Stephen Davis states that because of the broadness of the Chalcedon formula, the position one might hold of the kenosis theory is orthodox (Davis, 135). Yet, Davis softens his position by punting to the church on whether or not the kenosis theory is orthodox hinging on the "people of God accepting it as orthodox" (138). Davis' deferral to the present church contradicts the earlier point of the model being within the bounds of the Chalcedonian definition. That being the case, the doctrine of Kenosis defined either as "functional kenosis" or "ontological kenosis" promulgates a sense of competition between God's nature and human nature that the Chalcedon formula asserts as heretical (for definitions see Crisp, 119–120). As the formula avers,
One of the main principles of Christianity is the belief in both the divinity and humanity of Jesus, that these two natures are combined harmoniously in one being. In general, all modern Christians believe that Jesus was human, he was considered to be “The Word was made flesh” (John, I: 14). However, Jesus was more than just a human, despite being subjected to pain, suffering and death like all other human beings, he was sinless and also possessed the power to heal and to defy death in order to ascend, both body and spirit, into heaven. He was all man and all God, a combination of these two elements, remaining distinct but united in one being. The deity of Jesus is a non-negotiable belief in Christianity, which is referred to in many parts of scripture, “God was revealed in the flesh” (I Timothy, 3:16). The Christian faith does not perceive Jesus as God but rather a reincarnation of God, a mysterious deity who is the second person of the Holy Trinity. Throughout history, controversy has surrounded the issue of the humanity and divinity of Jesus, leading to the formation of Docetism, the belief that Jesus was fully divine but not fully human, Arianism, that Jesus was superior to all of creation, but less divine than God, and Nestorius, that there were two separate persons within Jesus. This the proportion of the divine and human within Je...
At the time of Barron’s essay, he felt Kroegar’s premise had not been examined further and he wanted to do so. Kroeger's basic ideas presented from Barron’s point of view were one of the two modern theories on a woman’s role in the church, that Paul was addressing a particular situation in Ephesus and the issues that were present at that time in history. Moo did not go into this in his essay in the same way as Barron. Barron emphasizes that the church of Ephesus may have been following a “gnostic” doctrine, which Baron points out the four points to their view of
One of the most distinct feature of dispensationalist view is the millennial kingdom in Revelation. The thousand year reign of Christ will take place on the earth. Based on grammatical-historical exegesis of chapter 20, Thomas provides
Each man trying to correct from within were pushed further and outward away from the goal of unity. We would have a different story if it were only one man who rejected the idea of the Church being one with the world. The individual would have been marked as the antichrist. Instead, we see a few men take a stand for what they felt was the truth, which we had strayed. Noted, Campbell has seen the destruction with takes place when man messes with God’s desire for gathering of the Church. Campbell states, “What awful and distressing effects have those sad divisions produced! What aversions, what reproaches, what backbitings, what evil surmisings, what angry contentions, what enmities, what excommunications, even persecution!!!” (Campbell and Thomas) Campbell’s biggest fight was pulling back the reigns of the world. Campbell extends ejecting all human creeds that cause divisions among Christians. He states, “… for their faith must not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power and veracity of God. Therefore, no such deductions can be made terms of communion, but do properly belong to the after and progressive edification of the Church. Hence, it is evident that no such deductions or inferential truths ought to have a place in the Church’s confession.” (Campbell and Thomas) Reaching out to across all divisions, Campbell has to be unprejudiced. “That although the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are inseparably connected, making together but one perfect and entire revelation of the Divine will, for the edification and salvation of the Church, and therefore in that respect cannot be separated.” “From the nature and construction of these propositions, it will evidently appear, that they are laid in a designed subserviency to the declared end of our association; and are exhibited for the express purpose of performing a duty of pervious necessity, a duty loudly called for in
Even though aspects of Copernicasism is acknowledged and accepted but it requires proof and accepting Copernicasism outright is dangerous for the Church. Therefore Bellarmine concludes that because of theses reason Copernicasism can only be accepted as a working hypothesis and not as
In this paper I shall consider Spinoza’s argument offered in the second Scholium to Proposition 8, which argues for the impossibility of two substances sharing the same nature. I shall first begin by explaining, in detail, the two-step structure of the argument and proceed accordingly by offering a structured account of its relation to the main claim. Consequently I shall point out what I reasonably judge to be a mistake in Spinoza’s line of reasoning; that is, that the definition of a thing does not express a fixed number of individuals under that definition. By contrast, I hope to motivate the claim that a true definition of a thing does in fact express a fixed number of individuals that fall under that definition. I shall then present a difficulty against my view and concede in its insufficiency to block Spinoza’s conclusion. Finally, I shall resort to a second objection in the attempt to prove an instance by which two substances contain a similar attribute, yet differ in nature. Under these considerations, I conclude that Spinoza’s thesis is mistaken.
...k is that Christianity is not a blind faith but a reasoned faith. He presents a faith that can stand inspection and critics. The weakness of this book is found in its brevity. Lewis as some points doesn’t expand enough on crucial key points. Though at some points he acknowledges that it is unnecessary to argue different doctrinal stances. Most disappointing is the lack of biblical support in the book. Not to say that his material is unbiblical but that he does not reference biblical passages that coincide with his subject at hand.
A second and stronger objection to Mackie’s version of the problem of evil is explained to us using the terms 1st and 2nd order goods and evils. 1st order goods/evils are purely physical. Examples are pleasure and pain, happiness and misery. It is claimed by many theists that 1st order evils such as pain and suffering are necessary for 2nd order goods like courage and charity. However there exists what Mackie calls a “fatal objection” to this claim and that is that along with 2nd order goods there must also exist 2nd order evil...
Walvoord, John F., Roy B. Zuck, and Harnold W. Hoehner. "Colossians." The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures. Wheaton, IL: Victor, 1983. 613-45. Print.
In chapter three there is a somewhat disparate side of the ontological argument. It centers on the nature of God than the meaning of him. Particularly, this chapter centers on the early quality of God that is the fact that he needs to exist. Inanimate things, supplementary living things, and humans are ...
As the developments in Eastern Christianity were happening independent of Western Christianity, the differences in approaches grew to a serious estrangement between the two (Ware 23-24). As Ware suggests, some of the more prominent differences between the eastern and western Christianity are in the approach of religious truth, the perception of sin and salvation, and the view of the Holy Spirit. For Orthodox Christians, truth must be experienced personally (Ware 132). There is thus less focus on the exact definition of religious truth and more on the practical and personal experience of truth in the life of the individual and the church. This emphasis on personal experience of truth flows into the actual definition of the word Orthodox, which essentially means the correct theological observance of religion (“orthodox”). In the Western churches sin and salvation are seen primarily in legal terms. God gave humans freedom, and if they misuse it and brake God's commandments, they deserve punishment. God's grace results in forgiveness of the transgression and freedom from bondage and punishment. The Eastern churches see the matter in a different way. For Orthodox theologians, humans were created in the image of God and made to participate fully in the divine life. The full communion with God that Adam and Eve enjoyed meant complete freedom and true humanity, because humans are most human when they are completely united with God.
Four movements, now heresies, of the past each adopted one of these four views mentioned previously. They are: Nestorianism, Eutychianism, Apollinarianism, and Arianism. Nestorianism and Eutychianism fall under the controversy of the relationship between the two natures. The controversy of Nestorianism arose over the propriety of the term theotokos (“God-bearing”) as a description of Mary. At the Council of Chalcedon in 428 Nestorius gave his view of theotokos to which he held and overly dividing view of the two natures of Christ. Nestorius felt that the term was of doubtful propriety unless the term anthropotokos (“human-bearing”) was also used. Nestorius was later condemned when Cyril of Alexandria; who held the belief in Christ having one nature got involved. Nestorius’ pronouncement towards the birth of Christ caused Cyril to oppose him. Nestorius said that God cannot have a mother; no woman can give birth to God. Cyril of Alexandria suggested that Nestorius was proposing that Jesus has two natures joined in a purely moral union. After Nestorianism came Eutychianism. Eutyches who was repeatedly summoned to the standing Synod of Constantinople in 448, finally appeared and stated his position whereas Christ has two natures before the incarnation, that was but one afterwards. The result of the Synod was the Eutyches was deposed and excommunicated and the one- nature doctrine rejected.
...s distributed in Theology 101 at the University of Notre Dame, Fremantle on 22 April 2008.
Throughout the history of metaphysics the question, What is? has always been answered in an incomplete,unsatisfactory or complicated manner, but Spinoza tried to answer this question in an exceptional way simply by describing God and His essence. Based on Spinoza’s views, God’s qualities can be referred to as attributes and modes are merely affections of a substance. This paper will provide a detailed view of Spinoza’s key ontological definition of God as the only substance, his attributes, and their co-relations. The study goes further to explore the major scholarly argument between Spinoza and Descartes, in regard to their view of substance, and its attributes.
...e it is the opposite of God's love which allows freedom of choice, it forces a