too great a similarity (leading to modalism or one of the other heresies). As I stated, language is inadequate to describe this reality just as human cognition is incapable of full comprehension. (After 2000 years of trying, I think it is time to accept that NOBODY is going to really ‘get it’).

 

[Jonaitis]

Even the early church struggled to find a word. While they ultimately chose “persons” for the creeds, they acknowledged that “persons” implied too great a separation. The problem was any alternative implied too great a similarity (leading to modalism or one of the other heresies). As I stated, language is inadequate to describe this reality just as human cognition is incapable of full comprehension. (After 2000 years of trying, I think it is time to accept that NOBODY is going to really ‘get it’).

God is certainly "other" (holy, set-apart, cut-above), but God is not "wholly other" that we cannot know Him. Language helps us where we are weak.

 

[atpollard]

God is certainly "other" (holy, set-apart, cut-above), but God is not "wholly other" that we cannot know Him. Language helps us where we are weak.

Yet another God paradox.
He is good at that.

 

[Jonaitis]

Yet another God paradox.
He is good at that.

You seem to accept only some paradoxes.

 

[atpollard]

You seem to accept only some paradoxes.

I accept them, I am just constantly “cognizant“ of the pitfalls inherent in conflating the verbal construct for the reality. God is not really the “father” of Jesus in the human biology or familial relationship way that we human beings understand that father-son relationship. They are not two completely independent beings. Jesus is not a demigod like Hercules.

 

[Jonaitis]

I accept them, I am just constantly “cognizant“ of the pitfalls inherent in conflating the verbal construct for the reality. God is not really the “father” of Jesus in the human biology or familial relationship way that we human beings understand that father-son relationship. They are not two completely independent beings. Jesus is not a demigod like Hercules.

I'm confused. How did it end up to this?

 

[atpollard]

I'm confused. How did it end up to this?

Define "simple" in Divine Simplicity.
Now ask your self if speaking about "roles" and "relationships" between a "Father" and a "Son" do not POKE A GIANT FINGER INTO THE EYE of the definition that you just provided?

[That's how we got here. We steppped outside the carefully boxed compartmentalization of the theory.]

 

[Jonaitis]

Define "simple" in Divine Simplicity.
Now ask your self if speaking about "roles" and "relationships" between a "Father" and a "Son" do not POKE A GIANT FINGER INTO THE EYE of the definition that you just provided?

[That's how we got here. We steppped outside the carefully boxed compartmentalization of the theory.]

Ah, now we are discussing some interesting topics. This has been brought up in recent times in the circles I have been around.