tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post114281198246240981..comments2023-10-25T09:18:44.010-04:00Comments on THINK: Helljonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10724017540080062026noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1143471709850071372006-03-27T10:01:00.000-05:002006-03-27T10:01:00.000-05:00Just to be clear, I"m *not* saying that I believe ...Just to be clear, I"m *not* saying that I believe the story that I told to be the truth of the matter. I do think that it is a possibility. I do *not* think that the text meant something different in the past then what it means now. What I am wondering is whether the human authors of the text *had to* fully understand what they were writing (distinguish what the text meant from what it was jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10724017540080062026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1143350362895863942006-03-26T00:19:00.000-05:002006-03-26T00:19:00.000-05:00Danny boy, I think that you raise some good issues...Danny boy, I think that you raise some good issues. Perhaps these topics deserve a post of their own.<BR/><BR/>I'm really not sure how much weight to give considerations as 'what did the (human) author intend here?' and 'what would the audience have understood?'. These questions are crucial for the understanding of mosts texts, but I wonder how the Bible being inspired by God makes things jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10724017540080062026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1143316701371650052006-03-25T14:58:00.000-05:002006-03-25T14:58:00.000-05:00Kenzo,Thanks for the comments and clarifications.I...Kenzo,<BR/>Thanks for the comments and clarifications.<BR/>I still think there is a problem in what you have labeled (1). If philosophy truly is useful in our understanding of theologial matters (which we seem to be in agreement on), then I don't see how the threat of other traditional doctrines being rejected should have any role in determining whether a given traditional doctrine is jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10724017540080062026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1143313751197584232006-03-25T14:09:00.000-05:002006-03-25T14:09:00.000-05:00Jon,Thank you for your kindness with me. I have no...Jon,<BR/>Thank you for your kindness with me. I have no desire to drag this unnecessarily longer, but I thought I should clarify certain points.<BR/>1) I certainly didn't mean to say that one should not use logic in theology. The contrary is the case. My reference to theology as a second order discourse is precisely intended to make room for this interpretation at the second level whereby we seekAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1143173377955702892006-03-23T23:09:00.000-05:002006-03-23T23:09:00.000-05:00Re the comments I made re God not choosing the att...Re the comments I made re God not choosing the attributes he has: Of course God's attributes were never chosen; neither by himself or others. If he had chosen his attributes there would be development and change in God, but he changes not. If indeed he existed from all eternity, he simply is who he is (we can't get our mind around this but from eternity past he is God). <BR/>That said, it seems Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1143073240664123882006-03-22T19:20:00.000-05:002006-03-22T19:20:00.000-05:00Chaz, I agree. If God was eternal that problem wou...Chaz, I agree. If God was eternal that problem wouldn't exist. The question of whether God is eternal (outside time) or everlasting (inside time) boggles my mind. I've heard quite convincing arguments in both directions. William Lane Craig also has a unique theory that God was outside of time until creation and he is now inside time. This might be the best bet.<BR/><BR/>I'm not thrilled aboutjonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10724017540080062026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1143055835803472222006-03-22T14:30:00.000-05:002006-03-22T14:30:00.000-05:00Jon, as you know, I think not having to embrace co...Jon, as you know, I think not having to embrace compatibilism is indeed a bonus! Kudos to O'Connor's position, I guess.<BR/><BR/>To clarify earlier points, I wouldn't say that divine simplicity dictates that God's nature <I>depends</I> on His actions; the point seems to be that there is just no difference between the two. It is an intriguing question whether this entails divine "character Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1143039287496372082006-03-22T09:54:00.000-05:002006-03-22T09:54:00.000-05:00Chaz, good questions. This is the kind of thing t...Chaz, good questions. This is the kind of thing that I want to research next. I think it makes good sense to say that God has his nature independent of his actions. We don't want to distinguish actions from nature and say that God's nature depends on his actions (I'm not sure if this is what you were saying) since then God would undergo something like character-development which seems wrong. jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10724017540080062026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1143038511356028002006-03-22T09:41:00.000-05:002006-03-22T09:41:00.000-05:00Kenzo, you are not intruding and thanks for your c...Kenzo, you are not intruding and thanks for your comments. I will check out those sources. While we're giving out sources, Jon Kvanvig (Mizzou) has a couple nice summary articles available off his website:<BR/>http://www.missouri.edu/%7Ekvanvigj/<BR/>The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy also has nice article written by Kvanvig:<BR/>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/heaven-hell/<BR/>I have jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10724017540080062026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1143009755952675152006-03-22T01:42:00.000-05:002006-03-22T01:42:00.000-05:00Jon,In your most recent post, you note that "I thi...Jon,<BR/><BR/>In your most recent post, you note that "I think that changing one's nature is a suitable candidate for something which logically cannot be done." One looming and relevant question seems to me to be that of divine simplicity: to what extent (if any) is God's "nature" distinct from His acts/will? The problem with Mr. Anonymous' statement, to which I alluded in my earlier post, onlyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1142991785222453122006-03-21T20:43:00.000-05:002006-03-21T20:43:00.000-05:00Jon,I have to apologize to intrude into your space...Jon,<BR/>I have to apologize to intrude into your space. However, I was intrigued by your blog on hell.<BR/>You're raising a serious question that commands our attention. I salute you when you say, "I have recently been forced to carefully evaluate my position on hell." I wish everyone would do the same on every theological question. Such was the attitude of the Berean Church in the NT.<BR/>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1142983815430864262006-03-21T18:30:00.000-05:002006-03-21T18:30:00.000-05:00Chaz, a couple comments. First, I don't think aba...Chaz, a couple comments. First, I don't think abandoning the ontological arguments is much of a price to pay either. My point was simply that on Mr. Anonymous' view we have moved a good deal away from that concept of what God is.<BR/><BR/>Second, I'm not sure it is as much of a problem as you think if God did not or cannot choose his nature. Omnipotence has to be defined as the power to do jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10724017540080062026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1142975156663754292006-03-21T16:05:00.000-05:002006-03-21T16:05:00.000-05:00Like Jon, I'm not so sure that Mt. 25:46 is as cle...Like Jon, I'm not so sure that Mt. 25:46 is as clear as we'd like it to be. Note that in the same chapter, Jesus talks about the Son of Man separating the sheep from the goats (v. 33). Are we to infer from this that actual sheep and goats will be separated from one another at the Second Coming? Of course not; Christians (the ones I know about, anyway) take this verse to be metaphorical. Why Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1142959884093290112006-03-21T11:51:00.000-05:002006-03-21T11:51:00.000-05:00Mr. Anonymous, thanks for the comments. I was hop...Mr. Anonymous, thanks for the comments. I was hoping to get some discussion and hopefully a better understanding as a result.<BR/><BR/>I don't think that Mt. 25:46 speaks clearly to the issue one way or another. It is not clear what the nature of 'eternal punishment' is. To my eye, eventual destruction is an eternal punishment - it is an eternal depravation of life.<BR/>I agree that the texts jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10724017540080062026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1142918526638784262006-03-21T00:22:00.000-05:002006-03-21T00:22:00.000-05:00JonRe the doctrine of hellScholars have looked at ...Jon<BR/>Re the doctrine of hell<BR/>Scholars have looked at this for years and have wanted the Bible to teach annihilationism, but if you take all the evidence, you have to conclude that the bible teaches eternal, conscious punishment. <BR/>The reference to destroying the soul does not mean that it ceases to exist, etc. <BR/>We can't chalk it up to the impact of Greek Philosophy: fact is the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1142892213870521902006-03-20T17:03:00.000-05:002006-03-20T17:03:00.000-05:00Chaz, thanks for the source. I'll have to check i...Chaz, thanks for the source. I'll have to check it out. <BR/>To give credit where it is due, I learned of this point from Clark Pinnock 'Four Views on Hell' and Bruce Reichenbach 'Is Man the Phoenix? A Study of Immortality'.jonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10724017540080062026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22874063.post-1142834726809448832006-03-20T01:05:00.000-05:002006-03-20T01:05:00.000-05:00Jon, I think we have good reason to believe your p...Jon, I think we have good reason to believe your point about the synthesis of Greek philosophy with the Bible is spot-on. I too find little Biblical support for the doctrine of eternal punishment nor for that of the eternity of all souls. Hebrew conceptions of Sheol are little if anything like Hellenic views on the afterlife.<BR/><BR/>An interesting project for Christians is to attempt to traceAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com