tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post1164967689063928629..comments2024-03-28T20:04:20.286-07:00Comments on One Cʘsmos: The Marriage of Time & EternityGagdad Bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-81473456159122459362016-05-15T16:20:24.675-07:002016-05-15T16:20:24.675-07:00Leslie, isn't it interesting to be in a Bible ...Leslie, isn't it interesting to be in a Bible study with mostly Protestants? They have some funny blind spots; in my study of Exodus last year, when we talked about what the manna represented not one person considered the Eucharist. Instead, they all thought it represented the Bible. I quite appreciated their perspective, even if I didn't always agree with their conclusions. They are studying John next fall, so I may go back.juliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15975754287030568726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-801847758698446322016-05-15T15:37:08.656-07:002016-05-15T15:37:08.656-07:00Mushroom: I recently wrote about what the Church s...Mushroom: I recently wrote about what the Church says about angels, which may not be what you were asking about, but the official position is that they are beings of pure spirit and therefore cannot change. In fact, they make their choice to turn toward or away from God, and they cannot "change their mind" because they are not in time like humans. So we can evolve and become better (or worse) over time, but angels are what they are eternally. I found that last part interesting, because at first glance it can seem odd or unfair that they can't change their decision to follow God's will or disobey Him. That paper was one of the "lighter" topics I wrote on for my Spring class, but it was very interesting. The Bible mentions angels quite a bit, so it's surprising to me that Protestants don't accept that doctrine anymore. In a Bible study book we are using in my Bible study (I'm the only Catholic), the story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in the fire with the angel was interpreted (in the book we use) as Jesus in there with them rather than an angel, which it says it was right there in the Book. I'm kind of curious about why they dropped angels..will have to investigate.Leslie Godwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794375005614166921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-41248894843050649262016-05-12T16:10:49.068-07:002016-05-12T16:10:49.068-07:00" I suppose that makes us Trinitarian Persona..." I suppose that makes us Trinitarian Personalists, which about sums up the Secret Raccoon Doctrine."<br /><br />I like that. ☺️Allenahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10998933457283434204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-84713981149589271662016-05-12T14:41:39.389-07:002016-05-12T14:41:39.389-07:00I'm not sure it's right to say that Buddhi...I'm not sure it's right to say that Buddhism 'posits a world of pure process with no substantial reality underneath'. The Mahayana definitely subscribes to an Absolute and one which is not impersonal but, rather, 'supra-personal' and subject to change under certain conditions. I've recently come across a couple of works representing the more 'theistic' dimension of this tradition (in the form of Shin Buddhism), written by a priest who apparently was a Buddhist disciple of Frithjof Schuon. I certainly found some compelling parallels with what Bob is talking about:<br /><br />http://www.amazon.com/Call-Infinite-Way-Shin-Buddhism/dp/1597310956<br /><br />http://www.amazon.com/Fragrance-Light-Journey-Buddhist-Wisdom/dp/1597311456<br /><br />These works helped me to understand that Buddhism in the West has been hijacked by the secular left (including the ghastly Deepak Chopra types) and does not represent the more 'personalist', devotional and metaphysical view embodied in its traditional forms as taught and practiced in the East. In fact, Schuon himself felt that the Pure Land form of Buddhism (of which Shin is the largest school), was the only Eastern religion suitable for Westerners.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-60902255764679889642016-05-12T11:24:22.448-07:002016-05-12T11:24:22.448-07:00Whoops. I typed that wrong. We are to Jesus, as ...Whoops. I typed that wrong. We are to Jesus, as our spiritual selves are to God. Same dynamics going on.It's the culturenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-81492497484486844732016-05-12T11:22:51.036-07:002016-05-12T11:22:51.036-07:00Didn't Don Colacho mention something like theo...Didn't Don Colacho mention something like theology has no function in resolving conflict, but in showing its necessity? That works for me.tedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07354048695798015131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-69208761957609487972016-05-12T11:22:18.619-07:002016-05-12T11:22:18.619-07:00Angels come from a different dimension? Anything&...Angels come from a different dimension? Anything's possible.<br /><br />I got into it once with a guy for a while and we sort of concluded that Jesus must be to us, as our spiritual selves are to God. Our physical self must form some kind of spiritual personality trait, or spiritual organ... some kind of vital influence dictated by the laws of the universe, which becomes quite important after physical existence is spent. That attachment never disappears. He called it a metaphysical anchor point. God has apparently allowed himself to be subject to the same circumstances in this greatest work of art. <br /><br />But, like the 2D being trying to figure out 3D space I can only guess. Or as Bob suggests, feel that truth.It's the culturenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-47706070375712125412016-05-12T10:58:48.767-07:002016-05-12T10:58:48.767-07:00God changes -- I want to say, in us, which may not...God changes -- I want to say, in us, which may not convey what I mean. Anyway, otherwise, why would He have gone beyond Adam or given Adam the capacity to reproduce? Angels -- as best I can figure, are more static. There may not be a path of angelic development or angelic evolution. All of God's creative evolution comes to a focus in the sons of Adam.<br /><br />Or possibly I need more coffee. I always need more coffee. mushroomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07651027035577798096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-74353905733206412132016-05-12T10:38:32.565-07:002016-05-12T10:38:32.565-07:00Yes, just soYes, just sojuliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15975754287030568726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-52629311864202770972016-05-12T10:36:40.236-07:002016-05-12T10:36:40.236-07:00I like the idea of the universe as art. It doesn’t...I like the idea of the universe as art. It doesn’t feed, defend or shelter any creator, just gives them something interesting (and meaningful?) to do when all else is irrelevant. It's the culturenoreply@blogger.com