Sentences with phrase «immutable god»

This theology denied any change or contingency in the world on the grounds that their possibility was logically excluded by the assertion that the omniscient and immutable God could not change in any of his aspects, including his knowledge.

These democratic aspirations have contributed to the problem of belief in an impassible, immutable God.

Two lines of defense have become popular among theologians who find themselves, for whatever reasons, unable to speak of God as ontologically limited and yet unable to affirm the predestinarian highhandedness of an impassible, immutable God.

Nonetheless, meaning is anchored beyond the material world in the immutable God; faith in an unseen God is demanded since the material, mutable universe provides no ultimate certitude.

Not exact matches

This would assume an «imaginative,» not a historical, disposition: a divine intent in history, God - gifted immutable laws of morality, to which man has a duty to conform; order as a first requirement of good governance, achieved best by a restraint and respect for custom and tradition; variety as more desirable than systematic uniformity and liberty more desirable than equality; the honor and duty of a good life in a good community as taking precedence over individual desire; an embrace of a skepticism toward reason and abstract principle.

Shall we say that God is impassible as well as immutable?

Letting go of the concept of God as immutable was helpful to me, even as I trust that God is unchanging in love and faithfulness to us.

So conceived, God is not an immutable, unchangeable, divine overlord.

Mr Deighan will have read in these pages «something very close» to the idea that Thomistic epistemology tends to emphasise «immutable essences» and static forms, and that this emphasis has been powerfully challenged by the success of modern science (for example Jaeger's article in our last issue and in our September 2006 issue the editorial and the quotes from Ronald Knox's God and the Atom).

Also, doctrine does not change, only what people choose to follow at one time or another (being God's word and all, its immutable, should you believe the Bible).

i believe you are trying to get to the justice of god and that he would be totally just if not all are saved or if none are saved, and that somehow this is his immutable love.

In the first instance, the Law, affirmed as the fixed and immutable expression of God's eternal will, and spelled out in theological and ethical formulas, was the sole and sufficient guide for man's conduct.

But if everything about God is necessary, then nothing could ever have come to be in or for him; that is, he is strictly immutable.

The first hypothesis will be denied not only by positivists but also by philosophers who take seriously the religious implications of a doctrine of God as infinite, immutable, simple, and necessary.

When you argue that it is god's immutable nature to be good, you are then shifting to the other prong of Euthyphro's dilemma, «god says so because it is good.»

You have yet to directly respond to the specific points I've made at least three times now, i.e.: 1) the immutable good nature argument is simply unsupported definitional fiat (god can be equally described as malevolent or apathetic with equal support); 2) the immutable good nature argument presents a source of morality beyond god's direct control placing the argument in the god says so because it is good prong of the dilemma; and 3) the argument suggests god is not omnipotent because god is constrained to only a limited set of potential behaviors.

The philosophers» God was impassible and immutable whereas the Biblical God was deeply involved with his creation and even with its suffering.

With all due respect, you can provide no empirical evidence for the «immutable good nature of god» because, after all, this is an opinion based upon presuppositionalist religious faith (i.e. the cart is way out in front of the horse).

At Harvard there were the idealist Hocking, whose poetic intuitions seemed to me profound, but whose arguments seemed mostly loose and unsatisfying (nevertheless it was he who convinced me that God was not immutable); Ralph Barton Perry, whose criticism of idealism and monism were challenging and impressive in their apparent rigor; and two brilliant logicians, Sheffer and Lewis.

With respect, you believe you have escaped Euthyphro's dilemma by referencing god's immutable good nature, but this is squarely within that prong of the dilemma which poses god says it because it is good.

But ultimately, you are embracing the latter because you are arguing an objective / absolute morality in god's immutable good nature which is a source of morality beyond god's actual control.

In addition to this being a case of special pleading via definitional fiat, the immutable good nature of god argument places the «objective / absolute» standard beyond the control of the god in that god has no choice but to obey this good nature (which also confounds the notion of omnipotence in that god is restricted to only a limited set of possible behaviors).

In more recent times, neo-classical theism (Whiteheadian process philosophy and theology) has reacted against the remote, transcendent, immutable and uninvolved God of classicism by making God totally immanent as evolving Deity.

Lastly, God is neither immutable nor impassable - those are concerns of early Greek thought and not from the Christian scripture.

The first is unchangeable, either because it is law which flows from the absolutely immutable nature of God and man, or because it is law which promulgates God's revelation as the divine will for the whole Christian era of grace and Church.

For is not to speak of God's eternity as the Fullness of Time tantamount to saying that God is the fullness of contingency and of change, and to denying that God is the Immutable, the Unchanging?

@RightTurnClyde, «God did not change because God is immutable and perfect.

For divine knowledge and love make a real difference in the creature, but can not make any difference to an immutable and necessary God.

God did not change because God is immutable and perfect.

Ogden's own view is to look upon God as Process, as a social reality that interacts with human persons in a relational way, and who is temporal and historical because he grows, matures, evolves and becomes, while at the same time being God because he is likewise infinite, eternal, unchanging and immutable.

In this presentation, Moltmann has moved away from the classical understanding of God as absolute and immutable toward a process concept of divinity in which God and the world stand in an ongoing, ever - changing reciprocal relationship.

(1) Unlike classical theism, black theology has never conceived of divine perfection in such a way as to entail that God is wholly immutable.

Faustus Socinus and his followers were the first to break, not only with trinitarianism and the worship of Jesus as literally divine but above all with the one - sided view of God as immutable and merely infinite, also with the tragic error of omnipotence in a sense contradictory of freedom in human beings.

Arguably religions do the same thing *, but in the same breath they say it is the immutable unchanging will of God.

(1) The classical conception of divine perfection is faulty in that it concludes wrongly that in order for God to be perfect, God must therefore be conceived as unchangeable / immutable in every respect.

According to Theodore, if God had made the human being as immortal and immutable to begin with, we would be differentiated in no way from the irrational creation, since we would have no knowledge of our own good.

In contrast to this traditional supremacy of God's immutable power, Hildegard went on to take a sharp right turn.

They continue to regard the Torah as the divine and immutable word of God.

In The Spirit and the Forms of Love Williams analyzes the meaning of love and indicates what this implies about the nature of God.104 The classical conviction that the immutable is the superior is shown to devalue human love and to conflict with the biblical conception of God's love.

Altizer's position represents his attempt to grasp the inner logic of the Incarnation, though he is fully conscious of the fact that the profanity of contemporary culture plays an essential role in his formulation of a radically immanental interpretation of Christ.31 He presents a telling case against attempts in Christian theology to conceive God as an immutable Absolute wholly unaffected by the contingencies of history.

They are rather disclosed as constitutive factors in the nature of the real.25 Thus, the paradigmatic happening which governs the distinctively Christian vision of God prohibits us from perceiving God as a self - contained, immutable Absolute.

I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.»

Writers also refer to «the immutable laws of God and» reason,» and «the laws of nature and nature's God.»

Needless to say, the notion that God has a receptive side is a denial of traditional, substantialist views that identify perfection with that which is eternal, immutable, unchanging.

In the eyes of the Afrikaners, their 1838 vow at Blood River established an immutable covenant between God and the chosen Boer race.

The tragic mistake was to suppose that the necessary truths were basically negations, that God is wholly, exclusively non-temporal, immutable, independent, etc..

This leap of faith is much smaller than the leap of faith required to believe that some unobserved god laid known immutable moral rules for humans it designed.

The split between the Gay community and your god is permanent, and immutable.

Like Samartha I do not see the creeds as immutable, but as historical documents pointing to the central Christian experience of God's love in Jesus Christ.

The classical view conceives of God as immutable and unchanging.