|
Thanks. But what does he think we are
missing about that? Does “relating” always mean “agreeing”? I think not. Izzy From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hughes Hi Izzy, I believe that Lance wants to construct not
just a theory to unify all known physical information but one that encompasses
everything under the Person of Jesus Christ. I believe it to be a noble
cause as well. You are correct that science does not need a theological
counterpart. It does however, need to be submitted to the authority of
who God is. I believe you are saying that below, just using different
words. I also believe that you relate to both believers and
non-believers. This is why Lance keeps hammering at you and Judy that you
two indwell the gospel in many different ways. You may think he is being
facetious but he really means it. We call it the great dance, the
partaking of the divine nature, the living a life out of the center of Jesus
Christ. Look at any post you have made about your family. Where
does the love you have for your family come from? Straight from God’s
love that is shared between the Father, Son, and Spirit. By sharing in
His life, you love others. This is what Lance is getting at when he
speaks of relating. JBH From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ShieldsFamily From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Hughes Jonathan Hi Izzy, Hope this helps: Wikipedia defines the TOE as: A theory
of everything (TOE) is a theory of theoretical physics and mathematics that fully explains and
links together all known physical phenomena (i.e. "everything"). This is a scientific construct designed to
encapsulate all of our scientific knowledge. Lance is asking what the
theological counterpart of this scientific theory would be. Actually he
may even be taking a step beyond this. I think he would say that
the scientific theory of everything (TOE) would become a predicate (become
part of, or a subset) of the theological theory of everything (TTOE).
What is the meaning of the cosmos, of creation? We can sum up that
meaning in the Person of Jesus Christ. As we do not separate God's acts
from God's being we can substitute the incarnation (God with us in space and
time as the Godman, fully God and fully human) for the words Jesus
Christ. Lance is suggesting that we define all that we do and think
through the lens of the incarnation. The incarnation being the focal
point out of which we come to understand our lives. What we tend to do is
use our theology to define our lives. Lance is suggesting that we allow
God to define our theology. Lance goes on to suggest that in order to do
this two things may need to occur: 1) Move past (not ignore)
external relations to think of internal relations, or onto-relations as he
likes to call them when we speak. The human person is defined by relationality.
To be fully human is to relate. Out of these relations comes change and
growth. 2) Indwell the Scriptures. The
Word of God is capable of setting us free. When we allow God's Word to
indwell us in light of who He is we come into this internal relation. Hope this helps. Based on what I
have said, can you see why Slade's response this morning came out of 'internal
relations'? Unfortunately my lunch break is over :) Jonathan Hughes Jonathan, I’m not sure anyone can use one
theory to unify all know physical information. Good luck to whoever tries. I
happen to believe that, if the Theory of Everything were true and factual, it
would not need a theological counterpart. True science does not deny God.
It confirms His handiwork. When we live our lives by the instructions of the
Bible we ARE allowing God to define our theology—and the everything we do is an
act of worship. I don’t know who Lance is preaching to about relating, but I
think I do plenty of that, with Believers and non-believers. Since I have
been dwelling on the scriptures for 30+ years I think they are quite a part of
me by now. The Holy Spirit definitely indwells me. So it all seems like
much ado about what is already going on for your average Believer to me. Izzy --- --- |
- RE: [TruthTalk] Two Covenants? ShieldsFamily
- RE: [TruthTalk] Two Covenants? Slade Henson
- Re: [TruthTalk] Two Covenants? Jeff Powers
- Re: [TruthTalk] Two Covenants? Jeff Powers
- Re: [TruthTalk] Two Covenants? Jeff Powers
- Re: [TruthTalk] Two Covenants? Knpraise
- Re: [TruthTalk] Two Covenants? Susan Petersen
- RE: [TruthTalk] Two Covenants? Slade Henson
- Re: [TruthTalk] Two Covenants? ttxpress
- RE: [TruthTalk] Two Covenants? Slade Henson
- Re: [TruthTalk] Two Covenants? ttxpress
