God & Time

[Kenneth Redden]

Mr. Redden, I detect another episode of 'not quite understanding' on your part.

The full thought of current M-theory is the Universe did not begin of itself, but as part of a greater 'multi-verse' or 'Bulk' (the term varies, but it is the 'greater' structure from which 'our' Universe springs. Also, as such, there is NO NEED for a Creator in the Biblical sense. In M-theory, God - as shown in the Bible as ultimate - does not exist.

You cite some gibberish about 'days' which appear to be a cloaked version of numerology and mysticism based on who knows what.

So your comment about having a "...case for M-theory and the days of Creation..." is without any serious Biblical foundation or even explicable logic. In many facets of reality, this sort of thinking is recognized as 'delusion'. And I've wasted enough time dealing with it.

I believe the wisdom of God is the wisdom of the fifth day and sixth day: explained in 2 Peter 3:3-8, prophesized in Revelation 6:9-11; and realized in Revelation 20:4-7.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I am beginning to question to relevance of this thread to the Traditional Theology forum at all.

This simply is not the way we approach Scriptures. I think this is why you are getting very little response, and what you do get is directly opposed to your method. You are mostly talking to yourself.

You might indeed carry on a lively discussion with like-minded folks elsewhere in the forum, if that is what you desire. The thread could be moved if you like. Perhaps General Theology, or Controversial Theology would be more to your liking?

But speaking from a Traditional standpoint, we do not look for hidden coded messages of something that is not already a part of our understanding. If one is not careful, one can find all sorts of "proofs" for a wide variety of competing beliefs in this way. I've seen it done, and have several books of such "proofs" tucked into my library.

Let us know if you'd like it moved. Otherwise, it really doesn't seem topical to this forum, beyond what has already been posted. If you're wanting lively conversation, you can probably get it that way.

 

[Kenneth Redden]

I am beginning to question to relevance of this thread to the Traditional Theology forum at all.

This simply is not the way we approach Scriptures. I think this is why you are getting very little response, and what you do get is directly opposed to your method. You are mostly talking to yourself.

You might indeed carry on a lively discussion with like-minded folks elsewhere in the forum, if that is what you desire. The thread could be moved if you like. Perhaps General Theology, or Controversial Theology would be more to your liking?

But speaking from a Traditional standpoint, we do not look for hidden coded messages of something that is not already a part of our understanding. If one is not careful, one can find all sorts of "proofs" for a wide variety of competing beliefs in this way. I've seen it done, and have several books of such "proofs" tucked into my library.

Let us know if you'd like it moved. Otherwise, it really doesn't seem topical to this forum, beyond what has already been posted. If you're wanting lively conversation, you can probably get it that way.

Do you have a place for me?

 

[~Anastasia~]

Do you have a place for me?

You are welcome in Traditional Theology, of course. It's just that this forum has a purpose that seems incompatible with your thread. If you will look at my post, I just linked the two forums you might prefer to move your discussion to?

 

[Kenneth Redden]

You are welcome in Traditional Theology, of course. It's just that this forum has a purpose that seems incompatible with your thread. If you will look at my post, I just linked the two forums you might prefer to move your discussion to?

Okay, thank you.

 

[~Anastasia~]

You're welcome. Just let me (or a moderator) know if you'd like it moved. I'd have to turn in a request for you. (Please post here in the thread if you want it moved, and not by PM, so it's your request.)

 

[Kenneth Redden]

You're welcome. Just let me (or a moderator) know if you'd like it moved. I'd have to turn in a request for you. (Please post here in the thread if you want it moved, and not by PM, so it's your request.)

Yes, please move me to a different thread.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Yes, please move me to a different thread.

I just put in a request for you. I hope you have more conversational engagement in a new forum.

 

[Kenneth Redden]

I just put in a request for you. I hope you have more conversational engagement in a new forum.

Thank you, ~Anastasia~.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Thank you, ~Anastasia~.

You're welcome. Hopefully it will be moved for you soon.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Thank you, ~Anastasia~.

Kenneth Redden, please accept my apologies. I had thought this was your thread. It was actually started by another member, who may have had a particular purpose for placing it here. Your theories had become the main focus so far back that I was thinking it was your thread.

I would encourage you, if you wish to discuss what you have been posting on, to begin a thread in General Theology, perhaps. I suspect you'd get more discussion there.

I apologize for the misunderstanding. God bless you!

 

[Kenneth Redden]

Kenneth Redden, please accept my apologies. I had thought this was your thread. It was actually started by another member, who may have had a particular purpose for placing it here. Your theories had become the main focus so far back that I was thinking it was your thread.

I would encourage you, if you wish to discuss what you have been posting on, to begin a thread in General Theology, perhaps. I suspect you'd get more discussion there.

I apologize for the misunderstanding. God bless you!

And God bless you! I'll try, thanks.

 

[~Anastasia~]

And God bless you! I'll try, thanks.

You're welcome, and thank you!

 

[Uber Genius]

Hi archie,

You wrote:


I've never understood that statement to mean that Jesus exists in all time at once. The Pharisees were merely disputing the idea that Jesus had ever personally known Abraham and Jesus responded that even before Abraham, he existed. I honestly don't see how you understand those words to somehow mean that he exists in all time at once.

However, I do agree that the limitations of our human understanding may certainly have some bearing on our being able to fully comprehend how time and God function together.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Seems like this post veers quite a bit from the proper exegesis of jn 8:58!

Ego eimi is a rendering of the tetragrammation found in Exodus 3:14

"The Septuagint translates ehyeh asher ehyeh of Exodus 3:14a into Greek as "ego eimi ho on", which in turn translates into English as "I am the one who is", and it translates the absolute ehyehof 3:14b as "ho on", "the one who is".[2] This earliest of all translations of the Hebrew thus associates the revelation of Exodus 3:14 with the concept of absolute existence."

εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Ἰησοῦς Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί. Ego eimi is a direct quote from the 3:14 version.

Just in case people are still in doubt John adds the effect of Jesus' claim in the following verse:

"At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds."

"At this" ties the two sentences together.

Jesus uses the tetragrammation and blasphemes! No one in his audience misses it. 2000 years later, without study of the cultural milieu, it is easily missed.

The reference seems to be one of identity rather than predicating the attribute of timeliness.

Although we see claims elsewhere to Jesus' eternality. Those scriptures in turn led to creedal formulations of " begotten not made, co-eternal with the father, etc."

 

[Paul Yohannan]

THIS IS A MOD HAT
THIS IS A MOD HAT
THIS IS A MOD HAT
THIS IS A MOD HAT
THIS IS A MOD HAT

Thread Permanently Closed

Due to repeated violations of sitewide and/or forum-specific rules, this thread will remain permanently closed.

Members are urged to take a moment to read the CF.com rules, as well as the Statement of Purpose for this particular forum.



In particular, members posting in Controversial Christian Theology may not criticize the practices of traditional Christian denominations.



Members are required to follow all official instructions from CF.Com Ambassadors, which will be denoted using Mod Hat graphics, and should pau careful attention to any guidance from Ambassadors concerning the rules and SOP of this and other forums.

Do not violate the SOP of this forum.
Do not post in this forum without reading the SOP.
Do not challenge Ambassadors or contest their Mod Hats; take such complaints to the Member Service formats.​

END OF MOD HAT
END OF MOD HAT
END OF MOD HAT
END OF MOD HAT
END OF MOD HAT​