DOCSLIB.ORG

Lesson Six M O D E L S O F G O D Key Concepts and Considerations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lesson Six M O D E L S O F G O D Key Concepts and Considerations LESSON SIX M O D E L S O F G O D If there is a God, HOW does this God exist? KEY CONCEPTS AND CONSIDERATIONS 2 * Key Terms Transcendence; Immanence; Creation ex deus; Creation ex nihilo * Models of God Pantheism Panentheism Theism Deism OVERVIEW 3 This lesson is best understood as an extension of the previous lesson. In this lesson the attention shifts from debates about the fact of God's existence to debates regarding the manner of God's existence. The question pursued here initially is: How does God exist? The focus is upon the possible relationships that God may have in relationship to creation, both at its point of origin, and with regard to its continuance. Four precise models are presented. These are: Pantheism; Panentheism ; Theism; and Deism. These models will be treated in a systematic fashion. Our discussion will focus upon: (1) an explanation of the name for the model; (2) an identification of key thinkers associated with the model; (3) a listing of some of the tenets of the model; and (4) an assessment of the model which will identify both strengths and weaknesses. Before beginning our systematic survey of each model it will be necessary to define and discuss four key terms. These terms are: Transcendence; Immanence ; Creation ex deus; and Creation ex nihilo. DEFINITION & DISCUSSION OF KEY TERMS The four terms needing definition and discussion may be grouped into two pairs. Transcendence and immanence belong together, as do creation ex deus and creation ex nihilo. The first term in need of definition is transcendence. In the context of this lesson transcendence refers to: that aspect of the Deity which is other than or remote from creation. This term is more clearly understood in its contrast with our next term, immanence. Immanence refers to: that aspect of the Deity which is identified with or is consider close (near) to creation. Immediately, the reader should sense a tension. If the Deity is conceived of in terms of transcendence, what about immanence? If the Deity is conceived of in terms of immanence, what about transcendence? The ways in which these two competing aspects of the Deity are conceived constitute a part of the challenge of this lesson. It is now time to comment on our second pair of terms. Creation ex deus refers to creation out of, or from, God. Ex deus is Latin, meaning "out of God." This phrase conceives of creation as an extension, or manifestation, of the very stuff of God. In this view the "things" in creation are related somehow to the very stuff, or essence, of God's being. For example, in some systems the Deity is conceived as emanating the divine being out into the universe, different parts, or "things," or creatures of the universe are understood to contain, or reflect, varying degrees of the essence of this Deity. This view clearly emphasizes the immanence of the Deity in its relation to creation. The views of Pantheism and Panentheism are more closely related to these emphases. Creation ex nihilo refers to creation out of nothing. Ex nihilo is Latin, meaning "out of nothing." This phrase conceives of creation as occurring at a point in time before which nothing existed, except the Deity. This is, classically, the Judeo-Christian view of God's relationship with the creation. In this view God is understood as "other" than creation. Sometimes the phrase "wholly other" is used. Clearly, then, this view is to be more associated with the idea of the Deity as transcendent. 4 In the four models of God to be explained below we will see the Deity conceived of in different ways along a continuum which portrays the emphases and tensions of the terms just defined. In two of these models (pantheism and panentheism) God will be presented along the lines of a creation ex deus model. In the other two models (theism and deism) God will be viewed along the lines of a creation ex nihilo model. The models will range from a Deity (pantheism) which is presented as almost exclusively immanent, to a Deity (panentheism) that is immanent but does have a degree of transcendence, to a Deity (theism) that is transcendent, having a degree of immanence, to a Deity (deism) that is almost exclusively transcendent. FOUR MODELS OF GOD Pantheism The term "pantheism" is comprised of two Greek words, "pan," meaning all, and "theism," referring to God. Hence, the term connotes the idea that all is God, or conversely, God is all. Several key thinkers have been associated with this model. Among them are: Spinoza; Parmenides; Plotinus; and Radharkrishna. Among the several tenets common to systems of pantheism are the following: (1) God is conceived of in terms more impersonal than personal. Hence, rather than referring to God as he, or she, the impersonal "it" is preferred. Actually, those espousing pantheism are not so tacky. God is most often described as the "Ocean of Being," or as the "Ground of Existence." (2) What follows from tenet one is the idea that everything in creation participates in this Ocean of Being called God, or is considered a manifestation of God, emanating, as it were, from the Ground of Being; (3) It is logical, then, for a pantheistic system, that creation be viewed along the lines of ex deus rather than ex nihilo; (4) An important correlative consideration in any systematic understanding of the relationship of God to creation is that of the knowledge of God. Namely, how does one come to know or become aware of God? In pantheistic systems the emphasis generally falls upon some kind of mystical experience or elevation of consciousness. Since God's Being permeates all things it is logical that one might be enabled to perceive God, given the proper state of consciousness; (5) The problem of evil is an important consideration in any model of God. Pantheists generally view the Deity as beyond good and evil. Evil is often simply reduced to the status of illusion or understood as reflecting inferior states of consciousness in human subjects. 5 The above tenets have provided enough of a sketch of this model in order for an assessment to be given. On the positive side pantheism represents a comprehensive system. All of reality is included in the Ocean of Being called God. The unity of all things is clearly emphasized, God, perhaps, understood as the concentrated center of the Universe. In pantheism the immanence of God is stressed. God-consciousness is available to those willing to cultivate the states of consciousness needed for one to be aware of God. Pantheists are generally inclusive in their religious outlook. The diversity of religion is usually recognized as a healthy variety. Hence, there are several legitimate approaches to God. Yet, pantheism does have some drawbacks. Oddly enough, pantheism is unaffirmable by those of us who understand ourselves as independent self-conscious beings. In a pantheistic universe one finds oneself in the dilemma of affirming that God exists (since God is all and all is God) but denying (by implication) one's own independent existence. This of course is self- defeating. For to deny one's existence, or self-consciousness, one must first exist and be self-conscious. Other criticisms may be added. An impersonal being appears inferior to a personal one, especially by persons who value their personhood above all things. The treatment of evil appears far too casual, especially for the masses who often exist in a continual struggle with evil. If elevated states of consciousness are necessary in order to apprehend the good (God) in (or beyond) evil, then pantheism appears to cater to an elite group, namely, those trained in esoteric consciousness raising techniques. Finally, pantheism may appear all too close to atheism. If the cosmos and its forces are all, and all consists of the cosmos and its forces (as is true with some forms of atheism), then one is left wondering what difference there is between an atheistic system which suggests that impersonal Nature is all, and the pantheist who simply uses the term God. Other strengths and weaknesses might be mentioned, but these should suffice in stimulating the reader's thoughts about the worldview called pantheism. Panentheism This model closely resembles the previous model but is nuanced significantly by the insertion of the Greek preposition "en" (meaning: in) between "pan" (all) and "theism" (God). Hence, panentheism means, "all in God," or conversely, "God [is] in all." The distinctive nuances created by the insertion of "en" will be made clear from a discussion of the tenets of panentheism. Unlike the other models, the key thinkers associated with panentheism listed here are all from the 20th century. The following are noteworthy: Charles Hartshorne; Alfred North Whitehead; Schubert Ogden; Harold Kushner; and Sally McFague. The following tenets are typical of the many ideas associated with panentheism: (1) God is considered more immanent than transcendent. Panentheism is often referred to as bipolar theism. The idea here is that God has two poles to his Being, the one immanent, the other transcendent. As in pantheism, God is all and all is God, but, there is an aspect to God, in panentheism, which is other than all. This "other aspect" represents the transcendent pole of God's Being. Yet, panentheism puts its stress upon God's 6 immanence, as will be apparent from the remaining tenets; (2) God is considered related to the world as the human soul is to the human body. This conceptual relationship could have positive value for a world in need of a more sensitive environmental consciousness.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Anselmian Approach to Divine Simplicity
    Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers Volume 37 Issue 3 Article 3 7-1-2020 An Anselmian Approach to Divine Simplicity Katherin A. Rogers Follow this and additional works at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy Recommended Citation Rogers, Katherin A. (2020) "An Anselmian Approach to Divine Simplicity," Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers: Vol. 37 : Iss. 3 , Article 3. DOI: 10.37977/faithphil.2020.37.3.3 Available at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy/vol37/iss3/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers by an authorized editor of ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. applyparastyle "fig//caption/p[1]" parastyle "FigCapt" applyparastyle "fig" parastyle "Figure" AQ1–AQ5 AN ANSELMIAN APPROACH TO DIVINE SIMPLICITY Katherin A. Rogers The doctrine of divine simplicity (DDS) is an important aspect of the clas- sical theism of philosophers like Augustine, Anselm, and Thomas Aquinas. Recently the doctrine has been defended in a Thomist mode using the intrin- sic/extrinsic distinction. I argue that this approach entails problems which can be avoided by taking Anselm’s more Neoplatonic line. This does involve AQ6 accepting some controversial claims: for example, that time is isotemporal and that God inevitably does the best. The most difficult problem involves trying to reconcile created libertarian free will with the Anselmian DDS. But for those attracted to DDS the Anselmian approach is worth considering.
    [Show full text]
  • Pandeism - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    Pandeism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandeism Pandeism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Pandeism or Pan-Deism (from Greek: πάν pan "all" and Part of a series on Latin: deus meaning "God" in the sense of deism), is a term describing religious beliefs incorporating or mixing logically God reconcilable elements of pantheism (that "God", or its metaphysical equivalent, is identical to the Universe) and General conceptions deism (that the creator-god who designed the Universe no Agnosticism · Apatheism · Atheism · Deism longer exists in a status where it can be reached, and can Henotheism · Monolatrism · Monotheism instead be confirmed only by reason). It is therefore most Panentheism · Pantheism · Transtheism particularly the belief that the Creator of the Universe actually became the Universe, and so ceased to exist as a [1][2] Specific conceptions separate and conscious entity. Creator · Architect · Demiurge · Devil Sustainer · Lord · Father · Monad It is through this incorporation pandeism claims to answer Oneness · Mother · Supreme Being · The All primary objections to deism (why would God create and Personal · Unitarianism · Ditheism · Trinity then not interact with the Universe?) and to pantheism (how in Abrahamic religions did the Universe originate and what is its purpose?). (Bahá'í Faith, Christianity, Islam, Judaism) in Ayyavazhi · in Buddhism · in Hinduism in Jainism · in Sikhism · in Zoroastrianism Contents Attributes Eternalness · Existence · Gender 1 A pantheistic form of deism Names (God)
    [Show full text]
  • The Sense of Deity and Begging the Question with Ontological and Cosmological Arguments
    Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers Volume 26 Issue 1 Article 6 1-1-2009 The Sense of Deity and Begging the Question With Ontological and Cosmological Arguments Daniel M. Johnson Follow this and additional works at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy Recommended Citation Johnson, Daniel M. (2009) "The Sense of Deity and Begging the Question With Ontological and Cosmological Arguments," Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers: Vol. 26 : Iss. 1 , Article 6. DOI: 10.5840/faithphil20092616 Available at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy/vol26/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers by an authorized editor of ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. THE SENSE OF DEITY AND BEGGING THE QUESTION WITH ONTOLOGICAL AND COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS Daniel M. Johnson Calvin famously interprets Romans 1 as ascribing human knowledge of God in nature not to inferences from created things (natural theology) but to a "sense of deity" that all people share and sinfully suppress. I want to suggest that the sense of deity interpretation actually provides the resources for explaining the persuasive power and usefulness of natural theology. Specifically, I will argue that understanding certain ontological and cosmological arguments as depen­ dent on the sense of deity preserves their ability to persuade while helping solve serious problems with the justification of their premises. In the case of the ontological argument, this will provide a new response to the most serious objection that the argument faces, the charge that it begs the question.
    [Show full text]
  • Original Monotheism: a Signal of Transcendence Challenging
    Liberty University Original Monotheism: A Signal of Transcendence Challenging Naturalism and New Ageism A Thesis Project Report Submitted to the Faculty of the School of Divinity in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Ministry Department of Christian Leadership and Church Ministries by Daniel R. Cote Lynchburg, Virginia April 5, 2020 Copyright © 2020 by Daniel R. Cote All Rights Reserved ii Liberty University School of Divinity Thesis Project Approval Sheet Dr. T. Michael Christ Adjunct Faculty School of Divinity Dr. Phil Gifford Adjunct Faculty School of Divinity iii THE DOCTOR OF MINISTRY THESIS PROJECT ABSTRACT Daniel R. Cote Liberty University School of Divinity, 2020 Mentor: Dr. T. Michael Christ Where once in America, belief in Christian theism was shared by a large majority of the population, over the last 70 years belief in Christian theism has significantly eroded. From 1948 to 2018, the percent of Americans identifying as Catholic or Christians dropped from 91 percent to 67 percent, with virtually all the drop coming from protestant denominations.1 Naturalism and new ageism increasingly provide alternative means for understanding existential reality without the moral imperatives and the belief in the divine associated with Christian theism. The ironic aspect of the shifting of worldviews underway in western culture is that it continues with little regard for strong evidence for the truth of Christian theism emerging from historical, cultural, and scientific research. One reality long overlooked in this regard is the research of Wilhelm Schmidt and others, which indicates that the earliest religion of humanity is monotheism. Original monotheism is a strong indicator of the existence of a transcendent God who revealed Himself as portrayed in Genesis 1-11, thus affirming the truth of essential elements of Christian theism and the falsity of naturalism and new ageism.
    [Show full text]
  • Does Classical Theism Deny God's Immanence?
    Scholars Crossing LBTS Faculty Publications and Presentations 2003 Does Classical Theism Deny God's Immanence? C. Fred Smith Liberty University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lts_fac_pubs Recommended Citation Smith, C. Fred, "Does Classical Theism Deny God's Immanence?" (2003). LBTS Faculty Publications and Presentations. 147. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lts_fac_pubs/147 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Crossing. It has been accepted for inclusion in LBTS Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of Scholars Crossing. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BiBLiOTHECA SACRA 160 (January-March 2003): 23-33 DOES CLASSICAL THEISM DENY GOD'S IMMANENCE? C. Fred Smith HE CONCEPT OF THE OPENNESS OF GOD has recently gained a foothold among some evangelical thinkers. Others who have T sought to refute this view have done so by emphasizing God's transcendent qualities. This article examines the criticism of clas­ sical theism by advocates of open theism and seeks to demonstrate that they portray classical theism inaccurately and that they have accepted a false understanding of God. OVERVIEW OF OPEN THEISM The movement's foundational text is The Openness of God, pub­ lished in 1994.l Most of what open theists have said since then amounts to a reiteration of arguments made in that book. Basic to open theism is the idea that God's being is analogous to that of humans, and so God experiences reality in ways similar to the ex­ periences of human beings. As evidence of this point Rice cites the fact that humankind is created in the image of God.2 In addition C.
    [Show full text]
  • Vertical and Horizontal Transcendence Ursula Goodenough Washington University in St Louis, [email protected]
    Washington University in St. Louis Washington University Open Scholarship Biology Faculty Publications & Presentations Biology 3-2001 Vertical and Horizontal Transcendence Ursula Goodenough Washington University in St Louis, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/bio_facpubs Part of the Biology Commons, and the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Goodenough, Ursula, "Vertical and Horizontal Transcendence" (2001). Biology Faculty Publications & Presentations. 93. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/bio_facpubs/93 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Biology at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biology Faculty Publications & Presentations by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL TRANSCENDENCE Ursula Goodenough Draft of article published in Zygon 36: 21-31 (2001) ABSTRACT Transcendence is explored from two perspectives: the traditional concept wherein the origination of the sacred is “out there,” and the alternate concept wherein the sacred originates “here.” Each is evaluated from the perspectives of aesthetics and hierarchy. Both forms of transcendence are viewed as essential to the full religious life. KEY WORDS: transcendence, green spirituality, sacredness, aesthetics, hierarchy VERTICAL TRANSCENDENCE One of the core themes of the monotheistic traditions, and many Asian traditions as well, is the concept of transcendence. A description of this orientation from comparative religionist Michael Kalton (2000) can serve to anchor our discussion. "Transcendence" both describes a metaphysical structure grounding the contingent in the Absolute, and a practical spiritual quest of rising above changing worldly affairs to ultimate union with the Eternal.
    [Show full text]
  • Ontology of Monotheism Road Map to Reach the Ontom
    Ontology of Monotheism Road map to reach the OntoM Bobiquins Estêvão de Mello1, Francisco A. Pereira Fialho2, José Leomar Todesco2 1Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia e Gestão do Conhecimento (PPGEGC) 2Departamento de Engenharia do Conhecimento (dEGC) Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) – 88040-900, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil {estevaomello,fapfialho}@gmail.com, [email protected] Abstract. This paper reports my qualifying working stage PhD research project. Our target is to develop the Ontology of Monotheism, an ontology to join the fundamental texts of the major monotheistic religions. We will base our research on Philosophy and Linguistics theories to accomplish our aim with Knowledge Engineering tools. We expect to generate an ontology to enhance comprehension among people from these religious denominations. 1. Introduction In 1868, Allan Kardec (1804-1869), founder of Spiritism, published La Genèse, les miracles et les prédictions selon le spiritisme and pointed the Christian-Spiritist doctrine as the third grand revelation; Moses promulgated the first one, the law of Sinai registered on Torah, and the Gospel originated from the Christ as the second revelation [Kardec 2013a, chapter 1]. If this premise is true, there is a didactic-pedagogic connection between the Torah, the Holy Bible and the Spiritist Pentateuch, linking Judaism and Christianity, two of the most influent monotheistic religions nowadays. Following this further, I have deduced that if God is only One, Islam, the other influent monotheistic religion, can be connected in the same way: another revelation registered on the Quran. How can these foundational texts be studied and analyzed without religious biases? By means of Artificial Intelligence tools such as ontologies — this is our bet.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sense of Deity and Begging the Question with Ontological and Cosmological Arguments
    Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers Volume 26 Issue 1 Article 6 1-1-2009 The Sense of Deity and Begging the Question With Ontological and Cosmological Arguments Daniel M. Johnson Follow this and additional works at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy Recommended Citation Johnson, Daniel M. (2009) "The Sense of Deity and Begging the Question With Ontological and Cosmological Arguments," Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers: Vol. 26 : Iss. 1 , Article 6. Available at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy/vol26/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers by an authorized editor of ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. THE SENSE OF DEITY AND BEGGING THE QUESTION WITH ONTOLOGICAL AND COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS Daniel M. Johnson Calvin famously interprets Romans 1 as ascribing human knowledge of God in nature not to inferences from created things (natural theology) but to a "sense of deity" that all people share and sinfully suppress. I want to suggest that the sense of deity interpretation actually provides the resources for explaining the persuasive power and usefulness of natural theology. Specifically, I will argue that understanding certain ontological and cosmological arguments as depen­ dent on the sense of deity preserves their ability to persuade while helping solve serious problems with the justification of their premises. In the case of the ontological argument, this will provide a new response to the most serious objection that the argument faces, the charge that it begs the question.
    [Show full text]
  • PAGANISM a Brief Overview of the History of Paganism the Term Pagan Comes from the Latin Paganus Which Refers to Those Who Lived in the Country
    PAGANISM A brief overview of the history of Paganism The term Pagan comes from the Latin paganus which refers to those who lived in the country. When Christianity began to grow in the Roman Empire, it did so at first primarily in the cities. The people who lived in the country and who continued to believe in “the old ways” came to be known as pagans. Pagans have been broadly defined as anyone involved in any religious act, practice, or ceremony which is not Christian. Jews and Muslims also use the term to refer to anyone outside their religion. Some define paganism as a religion outside of Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, and Buddhism; others simply define it as being without a religion. Paganism, however, often is not identified as a traditional religion per se because it does not have any official doctrine; however, it has some common characteristics within its variety of traditions. One of the common beliefs is the divine presence in nature and the reverence for the natural order in life. In the strictest sense, paganism refers to the authentic religions of ancient Greece and Rome and the surrounding areas. The pagans usually had a polytheistic belief in many gods but only one, which represents the chief god and supreme godhead, is chosen to worship. The Renaissance of the 1500s reintroduced the ancient Greek concepts of Paganism. Pagan symbols and traditions entered European art, music, literature, and ethics. The Reformation of the 1600s, however, put a temporary halt to Pagan thinking. Greek and Roman classics, with their focus on Paganism, were accepted again during the Enlightenment of the 1700s.
    [Show full text]
  • Divine Presence Theology Versus Name Theology in Deuteronomy.”
    Andrews University Seminary Studies, Vol. 55, No. 1, 3. Copyright © 2017 Andrews University Seminary Studies. RETRACTION FOR PLAGIARISM: ROBERTO OURO, “DIVINE PRESENCE THEOLOGY VERSUS NAME THEOLOGY IN DEUTERONOMY.” The editors of Andrews University Seminary Studies retract the following article by Roberto Ouro because of plagiarism: “Divine Presence Theology versus Name Theology in Deuteronomy” AUSS 52.1 (2014): 5–29. This article is retracted because the author plagiarized substantial portions from another work, misrepresenting the argumentation of the article as original work. This retraction has no bearing on the validity of the sources from which the article draws. 3 Andrews University Seminary Studies, Vol. 52, No. 1., 5-29. Copyright © 2014 Andrews University Press. DIVINE PRESENCE THEOLOGY VERSUS NAME THEOLOGY IN DEUTERONOMY ROBERTO OURO Adventist School of Theology Valencia, Spain Introduction Name Theology has long been understood by biblical scholars to be evidence of a paradigm shift within the Israelite theology of Divine Presence. This paradigm shift involves a supposed evolution in Israelite religion away from the anthropomorphic and immanent images of the deity, as found in Divine Presence Theology, toward a more abstract, demythologized, and transcendent one, as in Name Theology. According to Name Theology, the book of Deuteronomy is identifi ed as the transition point in the shift from the “older and more popular idea” that God lives in the temple with the idea that he is actually only hypostatically present in the temple. This new understanding theologically differentiates between “Jahweh on the one hand and his name on the other.”1 The residual effect of Name Theology is acutely evident in its immanence–to-transcendence scheme.
    [Show full text]
  • The Deity of Christ John 1:1-5, 14 John 1:1 “In the Beginning Was the Word, and the Word Was with God, and the Word Was God.”
    Pastor Robert Rutta The Deity of Christ John 1:1-5, 14 John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This is a topic that we must have a clear understanding of – the deity of Jesus Christ. This means that He was and is God. That truth shapes every aspect of our doctrine. If Jesus was not God, then we have no salvation. If all we had were the opening verses of John, that would be enough, but the Bible is full of proofs of this wonderful truth. John 20:28 28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Notice how Thomas addressed the Lord. He not only said "My Lord," but he also addressed Jesus as "my God." Did Jesus rebuke him and correct him and say, "Thomas, how dare you call me GOD. I’m not God, I’m just a man like you?" 29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. Jesus readily accepted it when He was called God. Hebrews 1:8 8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Titus 2:13 13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; The Bible clearly refers to Him as God. Many of the cults view Jesus very differently.
    [Show full text]
  • Spinoza and Deleuze. NAME
    TITLE: Anatomies of the subject: Spinoza and Deleuze. NAME: Deborah Anne Kenny. COLLEGE: Queen Mary, University of London. DEGREE: Phd. i :ý 2 ABSTRACT Name: Deborah Anne Kenny. Title of Thesis: Anatomies of the Subject: Spinoza and Deleuze. Degree: Phd. This thesis centres on an examination of Gilles Deleuze's non-subject centred philosophy and the influence of the earlier (seventeenth century) work of Benedict Spinoza, whom Deleuze describes as one of an "alternative" tradition of philosophers, and whom he claims as an antecedent. Historically, the subject has always appeared as a question, or as in question, as a problem around which concepts cluster. The focus here is on Deleuze's approach to the problem of subjectivity, his treatment of it and his attempt to configure an "anti- subject" based on his own transformations of Spinozist concepts, which he takes up and modifies for his own purposes. The proposal is that Spinoza provides a key or a way into Deleuzean concepts, and at the same time that Deleuze's readings of Spinoza's theories reinvigorate them. What unites Spinoza and Deleuze, and is a recurring theme of this thesis, is that they both conduct their critiques and elaborate models from within a conceptual framework of a radical immanence that opposes all transcendence, and especially the' transcendent subject of consciousness. It is on the basis of Spinoza's radical immanence and his non-analogical approach to Being/beings that Deleuze constructs be a theory of becoming - as "de-individualising" process - that will his alternative to models of the subject based on identity.
    [Show full text]