...both theologians lived in a time when the rules of theology were not concretely set, having not reached Nicea by the time of Origen and having gone through the Enllightenment and liberal theology by the time of Barth. Both theologians correspondingly have to reason from first things, and so an insight into the inner logics of both is possible from a consideration of how each reaches his conclusions. Moreover, both theologians lived in times when Christianity was not the dominant and powerful monolith it was from the age of Constantine to the French Revolution, and living in such times raises directly the question of the salvation of those outside of the church and the simultaneous question that results of the place for Christian faith in that setting. It is the ecclesially focused natures of the two in pluralist settings which makes their theologies so interesting for the question of soteriology.
revdrew61 wrote: It is the ecclesially focused natures of the two in pluralist settings which makes their theologies so interesting for the question of soteriology.
Sobornost wrote:What do you reckon on the saying of Jesus - 'If your right eye offends you, pluck it out'. I've also seen this cited as a possible inspiration for Origen's castration. I have some historical/contextual thoughts on this - but I wonder how you see it as an exegete?
When Jesus had finished these sayings, he left Galilee and headed for the region of Judea beyond the Jordan River. Big crowds followed him, and he healed them. The Pharisees went to put him to the test. They said, "Is it legal for a person to divorce his wife on the grounds of 'Any Matter'?"
Jesus answered, "Haven't you read that he who created in the beginning made people male and female, and said, 'for this reason a person will leave his father and mother and be united with his wife and the two will become a single body/ Thus they are no longer two but a single body. So then what God has united, no one is to break apart.!"
They asked, "Why then did Moses command that a certificate of divorce is to be given upon divorce?"
"Because you are hard-hearted!" Jesus answered. "That's why Moses permitted you to divorce your wives, but it wasn't so from the beginning. In fact, whoever divorces his wife, unless it's on the grounds of 'General Sexual Immorality', and marries someone else, commits adultery."
His disciples said to him, "If this is the situation with husband and wife, it's better not to get married at all!"
But Jesus answered, "This doesn't apply to everyone, but only to those to whom it has been given. Now there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made that way by human intervention, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of Heaven's Realm. If it applies to you, then accept it!"
Sobornost wrote:The article at this page of the site concerns the English Anabaptists during the Reformation – and is very hostile to the Anabaptist story, and scandalously biased in my view.
like a virusThe Anabaptists infected Britain at an early date
Sobornost wrote:There is a rather charming irony in this Conservative Reformed site quoting approvingly from Schaff. Schaff was a German American Church Historian – a colossus in f his knowledge of the Creeds of the Church. He was a Calvinist by tradition, but as with Barth in the twentieth century he had a truly Ecumenical vision - and it appears that he was a Christian Universalist!
For more on Schaff’s Universalism see
http://www.churchcrucified.org/agapewik ... lip_Schaff
So the heresies of the neo-Marcionitic and neo-Manichaean Paulicians and even of the antitrinitarian Servetus himself were already afoot even in Knox's Britain. Indeed, prominent among the British Anabaptists was the so-called 'Family of Love' in England.
As Williams has explained:354 "The English 'Familists' were communitarian pacifistic Anabaptists who, like the Paulicians and the Servetians, received believers' baptism at the age of thirty."
They were very well-described by John Rogers, in his 1579 Horrible Sect of Gross and Wicked Heretics naming themselves the 'Family of Love.' There, explained Rogers, "marriage is made by the brethren.... These had never met before.... All men not of their congregation, or revolted from them, are as dead.... If they have anything to do touching their temporal things, they must do it...through one of their bishops."355
Rome rides again -- toward the sunset of the modern Moonies! Tallyho! Yahoo! Weirdo's of the world -- unite!
sobernost wrote:2e (12th/13th cent.), 2ap (12th cent.) and 1r (12th cent.). The [other] miniscules he consulted were: 1eap (12th cent.), 4ap (15th cent.), and 7p (11/12th cent.).
•To refrain from passing urine is bad for your health; but be discreet when you go. There are some who teach that a child should hold in digestive wind by clenching his buttocks. But it’s not good manners to make yourself ill in your eagerness to appear polite.
•If someone crudely urges you to drink more, it’s fine for you to promise that you will respond to his request when you are grown up.
good advice•He shouldn’t put himself above others, nor boast about what he’s done, nor criticise someone else’s behaviour, nor disparage the customs or habits of another country, nor reveal a secret he’s been trusted with, nor spread fresh rumours, nor damage someone’s reputation spitefully, nor reproach someone on account of an inborn defect...Following these guidelines should mean that you win praise without envy and gain friends.
likewise here•Don’t get involved in quarrels with anyone, and show affability to all.
Tell this one to all the rabid sports fans out there.•Someone who concedes a game with good humour gains more honour than one who always insists on winning.
and this too•The point of playing is in the spirit of the game rather than any prize.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests