Sunday, September 14, 2008
Infinite revisited
Belgium, (photo from trekearth.com)
My Infinite article was first presented in 2006, but I did not receive many comments. I now have more readers and wish to present this article with some slight changes.
Brian Davies writes that the English word infinity comes from the Latin word infinitas, meaning boundless or endless. Davies (1999: 298). Davies states that some have ascribed the term infinity with various degrees of understanding of substance, time, space, the universe, numbers, and classes. Davies (1999: 298). Davies mentions that many philosophers have dealt with the issue of infinity through the centuries, but Biblically speaking there is not a doctrine of infinity. Davies (1999: 298). I can give Davies this point if by this he means that within Scripture there is not a specific explanation of a doctrine of the infinite God. Davies writes that God's infinity is viewed as marking his perfection, and that God alone is understood as infinite. As God is uncreated and uncreatable, he is infinite. Davies (1999: 298). God would not be limited by time and space, and so contrary to the previous comments time and space would be considered finite and not infinite within traditional Christian thought. God would be superior to all creatures and would be omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, and eternal. Davies (1999: 298).
Davies notes that process theology has postulated that God's personal nature means that he can change as he works within created time. Davies (1999: 228). Process theology reasons that God possibly develops in personality as he deals with his created beings. Davies (1999: 228).
I would state that if God's nature can be changed and develop within time, then he is not infinite, but rather the most advanced finite being in existence. A finite being that is beyond matter, perhaps. I reject process theology's notion of a finite God, for at least the following reasons.
If God is not infinite then he cannot posses any infinite attributes, and this would prohibit God from being eternal. To be eternal would mean that one has unlimited life. If God is not eternal, then how did God come to exist? If there was a God that created God and so on, we have the problem of vicious regress in which we are stuck with an infinite regressions of Gods. If it is suggested at some point the regression ends, why cannot we simply reject the vicious regress and state that the Biblical God, or a God, is the only God? To state that God simply came to exist from nothing does not seem reasonable, and the suggestion answers nothing. If God is merely finite, then we have a problem of determining the first cause.
Many scientists and scholars reason that the universe is 15-20 billion years old, and believe in a 'Big Bang Theory'. Whether the universe is billions, millions, or thousands of years is not the primary concern of this article, but with a big bang model or like, the universe in agreement with the Bible, is not eternal. Billions, millions, or thousands of years is more time than any of us can comprehend and may be considered perhaps from a human perspective, virtual eternity, but is not actual eternity, and therefore is not infinite. Since God created matter in Genesis, Chapter 1, it is clear that nothing within the material, physical realm existed prior to creation. This would leave us with God, and perhaps the angelic beings prior to the existence of matter. It can be deduced that angels cannot be infinite in nature, because if they were limitless in nature they would themselves be God. We cannot have two or more limitless beings by definition as they simply would be an aspect of one infinite, eternal God of one substance. Thiessen notes angels are not eternal although the Bible does not state when they were created. Thiessen (1956: 191). Thiessen thinks angels may have been formed at the Genesis 1 creation or just after. Thiessen (1956: 191). I would of course have no definite idea, but think that angels were created within time. I do not reason that angels existed in a timeless state with God. I would deduce that even non-physical finite spiritual beings must exist within time, although not necessarily within physical matter, in order to process thought patterns, as God alone is all-knowing and does not need to process thoughts within time. I would conclude this point by stating that God alone existed before the creation of matter and angelic beings.
Millard J. Erickson discusses the Scriptural concept of God's existence in contrast to that of his creation. In Acts 17: 24-25 it states that God does not dwell physically, but is the creator of everything. Erickson notes that God is called the first and last in Isaiah 44: 6, and the Alpha and Omega in Revelation 1:8, 21:6, and 22:13. The idea being shown here is that God has always existed and will always exist. Erickson (1994: 273-274).
As pointed out previously, before the creation of matter and the angels nothing else would have existed. There is also the idea put across in Scripture that God is immutable and does not change in his nature. Malachi 3:6 states that the Lord does not change and Erickson views this as referring to God’s nature and attributes.
It can be stated here that the God of the Bible is not pantheistic as the creator is totally independent in nature from his creation. Erickson (1994: 303). God existed before the creation of matter as a purely spiritual being, and was not dependent on matter or anything other than himself for existence. God is not equal to his creation or matter, he is beyond it. God is also not to be considered in a panentheistic context as although the creator does sustain all of his creation through his power he is not the vital force within all he creates. Erickson (1994: 307). God in pantheism may be considered to be equal with a tree. God in panentheism may be considered beyond the tree, but the vital force within it, where as in my view a traditional Christian understanding would be that God is beyond a tree and sustains it, but is not the vital force within it. If God is the vital force within a tree, it could be argued that the tree’s essence is infinite and eternal and I think that this would be error. In contrast, I think that God sustains and energizes all of his creation while allowing it existence separate from his own. The tree remains finite although it is sustained by God. When the tree dies so does its essence, although the related finite matter continues to exist.
God and not his creation, is alone infinite.
DAVIES, BRIAN (1999) ‘Infinity’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.
ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
I do not want to dwell on graphic evils, but the extreme case below can serve as an example of why certain religious views need to be strongly intellectually challenged at times.
From Sky News
satanists
Eight suspected Satanists have been arrested in Russia for allegedly stabbing to death and eating the body parts of four teenagers, reports claim.
Russian police officers have 'arrested eight'
The four victims were lured one by one to a country cottage in the region of Yaroslavl on the Volga River, a popular Russian tabloid said.
The teenagers were then stabbed "666 times" each, as part of a Satanic ritual, the daily said, quoting investigators.
The victims were allegedly forced to get drunk before being stabbed and dismembered.
Their killers then lit a bonfire under a tree near the cottage where they cooked and ate their victims' body parts, the report claimed.
Hair from the victims was apparently found in the embers of the bonfire.
The report also quoted interrogations with the suspects and said police had intercepted their phone calls following the killings.
The victims - three girls and one boy - were all aged between 16 and 17 and belonged to local "goth circles", a subculture that is very popular in provincial Russia, Komsomolskaya Pravda said.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Russ,
ReplyDeleteThat cartoon is appropriate to me, since I spent a lot of time updating my Facebook page last night, after only going there a couple times in the past. Last night's updates were a result of your suggestion.
Davies mentions that many philosophers have dealt with the issue of infinity through the centuries, but Biblically speaking there is not a doctrine of infinity. Davies (1999: 298).
e·ter·nal
–adjective
1. without beginning or end; lasting forever; always existing (opposed to temporal): eternal life.
2. perpetual; ceaseless; endless: eternal quarreling; eternal chatter.
3. enduring; immutable: eternal principles.
4. Metaphysics. existing outside all relations of time; not subject to change.
–noun
5. something that is eternal.
6. the Eternal, God.
Genesis 21:33
"Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba, and there he called upon the name of the LORD, the Eternal God."
Deuteronomy 33:27
"The eternal God is your refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms. He will drive out your enemy before you, saying, 'Destroy him!'"
Psalm 119:89
"Your word, O LORD, is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens."
Isaiah 26:4
"Trust in the LORD forever, for the LORD, the LORD, is the Rock eternal."
Davies notes that process theology has postulated that God's personal nature means that he can change as he works within created time. Davies (1999: 228). Process theology reasons that God possibly develops in personality as he deals with his created beings. Davies (1999: 228).
James 1:17
"Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning."
"If God is not infinite then he cannot posses any infinite attributes, and this would prohibit God from being eternal. To be eternal would mean that one has unlimited life."
ReplyDeleteHey Russ,
I'm not sure what you mean here. Granted, I'm at work, so I'm only able to skim artilces most of the time. I've tried to slow down here, but I'm still having trouble.
You say that to be eternal one would have unlimited life. Does this mean from a point of existence. We, who are in Christ, have eternal life now and will "live" forever. The "unsaved" are believed to "live" forever as well, but in the context of "death", that is apart from God.
Of course, you use the term "unlimited", which is somewhat ambiguous in itself.
From the quote I started with, it seems as if you are saying that for God to be "eternal", He must first be "infinite". So I must be misunderstanding you here because we, obviously, are not infinite, yet we are granted "eternal" life.
Anyway, when you get a chance can you help me understand what you mean here?
Thanks, Jeff.
ReplyDeleteI thought of you when I posted the cartoon.
Russ
Thanks, GGM.
ReplyDeleteFrom my archived article:
everlatings vs. eternal
Interestingly in New Testament Greek according to Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, the same Greek word can be defined in English as either eternal or everlasting. The Greek word aíwvios (aionios) is explained as meaning perpetual, used of past time or past and future as well, eternal, for ever, and everlasting. Strong (1986: 8). Strong provides only one word for eternal or everlasting from the New Testament.
Walter Bauer notes that in Romans 16: 25, a form of the word is used to describe a mystery of long ages ago without beginning. Bauer (1979: 28). In Hebrews 9: 14, a form of the word is used to describe the eternal Spirit and is mentioned as existing without beginning or end. Bauer (1979: 28). In Mathew 19: 29, Jesus discusses those that shall inherit everlasting life, and the word is used in a form that describes life existing without end. Bauer (1979: 28). The first verse appears to be describing a mystery that always existed with God, and in the second verse it mentions the Spirit of God that has always existed, and did not begin and will not cease. In the third verse the life Jesus discusses did not always exist, but everlasting life shall be given to some by God. There is a clear philosophical difference between the first two meanings and the last one.
Only God has eternal life. We as resurrected persons will have everlasting life.
I am not trying to split hairs here, but rather wish to attempt to define my terms as properly as possible in order to avoid related theological and philosophical difficulties through the use of terminology in the future.
Russ:)
Thanks Russ,
ReplyDelete"I am not trying to split hairs here, but rather wish to attempt to define my terms as properly as possible in order to avoid related theological and philosophical difficulties through the use of terminology in the future."
That's cool. But as those who, in Christ, are "partakers of the divine nature", doesn't Jesus' attribution of "eternal life" to those who belong to Him have a quality that is not simply an "everlasting" existence? In this case, I'm thinking of the illusions of the Scripture that speak of us sharing in the life of Christ through our union with Him.
I'm not suggesting, of course, that we are "becoming" Christ, or that we in any way are becoming divine. But remember, Jesus was/is also fully human; so at some level our restoration to full and authentic humanity in Him must have some association with the concept of "eternal life" that is IN Christ that is more than simply living forever.
If you've answered these in the link, just let me know and I'll find time to read through it. If this is a new idea for you to interact with, then I'll eargerly await a response. I'm just trying to understand Jesus' use of this terminology that makes more sense of our lives now (and in the future) than simply living forever; in which case, the unbeliever also participates in "eternal/everlasting life" (only in the context of "death"), so it must be something more that Jesus grants to us who do believe.
Oh well...I'm always trying to increase my knowledge of Biblical principles and doctrines, so any help here would be appreciated.
GGM
Hi Jason,
ReplyDeleteThat's cool. But as those who, in Christ, are "partakers of the divine nature", doesn't Jesus' attribution of "eternal life" to those who belong to Him have a quality that is not simply an "everlasting" existence? In this case, I'm thinking of the illusions of the Scripture that speak of us sharing in the life of Christ through our union with Him.
Linguists are not necessarily philosophers, and vice-versa. It should be translated everlasting life if one understands the philosophical difference. If no attention is paid to the philosophical difference, even found in Scripture, we could be stated to have eternal life. I understand what is meant when this is used.
We share in God's eternal nature (his presence) and we shall be everlasting beings with everlasting life and existence. We do have union with Christ as perfect human beings in the resurrection, and with God, but we share his communicable attributes, not his incommunicable attributes such as those related to his infinite nature.
Everlasting life or everlasting existence with God as I state at times, Biblically is life with God.
The unregenerate would not Biblically have either as they exist in the lake of fire, although they do exist of course.
Thanks, Jason:)
I remember when I was a kid, I would lay in bed in the dark and start to think about the ideas of infinity and eternity, and I'd get so scared I'd have to hide under my pillow. The thought of living forever, even if it was in a place as amazing as heaven freaked me out. How could we possibly live forever? How could God have no beginning and no end? Of course, as I got older I started to realize that this was nothing to be scared of---it helped to maintain a healthy fear, that's for sure, but no need to be scared.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, just a little story that came to mind. :)
This can be really tricky ground, talking about these concepts in relation to God. Since we cannot grasp the ideas of eternity and infinity, we have trouble even talking about them because we end up giving them spatial aspects. Think of it---we say infinity is "forever," but the word "forever" is quantitative while eternity is not. Philosophical craziness! But it's fun to talk about.
This, I think, can tie into the concepts of transcendence and immanence as they are related to God, and that can also become a very difficult and tricky discussion.
Thanks, Jake.
ReplyDeleteI agree these are tricky subjects.
I deal with them for at least two reasons:
1. Clarification for myself and other believers.
2. Clarification for critics of Christian faith and philosophy. This is always in the back of my mind.
Cheers, my friend.
Russ:)
Some people are simply sick. And some teach that this stuff is good. So sad, Come quickly Lord Jesus. Rick b
ReplyDeleteAgreed, Rick.
ReplyDeleteI remain firm in my conviction the Church needs Christian sites that actually deal with difficult and controversial theological issues, as well as devotional type sites.
Russ:)
That article is NASTY!
ReplyDeleteAnd the comments below the article are ridiculous:
# You beat me to it, David. I would like to re-iterate what David said. These crimes were not perpetrated by real Satanists; the individuals involved were most likely suffering from severe mental illness, or are using Satanism as a scapegoat for their horrendous actions. Real Satanists will never take a person's life, unless their own life is in mortal jeopardy.
Posted By :D. Mays Report This
# Eating goths for Satan, hahaha...what fervent dedication (or morbid curiosity, more likely).
Posted By :Schmied Report This
# Only available in great russia... genocide runs through in their veins.
Many years ago, I loved to listen to albums of Christian comedian Mike Warnke. I saw him perform in person once (oddly, he looked really angry at the world while he was waiting to begin, then, when he began performing/talking, his demeanor changed). I read his book, "The Satan Seller," which I found fascinating. Then, Cornerstone magazine did a few stories on him, where they researched his background, and found that many of his claims did not line up with what they had found. That was a huge and confusing shock to me, and was almost a blow to my faith, because I could not believe that a well-known Christian could lie like that to the public, and make money off things which were apparently lies.
ReplyDeleteIt is nasty as is the story concerning the stabbing, beheading and cannibalism that took place in Manitoba on a bus several weeks ago.
ReplyDeleteI am not going to concentrate a lot on the morbid on my blogs, but sometimes these stories demonstrate how great the problem of evil is at present.
Thanks, Jeff.
I visited a police museum once, and they had articles and evidence of satanist groups committing murder, as well as people who were deeply into playing the role-playing game, Dungeons and Dragons, committing murders. These were not rumors; they were actual cases that the police had investigated and found the suspects guilty, or found evidence.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me Walter Martin on his Satanism tape stated that Warnke was legitimate. I may have heard this on his radio show as well on-line.
ReplyDeleteThis was before Warnke was exposed. Even very good researchers can be fooled at times.
Back to Walter Martin, as noted I have his Satanism tape and I also made a mini-disc copy. One of his claims was that Satanists do not believe in a literal Biblical Satan.
ReplyDeleteI have wondered if there are people in the world that actually worship the Biblical Satan, and likely realize they are going to hell but still follow Satan regardless.
In other words, according to Martin there are Satanists that follow human satanic principles, but do not knowingly follow demonic spirits, but are there persons that actually knowingly follow Satan and his demons?
If not, perhaps this will be left to the Antichrist and the false prophet.
This would be the bottom of the barrel, humanly speaking.
It would be a relief if Walter Martin was right about Warnke. However, in a quick search, I just found this:
ReplyDelete"The first significant book of this genre was The Satan Seller by confessed ex-satanic high priest Mike Warnke. The Satan Seller introduced the idea of widespread, almost invincible and almost undetectable satanic conspiracy. Warnke claimed in this book and in other places that in his short time in 1965 and 1966 as a satanic high priest he recruited 1,000 new members to his satanic empire in the sleepy San Bernardino desert area of Southern California; flew around the country to secret satanic strategy meetings, meeting with some of the most dastardly of the darker side of life, including Anton LaVey and mass murderer Charles Manson; and ran a massive drug dealing ring. The Satan Seller's two chief contributions to the development of Christian sensationalism concerning satanism were, first, widespread conspiracy theories; and, second, the incorporation of the earlier trend to use unsubstantiated personal experience stories as "proof" of one's assertions regarding the occult. Nowhere in The Satan Seller or in other recitations of his story does Warnke document any portion of his story, even the more incredible ones (such as meeting with Manson, even though state records show Manson was in prison during the entire time Warnke allegedly was a satanist). In fact, he does not even provide the reader with accurate names, dates, and locations to enable an ordinary reader to check his story out if he were so inclined. Since its publication in 1972, The Satan Seller has sold hundreds of thousands of copies, and Warnke has maintained a very public, successful ministry addressing thousands at a time in mass rallies."
from Answers In Action
It seems that Walter Martin was right about Satanists not believing in a literal Satan.
ReplyDelete"In Satanism, Satan is an archetype, a representation of certain qualities that the Satanist embodies including rational self-interest, avoidance of oppressive mentalities, the questioning of all, and a perseverance towards success and human potential. The Satanic Bible encapsulates this iconography in The Nine Satanic Statements, which are thus:
1) Satan represents indulgence, instead of abstinence!
2) Satan represents vital existence, instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
3) Satan represents undefiled wisdom, instead of hypocritical self-deceit!
4) Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it, instead of love wasted on ingrates!
5) Satan represents vengeance, instead of turning the other cheek!
6) Satan represents responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic vampires!
7) Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his divine spiritual and intellectual development, has become the most vicious animal of all!
8) Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!
9) Satan has been the best friend the church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all these years!"
From PaganMystics
From the same 'PaganMysics' website:
ReplyDelete"Satanism, the first carnal religion in human history, was codified and established by Anton Szandor LaVey (1930-1997) with the founding of the Church of Satan in 1966 C.E. (Year One). It is a religion and a philosophy based on man as he really is: a carnal being free from the fiction that is spirituality and one who champions total responsibility, pragmatism, and the here-and-now. Currently, the Church of Satan is headed by High Priest Peter H. Gilmore, High Priestess Peggy Nadramia, and Magistra Blanche Barton. Additional information on Church of Satan hierarchical structure, policies, updates, and more can be found at the CoS website.
Satanism has been referred to as an "unreligion" in the sense that it does not subscribe to the notion of an anthropomorphic deity and, by extension, some being who must be worshiped, its most common misconception. Others say that Satanism is challenging popular notions of how 'religion' is defined, not content with the dictates of Judeo-Christian strictures. Both are valid opinions. But for those who feel that deity worship and religion must be and always have been inextricably bound, it should be noted that Satanism's lack of deity belief and deity worship is not singular as Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism (all considered religions the world over) also share this viewpoint. Also, the concept of a literal "Satan" which infiltrates people's lives and influences their decisionmaking is exclusively Christian, and decidedly not Satanic.
Satanism is further described as being a de facto personality type as, in the words of Anton LaVey, "Satanists are born, not made." To try is to lie. It takes a certain set of predispositions to accurately label oneself a Satanist, to naturally feel at home with all that Satanism entails. Satanism, as a philosophy, can be potentially taken and learned from by a large percentage of the population, but this does not make one a Satanist, but, perchance, Satanic. Qualities such as cowardice, insecurity, self-loathing, drug addiction, stupidity, constant life failures, unconditional niceness, and lack of direction (and there are MANY more) are clear indicators that the person in question and the title of Satanist are NOT compatible. For such a person, Satanism isn't a direct reflection of one's core (as it is with Satanists), it can only be a human improvement program at best, which is valid on that level only. This is one distinction that many, be they Satanic "hopeful" or earnest researcher, would be better off to recognize."
Again, from the same website:
ReplyDelete"What is the difference between Satanism and devil worship?
Satanism and devil worship are two distinctly different animals. Devil worship is what it is: the worship of an external deity (in this case, a "devil"), much as it could be labeled inverse Christianity -- that is, confining yourself to the Christian religion and overall model, but merely choosing the "bad guy" in their Bible instead of the purportedly central character. The Satan in Satanism is an archetype, one many know by name and is relative to the culture. Some Satanists choose different aspects of this archetype, depending on geography or just plain aesthetics, but the same characteristics still hold true. It would make little sense for us to claim to embody the archetypal qualities of Satan (rebellion, rational self-interest, carnality, etc.) on one hand, and then attempt to worship an anthropomorphic Satan on the other. In laymen's terms, it's hardly rebellious to worship a figure that represents rebellion. The Satanist finds unproductive and one-sided idol worship to be draining and useless (not to mention hypocritical). Much of this is aptly mentioned in The Satanic Bible and the other books listed in the Satanism section of this website.
Are all of those atrocious and illegal acts people say you commit true?
The Church of Satan harshly frowns upon the commission of any illegal act. If you choose to do so, you do it of your own volition and without the approval and consent of the Church of Satan. That is free will and it has consequences. We have stated since the inception that Satanism has nothing to do with animal or human sacrifice (the top of page 89 of The Satanic Bible states this in black and white, quite clearly). Likewise, we are against child molestation because we hold children in such high regard, seeing them as natural magicians, beings much closer to their nature than most of the consumer-programmed adults out there. If a Church of Satan member is convicted for a serious crime, particularly a violent one and one that violates the tenets of Satanism, that person's membership is often revoked. And, yes, we have kicked people out of the CoS."
The question is flawed. Can an infinite God change? Can a blue Chevy go backward? In our own limited minds, all the more limited in the engineered ignorance of this generation, we tend to put "infinity" in a finite category, like being "out there" to the limit, like infinitely far away would be up against the outer skin of the Universe? Of course God can change, in that He can increase in His experience (that "Christ learned obedience through the things that He suffered...") and He can increase in His saving influence in our lives and those of (please God, many) others. Can He change from being Who He Is? Does His Character, His Nature, His purpose and intention change? Of course not! But to try and cast the Living God as a theoretical cipher is a most ridiculous form of idolatry. If we can get our minds around "God is love" we've done more than most.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Jeff.
ReplyDeleteThere can be temptation within Christian ministry to be overly sensationalistic in order to attract interest and money.
I remember Martin reading the list from the Satanic Bible.
Also, the concept of a literal "Satan" which infiltrates people's lives and influences their decisionmaking is exclusively Christian, and decidedly not Satanic.
Yes.
Satanism and devil worship are two distinctly different animals. Devil worship is what it is: the worship of an external deity (in this case, a "devil"), much as it could be labeled inverse Christianity -- that is, confining yourself to the Christian religion and overall model, but merely choosing the "bad guy" in their Biblinstead of the purportedly central character.
I see they are making a separation between the two.
In laymen's terms, it's hardly rebellious to worship a figure that represents rebellion. The Satanist finds unproductive and one-sided idol worship to be draining and useless (not to mention hypocritical). Much of this is aptly mentioned in The Satanic Bible and the other books listed in the Satanism section of this website.
We have stated since the inception that Satanism has nothing to do with animal or human sacrifice (the top of page 89 of The Satanic Bible states this in black and white, quite clearly).
Yes, the official Church of Satan attempts to remain legal. It is the unofficial Satanists/devil worshippers/occultists that feature some individuals that commit illegal acts in the name of religion.
To answer my own question.
In other words, according to Martin there are Satanists that follow human satanic principles, but do not knowingly follow demonic spirits, but are there persons that actually knowingly follow Satan and his demons?
If not, perhaps this will be left to the Antichrist and the false prophet.
This would be the bottom of the barrel, humanly speaking.
I do reason that there are likely some types of Satanists/devil worshippers/occultists that do worship the Biblical Satan. I accept that this is not official Church of Satan doctrine.
Thanks, Robert.
ReplyDeleteGod the Son, did take on human nature, but this does not change God's spiritual nature. God does interact with humanity and can change plans and direction based on human prayer, but of course from God's omniscient perspective this was part of his sovereign plan.
I reason God does not change in attributes and character. God is immutable.
Yes, and that's one of the dynamics we have to deal with, isn't it? God is immutable: He, as God, does not change from being Who/What He Is. Yet, as God, the Word became flesh, put on a new nature to what He had known/experienced previously. He is still God, still the Word, and now He is also Jesus. He Who knows our every thought and intention acquired firsthand the experience of our infirmities and all the joys and griefs of this world. The divine, immutable nature of God took onto Himself the nature of a Man, even to the point of taking to Himself the Adamic curse of death, Hell, the grave, and made them all subject to His kingdom. Now, that'll preach!
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me this dreadful act, has nothing to do with being satanists, or "mentally ill" or any other thing that we may try to explain or rationalize, their actions by, apart from the depravity of the human heart, and the evil world we inhabit because of that depravity.
ReplyDeleteGood sermon, Robert.
ReplyDeleteRuss:)
Good analysis, Deejay.
ReplyDeleteThanks,
Russ
Hello Russ,
ReplyDeleteThank you for my birthday greeting. I did indeed have a wonderful day with my family and a nice birtday dinner at the Olive Garden.
This is a very deep and profound subject one that i will have to admit that i will never totally grasp in my natural mind because it is indeed finite unlike God's.
Take care and God bless you Russ... Tamela
Cheers, Tamela.
ReplyDeleteRuss:)
This just in:
ReplyDeleteThis email is to inform you that the Rolitex & Roliana company China needs a representative in Canada and the United states Of America.
The role of the representative will be collection/recieving of payment from our customers in canada & USA on behalf of the ROLITEX & ROLIANA COMPANY after which you will be remmitting the funds directly to the company as you will be directed by the regional account manager.
SALARY:The 5% of the total amount paid to you by our customers will stand as your salary & will be paid to you every two weeks according to your returns,If You are interested in this Job offer,Pls do contact our United Kingdom manager below with your contact details.
Mr.Dennis Cranford
email: denniscranford_dept2008@live.co.uk
Tel:+44 703 190 7755
Regards
Lan Wong
ROLITEX & ROLIANA COMPANY
Rolitex and Roliana
ReplyDeleteThanks, Jeff.
ReplyDeleteChucky looked that up last night as well.
Hi Russ,
ReplyDeleteI hesitate to dip into this conversation, but this is a topic I ponder often... as this has been a year for me of much loss through the death of friends and family...what I think about is...if we have everlasting life once our life on earth as believers is finished(heaven)are WE then outside of time? If so, there could be no looking down from heaven on our loved ones below, that connection would be finished...so what will be the relationship we have with our beloved friends and family? thanks for your scholarship. the distinction between eternal and everlasting is helpful.
Jen
Time to Reason
ReplyDeleteThanks, Jennifer.
My article above relates to your comments.
Hi Russ.
ReplyDeleteMate you are generating a lot of comments that's for sure. Keep up the good work.
Eternity, just give me a bit of time to think about it.
On Sunday in one of my talks I tried to explain the height of God's love. That's a long way up there.
Blessings mate.
Russell from down under.
Hi, Russell,
ReplyDeleteAs you may have noticed there are a greater number of comments on the satire and theology article. I really appreciate the participation with both blogs.
Thanks for the support and I would like to hear you preach.
Eternity, just give me a bit of time to think about it.
Good one, mate.
Russ:)
Heads up! Job offer!
ReplyDeleteWe mainly focus on machining jobs with the lot size ranging from 100 to 2000 pieces on monthly basis. Please be advised with the basic information of our shop below:
A. Facility & Machinery
-Employers: 120; Space: 10000 Sq. feet; Certificate: ISO9000;
-CNC lathe: 10; CNC mill: 8; Grinders: 3; Auxiliary machine: 35; Wire cut: 8;
-Tolerance: 0.01 mm and maximum capability: 800mmx600mm.
B. Materials & Finishing
-Aluminum, bronze, brass, stainless steel
-Power coating, anodizing and plating
* Remarks: colors by Pantone
C. Typical Products & Industry Served
- Housing, heat sink, fixture, machine parts,
- Automation, robots, instruments, equipment & machine making, engine & motors,
dentists, product design & engineering, etc.
E.CAD files Accepted
Hand draft, IGS, STEP, AutoCAD 2007, Solidworks, AutoDesk, UGNX and ProE
F. Delivery Cycle
- Emergency: 3 days
- Fast delivery: 10 days
- Normal delivery: 2 weeks or monthly basis
Serious buyers please send us drawings for a quotation and details.
* No casting,stamping,injection,screw machine parts please.
Yada Inc./TaiHao Factory
Contact: Mr. Ling (Hotline: 86 755 88832548)
Email: m2102@tom.com