Ask Mr. Religion

Okay... Invoking Trinitarian controversy over Egalitarian versus Complementarian debate is inane. It's an odd attempt at anthropomorphizing God and subordinating the eternal relation of the Father and the Son to man. Creator being made in the image of creation. The relation of Father and Son are not equivocal to man and woman. It's beyond absurd. AND it's innovating at the most sacred level of doctrine for the sake of socio-politcal pontification. Subjugating Theology Proper to modern cultural issues is enough for me to consider someone anathema. All approach to Theology Proper should be divine ontology, NOT human economy. And political posturing is nothing but human economy at the lowest level in this regard.

On the argument regarding Subordination of the Son to the Father, I think you might be surprised that I come down staunchly against the ESS view, at least as far as I currently understand the framework of the debate. There can never be a hint of Semi-Arianism for the Trinity. And this is, again, why I insist upon a Multi-Phenomenal Trinity versus the Multi-Hypostatic Trinity that cannot be dealt with honestly by moderns who are intending to innovate for reasons beyond Theology Proper itself and knowing God for who He is as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Theirs are merely forays into Uni-Phenomenal fallacy, much like the original arguments all throughout history. (Though I know I've not yet been able to convey in this venue exactly what all of that means.)

I think you will find the current TOL "debate" (debacle? LOL) on the Spammer's Wasteland thread to be as ridiculous as I. Tambora, with likes from many of the wack Dispies, is contending that Monergism and Synergism are relative to Theology Proper rather than Soteriology; thus demonstrating and validating my concerns regarding modern representations of the Trinity as wholly Tritheistic. I could sooner abide Synergism for Election than the obvious damage of impossibly applying Contingency internally to God. My Lutheran Pastor now sees my concerns of rampant Tritheism by conceptualization. It's in the air we breathe.

Okay, I'll look at both of the sites. And I just downloaded the google drive doc, so you can delete it from the message. Thanks.

I'll pilfer through the Cloud and see what I think best to send you. I haven't watched but a couple of them myself. I didn't even know they were being stored in the Cloud until a few months ago. Most are audio, but many are also video. I can also transcribe, I suppose. They're all long (about 2 hours, some a bit longer), and I think some are in multiple parts because of that (though seamless).

Yes, I'm always a bit blurry on where and when to stop feeding the trolls. Yes to the pearls question, of course.

I think it's all winding down, friend of mine. I noticed Knight hasn't been here in the last 48 and the members present in that period is 150. . . TOL should have that many from the Denver area. A sign of the times, perhaps. I run into bybee and a few others on FB more than I do here of late. :idunno: :cheers:

I'll be surprised if he doesn't let it run its course within this year absent a sea change.

:ha:

If I had a dollar for every distorted thought Sod or SD posted about me I'd have to move to a gated community.

Yes, I determined that utilizing the uniformity of Greek etymologies is more beneficial than avoiding comparisons with Aquinas et al by clinging to Latin etymologies. And since they're the same thing, it makes more sense. Few are familiar with either term.

I'll order Charnock's works. I have heretofore mostly relied on lexicography and the Patristics. I've generally avoided later writings.

Morning Patrick. Still bringing you before the Throne of Grace.

I think if you would read on for my further response to LA, you might rescind your sigh.

Do you think the death of the Lifetime memberships is Knight's way of not encumbering a potential new owner or a nod to the seeming slow death spiral of this type of forum and an unwillingness to see people put in that sort of money for an enterprise on the clock?

So a twist in the chatbox found me adding to my TOL Lexicon thread. The newest addition?

Otherdoxy: your guess is as good as theirs.

Because of my mild disdain for Augustine, I had avoided reading much of Luther over the years. I've recently found that to be a profound mistake, including appreciating his Rennaisance-era candor and blunt sarcasm, etc. I still hold to my contentions of Multi-Hypostaticism erroneously replacing what should have been depicted and defined as Multi-Phenomenality, but it is with an "open hand and heart" rather than clutching it tightly to my own detriment. I'll likely finish my MDiv locally before moving to Saint Louis for doctoral work, but I'm waiting for the unction of the Spirit for the time-based answers. And I've become convinced that there is also a vitally needed reconciliation between Sacramentarianism and Symbolism. Between Roman Transsubstantiationism and Reformed Ordinances, there is a mitigating factor that resolves the disparities that is closer to Lutheran "Con"substantiationism (though they don't use that term).

Many thanks for the encouraging words of edification. I've spent the past few months going through Lutheran Catechism with a local Pastor I trust, having been alternately attending a Reformed SBC fellowship and the Lutheran MS fellowship. It has been encouraging and healing, as this Lutheran Pastor is a linguist and exegete extraordinaire. He insists I'm more reformed and orthodox than possibly anyone he has known, and has seen my concerns of functional Tritheism manifest nearly weekly in the mid-week Adult Bible Study class. He contends I'm thoroughly Trinitarian and has been instrumental in relaying my position to seminarians who share my concerns, though from a slightly different perspective that needs enlightened a bit. We've had hours and hours of discussion, and he's truly a shepherd. He had some initial concerns, but now insists I'm more Lutheran than most Lutherans.

And after considering Southern Seminary in Louisville (SBC), and Covenant Seminary in Saint Louis (PCA), I will likely go to Concordia in Saint Louis (LCMS) for my doctoral work. In initial correspondence through a local Pastor, there are those within the Luthern MS leadership worldwide who are pursuing measures to clarifying the Simplicity of God in the Trinity formulaic without corrupting the doctrine. They share the same major concerns I've expressed, and I'll know more after a personal interview meeting this summer. I still have many rough edges from all my years of contending against the heresies that I was indoctrinated into and lost for nearly three decades. But those old (and similar newer) wounds can't be what drive me. I must be drawn, and only to prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God. I wanted you to know that your long-suffering with my coarseness and roughness was not in vain.

I think you read these, even if you don't respond. I want to let you know that some time ago, God instructed me by the Spirit to learn to listen to you; for you care for my spiritual welfare and others'. Along with several others God has placed in my path, you've helped me focus my challenges and criticisms to be rigorously and meticulously within the boundaries of orthodoxy and orthopraxy according to the Reformed tradition. Mine are minority variants that can only have validity on any larger scale if I contribute them in whatever manner for review within leadership at some level. If appropriately addressed from a position of credibility and overall doctrinal integrity, then an audience could give credence to my concerns and suggestions at some point for inclusion or exclusion within the established perimeter of the Faith. There has been too much angst in me. Too much wounded rogue maverick, though that is not my heart.

It's heartening to know that you read and endorse my posts in Nang's thread. Humble thanks for your submission of my post.

He's a "she" in this case