Re: God the interactor (was God the tinkerer)

From: George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
Date: Fri Sep 02 2005 - 15:21:47 EDT

Dave -

You continue to dodge the crucial question: Did one of the persons of the Trinity, who shares the divine nature, actually become a participant in our space-time universe in the Incarnation? If your answer is "Yes" then we can go on to deal with the questions you pose and at some point may have to throw up our hands and say "I don't know." If your answer is "No" then I think we have a serious theological disagreement.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: D. F. Siemens, Jr.
  To: williamehamiltonjr@yahoo.com
  Cc: gmurphy@raex.com ; asa@lists.calvin.edu ; dfwinterstein@msn.com
  Sent: Friday, September 02, 2005 2:51 PM
  Subject: Re: God the interactor (was God the tinkerer)

  Let's see if I understand you guys. If you're right, then there was a something-not-time (snt) before God planned the universe, then a snt after the original and before the execution when he planned it, then a later snt when he produced the universe, followed by many other snts. The last snt that I recognize is the glorification of the elect. I haven't observed this, yet Romans 8 says it has already happened. So it both is already and isn't yet. God, being omnipotent, makes it be and not be in some snt.

  However, I still need clarification. How are snts related to time in our universe/experience? Are snts just an aspect of time? How many snts occurred during the first period mentioned above? What could have gone on during these precursor snts?

  Why do I get the strong impression that it is not just YECs that talk nonsense on the claimed basis of scripture?
  Dave

  On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 07:12:28 -0700 (PDT) Bill Hamilton <williamehamiltonjr@yahoo.com> writes:
    I agree with George. Dave can perhaps be satisfied that in the world of logic he is correct. But logic that ignores the constraints imposed by knowledge available to us (Scripture) is sterile.
    Furthermore, Dave's insistence that God cannot engage in a sequence of actions limits God. None of us can fully appreciate omnipotence, but I would want to be very careful about statements to the effect that "God cannot do X".

    George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "D. F. Siemens, Jr."
      To:
      Cc: ;
      Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 12:13 AM
      Subject: Re: God the interactor (was God the tinkerer)
      ......................

> Now, if you can come up
> with a consistent description of a being both outside of time as Creator
> and within time as reactor, apart from the incarnation, I'll acknowledge
> a mutable deity.
      ......................

      If the qualification "apart from the incarnation" is to be made a condition
      for the discussion then I have nothing further to say about the matter. The
      Incarnation is the essential reason for talking about God's involvement with
      the time of the world.

      Shalom
      George
      http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

    Bill Hamilton
    William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
    586.986.1474 (work) 248.652.4148 (home) 248.303.8651 (mobile)
    "...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31
    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
    http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Fri Sep 2 15:23:45 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Sep 02 2005 - 15:23:45 EDT