The flaw in the statement it is not the «
theoretical gods men created 2000 years ago» but I accept history as a valid form of knowledge.
You do not accept the scienctific theories and dismiss them, but readily accept
the theoretical gods men created 2000 years ago... do you not see the flaw in your logic?
Not exact matches
But above all, the idea of alinsan al - kamil in
theoretical mysticism smacks of the internalization of the notions of
God bearing -
man or
God -
man, indeed an idea that transforms the very notion of
God.
How to understand
men as fundamentally related to
God when their relations to nature and society had so changed presented a most difficult practical as well as
theoretical problem.
Not only does it appear free from the
theoretical incoherence of the older theism, but it also removes what we saw to be the major stumbling - block to modern
man's ever really hearing any witness to the reality of
God — namely, the implication that this world of time and change is ultimately unreal and lacking in significance.
The Strategy of the Genes: A Discussion of Some Aspects of
Theoretical Biology (London: Allen and Unwin, 1957); Hardy, Sir Alister, The Biology of
God: A Scientist's Study of
Man the Religious Animal (New York: Taplinger Publishing Company, 1976); by the same author, The Living Stream: A Restatement of Evolution and its Relation to the Spirit of
Man (London: Collins, 1965), and The Divine Flame: An Essay Towards a Natural History of Religion (London: Collins, 1966), Vols.
If a
man must say that he can not find
God in the reality of his own present life, and if he would compensate for this by the thought that
God is nevertheless the final cause of all that happens, then his belief in
God will be a
theoretical speculation or a dogma; and however great the force with which he clings to this belief, it will not be true faith, for faith can be only the recognition of the activity of
God in his own life.
Niebuhr insists that both poles are thorough - goingly
theoretical: «Whether its function as the exercise of the intellectual love of
God and
man or as the illumination of other church activities is stressed, in either case the work of the school is
theoretical».
Directly opposed to this view is the pragmatic theory which regards
theoretical activity as an affair of rationalizations, essentially irrelevant to practice; practice is valued both for its own sake and as more directly contributory than thought can be to the welfare of
men and the glory of
God.
The
theoretical foundation for this view lies in the centrality of the Incarnation, for it is precisely Jesus Christ who has made
man aware of
God's role in history and the demand to incorporate it into an understanding of human history.