I wish to apologize

[Thatgirloncfforums]

The question of the “universal jurisdiction of the Pope” is what divides Rome from the rest of the “Orthodox” church.

Yes, but since I do not affirm it, I am not Roman Catholic.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I really am having difficulty understanding that post of yours, specifically, I can’t tell what you are trying to say about Trinitarian churches. Help me out here.

My underlying point is simply that whether leaders of the various sectors/denominations/traditions within our Trinitarian faith "feel" in accord spiritually with each other or not, they are at 'one' together at the core, regardless. Some of my view on this is inspired by my reading of Kevin Giles' comments on Trinitarian Ecclesiology in his book, What On Earth Is The Church (1995).

Now, obviously, in saying what I'm saying above it doesn't sound like I'm saying all that much, and indeed I'm not. But this is because I like to keep things simple, particularly being that I have limited time to write and, like Kierkegaard, I don't have all that much faith in the processes of systematic theologizing.

Therefore, because of this, I would rather offer what are admittedly piece-meal, more simplified affirmations of traditional theology within the bounds of a mutually empathic discussion rather than pour out a deluge of collected details presented through elongated, austere articulations. Besides, it's not as if I have something to prove up and over any other Christian here on this forum.

As for addressing the concerns of @Thatgirloncfforums, if you feel you want to address her questions and you can do so more substantively and more 'correctly' than I can, then please feel free to do so. I'm not going to attempt to counter you. Why should I? This isn't a competition to see who can out-do the other in this endeavor.

 

[The Liturgist]

My underlying point is simply that whether leaders of the various sectors/denominations/traditions within our Trinitarian faith "feel" in accord spiritually with each other or not, they are at 'one' together at the core, regardless. Some of my view on this is inspired by my reading of Kevin Giles' comments on Trinitarian Ecclesiology in his book, What On Earth Is The Church (1995).

Now, obviously, in saying what I'm saying above it doesn't sound like I'm saying all that much, and indeed I'm not. But this is because I like to keep things simple, particularly being that I have limited time to write and, like Kierkegaard, I don't have all that much faith in the processes of systematic theologizing.

I myself venerate Soren Kierkegaard as a saint and am skeptical of systematic theology; I feel like it was done sufficiently by St. John Damascene, and exhaustively by Thomas Aquinas, and subsequent efforts such as Karl Barth’s epic Church Dogmatics, while impressive, aren’t my cup of tea (I also disagree with many of Barth’s points).

But on the subject of points, for the veritable life of me I cannot figure out what overall point you are trying to make; indeed I am more confused than I was previously. Are you trying to say an essential unity exists among Christian churches (by definition, Christians believe in the Holy Trinity; it is an essential doctrine of the faith, and on ChristianForums, the Statement of Faith very properly defines Christians as those whose beliefs are in accord with the Nicene Creed)? Are you advocating the ecclesiology sometimes called “the invisible Church”?

Therefore, because of this, I would rather offer what are admittedly piece-meal, more simplified affirmations of traditional theology within the bounds of a mutually empathic discussion rather than pour out a deluge of collected details presented through elongated, austere articulations.

[/quote]

I find myself again befuddled, this time by your choice of words, in that, is austere really the word you were searching for? It seems contradictory, and therefore a negation of, elongated.

Besides, it's not as if I have something to prove up and over any other Christian here on this forum.

Well, then, you are in the right place, in that Traditional Theology is widely considered to be among the most friendly, caring and respectful forums on this site. As a rule, the regular participants here such as myself, @Paidiske, @MarkRohfrietsch, @~Anastasia~ , @Thatgirloncfforums , @hedrick , @prodromos , @Shane R , @All4Christ , @bekkilyn , @chevyontheriver , @Philip_B and the rest of the crew are not interested in one-upmanship or winning debates, but rather learning from each other, enjoying the benefits of mutual edification. Denomination Specific Theology is more of a theological baseball stadium, as is General Theology, but even then, ChristianForums has a remarkably good culture, which is why I liken our more debate-centric forums to baseball stadiums rather than to hockey rinks or boxing rings*

As for addressing the concerns of @Thatgirloncfforums, if you feel you want to address her questions and you can do so more substantively and more 'correctly' than I can, then please feel free to do so. I'm not going to attempt to counter you. Why should I? This isn't a competition to see who can out-do the other in this endeavor.

Indeed, it certainly isn’t, for the reasons I explained above. In Traditional Theology, we are here to learn from each other, not to win arguments, propagate doctrinal controversy, or engage in dogmatic food fights. However, right now I am still mystified as to what your central thesis is, and I do apologize for this; I feel terribly dense, but if you could help me understand what you mean when you state how the Trinitarian denominations are one at the core, that would help me, and enable me to be edified by your post; it might well help other members to understand as well, and it is entirely possible we actually agree with each other.



* with apologies to hockey and boxing fans; the only spectator sports I enjoy are live motorsports at the county fair, and the bobsleds, luges, high speed rollerskating and other interesting sports only seen at the Olympics, although I love playing basketball because of the mental math required to plot a ballistic trajectory in real time to shoot a hoop; I could shoot hoops all day, and I have a pretty high success rate, and a nice relaxing swim in a well heated pool is also profoundly soothing

 

[atpollard]

There is so much more beauty in Christianity than could ever be expressed by nursery rhymes, and that nursery rhyme further suffers from a preconception about the role of scripture, which ignores the vital function of the Church and the Sacred Mysteries. I mean, its a nice, sweet nursery rhyme for children, but it fails to address the beauty @Thatgirloncfforums has experienced and is seeking in Lutheranism and Orthodoxy.

1. Jesus loves me! This I know,
   For the Bible tells me so;
   Little ones to Him belong;
   They are weak, but He is strong.
   • Refrain:
     Yes, Jesus loves me!
     Yes, Jesus loves me!
     Yes, Jesus loves me!
     The Bible tells me so.
2. Jesus loves me! This I know,
   As He loved so long ago,
   Taking children on His knee,
   Saying, “Let them come to Me.”
3. Jesus loves me still today,
   Walking with me on my way,
   Wanting as a friend to give
   Light and love to all who live.
4. Jesus loves me! He who died
   Heaven’s gate to open wide;
   He will wash away my sin,
   Let His little child come in.
5. Jesus loves me! He will stay
   Close beside me all the way;
   Thou hast bled and died for me,
   I will henceforth live for Thee.

haters gonna hate,
mr. orthodox tradition.
God gonna love!

(If that doesn't work for you, then ... that's your problem.)

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

1. Jesus loves me! This I know,
   For the Bible tells me so;
   Little ones to Him belong;
   They are weak, but He is strong.
   • Refrain:
     Yes, Jesus loves me!
     Yes, Jesus loves me!
     Yes, Jesus loves me!
     The Bible tells me so.
2. Jesus loves me! This I know,
   As He loved so long ago,
   Taking children on His knee,
   Saying, “Let them come to Me.”
3. Jesus loves me still today,
   Walking with me on my way,
   Wanting as a friend to give
   Light and love to all who live.
4. Jesus loves me! He who died
   Heaven’s gate to open wide;
   He will wash away my sin,
   Let His little child come in.
5. Jesus loves me! He will stay
   Close beside me all the way;
   Thou hast bled and died for me,
   I will henceforth live for Thee.

haters gonna hate,
mr. orthodox tradition.
God gonna love!

(If that doesn't work for you, then ... that's your problem.)

This is fine as far as it goes; children in our Sunday schools sing this too. This certainly falls short as a theological summary; and says absolutely nothing of the obligations that fall on the faithful. It's not about hate, it is about being real, being justified by Christ and the life long journey of sanctification (deification)sp?; becoming Christ-like; Apotheosis, or what ever one wishes to call it. It runs much deeper than just "Jesus Loves Me".

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I myself venerate Soren Kierkegaard as a saint and am skeptical of systematic theology; I feel like it was done sufficiently by St. John Damascene, and exhaustively by Thomas Aquinas, and subsequent efforts such as Karl Barth’s epic Church Dogmatics, while impressive, aren’t my cup of tea (I also disagree with many of Barth’s points).

But on the subject of points, for the veritable life of me I cannot figure out what overall point you are trying to make; indeed I am more confused than I was previously. Are you trying to say an essential unity exists among Christian churches (by definition, Christians believe in the Holy Trinity; it is an essential doctrine of the faith, and on ChristianForums, the Statement of Faith very properly defines Christians as those whose beliefs are in accord with the Nicene Creed)? Are you advocating the ecclesiology sometimes called “the invisible Church”?

Therefore, because of this, I would rather offer what are admittedly piece-meal, more simplified affirmations of traditional theology within the bounds of a mutually empathic discussion rather than pour out a deluge of collected details presented through elongated, austere articulations.



I find myself again befuddled, this time by your choice of words, in that, is austere really the word you were searching for? It seems contradictory, and therefore a negation of, elongated.



Well, then, you are in the right place, in that Traditional Theology is widely considered to be among the most friendly, caring and respectful forums on this site. As a rule, the regular participants here such as myself, @Paidiske, @MarkRohfrietsch, @~Anastasia~ , @Thatgirloncfforums , @hedrick , @prodromos , @Shane R , @All4Christ , @bekkilyn , @chevyontheriver , @Philip_B and the rest of the crew are not interested in one-upmanship or winning debates, but rather learning from each other, enjoying the benefits of mutual edification. Denomination Specific Theology is more of a theological baseball stadium, as is General Theology, but even then, ChristianForums has a remarkably good culture, which is why I liken our more debate-centric forums to baseball stadiums rather than to hockey rinks or boxing rings*



Indeed, it certainly isn’t, for the reasons I explained above. In Traditional Theology, we are here to learn from each other, not to win arguments, propagate doctrinal controversy, or engage in dogmatic food fights. However, right now I am still mystified as to what your central thesis is, and I do apologize for this; I feel terribly dense, but if you could help me understand what you mean when you state how the Trinitarian denominations are one at the core, that would help me, and enable me to be edified by your post; it might well help other members to understand as well, and it is entirely possible we actually agree with each other.



* with apologies to hockey and boxing fans; the only spectator sports I enjoy are live motorsports at the county fair, and the bobsleds, luges, high speed rollerskating and other interesting sports only seen at the Olympics, although I love playing basketball because of the mental math required to plot a ballistic trajectory in real time to shoot a hoop; I could shoot hoops all day, and I have a pretty high success rate, and a nice relaxing swim in a well heated pool is also profoundly soothing

To tell you honestly-- covid or no covid --I find it strange that you've suddenly gone from a frame of mind where you were able to qualify my statements above as being "superficial" and in need of an elongated address to one where you're finding yourself to be, now, utterly "mystified" by whatever I've said. [And yes, I know what the experience of covid brain-fog is because I had it until recently]

No, I think I shan't proceed in the way that you're requesting. Nor do I jump through anyone's hoops to 'demonstrate' my proficiencies. I'll just say in short that what I had in mind, and over which I won't explicate very much, is a form of Incarnational Theology in conjunction with the abstracted concept of the "Church Invisible."

But I'd rather think of what I have in mind, philosophically speaking, as a form of the "Church Simpliciter" but with all of the fuzziness and hypthetical guesswork retained when we attempt to re-visualize what Christians were doing those first 30 years after Christ.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

I agree with @The Liturgist and @MarkRohfrietsch. The song says nothing about the Trinity, Incarnation, Virgin Birth, Sacraments, Church, Repentance (The Law), and very little about Justification and Sanctification. As to the latter, how do I become like a little child? How does Christ help me in my struggles to become one (ie, how does Christ's strength compensate for my weakness? )Is my living for him merely a response to his death, or is it his power in me through the Holy Spirit? Children sing this in our church too, but they are being thoroughly catechized along side it. They have a wider theological context in which to understand what they are expressing in this song. This song as a stand alone could be sung by many unorthodox Christians such as Mormons and Oneness Pentacostals.

1. Jesus loves me! This I know,
   For the Bible tells me so;
2. Little ones to Him belong;
   They are weak, but He is strong
3. Refrain:
4. • Yes, Jesus loves me!
     Yes, Jesus loves me!
     Yes, Jesus loves me!
     The Bible tells me so.
5. Jesus loves me! This I know,
   As He loved so long ago,
   Taking children on His knee,
   Saying, “Let them come to Me.”
6. Jesus loves me still today,
   Walking with me on my way,
   Wanting as a friend to give
   Light and love to all who live.
7. Jesus loves me! He who died
   Heaven’s gate to open wide;
   He will wash away my sin,
   Let His little child come in.
8. Jesus loves me! He will stay
   Close beside me all the way;
   Thou hast bled and died for me,
   I will henceforth live for Thee.

haters gonna hate,
mr. orthodox tradition.
God gonna love!

(If that doesn't work for you, then ... that's your problem.)

 

[atpollard]

I agree with @The Liturgist and @MarkRohfrietsch. The song says nothing about the Trinity, Incarnation, Virgin Birth, Sacraments, Church, Repentance (The Law), and very little about Justification and Sanctification. As to the latter, how do I become like a little child? How does Christ help me in my struggles to become one (ie, how does Christ's strength compensate for my weakness? )Is my living for him merely a response to his death, or is it his power in me through the Holy Spirit? Children sing this in our church too, but they are being thoroughly catechized along side it. They have a wider theological context in which to understand what they are expressing in this song. This song as a stand alone could be sung by many unorthodox Christians such as Mormons and Oneness Pentacostals.

This is your topic to ask your questions, so I will leave you to it. I leave you with a rhetorical question as a final thought:

How much THEOLOGY DISCUSSION about "the Trinity, Incarnation, Virgin Birth, Sacraments, Church, Repentance (The Law), and ... Justification and Sanctification" will lead to becoming "like a little child"?

Faith, not knowledge.
Grace, not traditions.
Hope, not hierarchy.
... that is what saves us.
(all three come from knowing God rather than knowing about God).

I genuinely hope you find what you seek (although as a Particular Baptist and per the Heidelberg Catechism, I would pray that who you seek, finds you).

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

To tell you honestly-- covid or no covid --I find it strange that you've suddenly gone from a frame of mind where you were able to qualify my statements above as being "superficial" and in need of an elongated address to one where you're finding yourself to be, now, utterly "mystified" by whatever I've said. [And yes, I know what the experience of covid brain-fog is because I had it until recently]

No, I think I shan't proceed in the way that you're requesting. Nor do I jump through anyone's hoops to 'demonstrate' my proficiencies. I'll just say in short that what I had in mind, and over which I won't explicate very much, is a form of Incarnational Theology in conjunction with the abstracted concept of the "Church Invisible."

But I'd rather think of what I have in mind, philosophically speaking, as a form of the "Church Simpliciter" but with all of the fuzziness and hypthetical guesswork retained when we attempt to re-visualize what Christians were doing those first 30 years after Christ.

They weren't singing Jesus Loves Me; that I am sure of.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

This is your topic to ask your questions, so I will leave you to it. I leave you with a rhetorical question as a final thought:

How much THEOLOGY DISCUSSION about "the Trinity, Incarnation, Virgin Birth, Sacraments, Church, Repentance (The Law), and ... Justification and Sanctification" will lead to becoming "like a little child"?

Faith, not knowledge.
Grace, not traditions.
Hope, not hierarchy.
... that is what saves us.
(all three come from knowing God rather than knowing about God).

I genuinely hope you find what you seek (although as a Particular Baptist and per the Heidelberg Catechism, I would pray that who you seek, finds you).

The faith of a child is this: Unquestioning trust; full obedience; fear of God; Loving God... it is not regressing ones intellect to a preschool level. We read scripture to learn and grow in the faith; not regress, not dumbing down what God gave us in Scripture.

 

[atpollard]

The faith of a child is this:

Answering questions no one is asking, speaks volumes.

Carry on without me, O' waiting to talk Lutheran.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Thank you but I honestly don't mind debate. As long as you're following the rules of this forum, I wouldn't worry about stepping on my toes.
Question: Did the framers of the Heidelberg Catechism have theological discussion in order to formulate their Catechism? They seem to affirm many of the theological tenets I pointed out here. For example, I noticed that the Apostle's Creed is included as that which ought to be adhered to.

This is your topic to ask your questions, so I will leave you to it. I leave you with a rhetorical question as a final thought:

How much THEOLOGY DISCUSSION about "the Trinity, Incarnation, Virgin Birth, Sacraments, Church, Repentance (The Law), and ... Justification and Sanctification" will lead to becoming "like a little child"?

Faith, not knowledge.
Grace, not traditions.
Hope, not hierarchy.
... that is what saves us.
(all three come from knowing God rather than knowing about God).

I genuinely hope you find what you seek (although as a Particular Baptist and per the Heidelberg Catechism, I would pray that who you seek, finds you).

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Answering questions no one is asking, speaks volumes.

Carry on without me, O' waiting to talk Lutheran.

You are the one who put the premise forward; I only responded to what I (and others) saw as shallowness in that premise.

The OP agreed with the responses of myself an other too BTW.