Recent content by hoghead1

It's no irony. He is an amateur and out of his league here. I view myself as an expert here and I have the publications and credentials to prove that.

Thomas, if you would have read and understood Eckhart, you would agree with me. Bottom line: I do not need you are anyone else here to lecture me on Eckhart or anything else. I know what I am doing. If you don't like what I say, that is your problem. You are no scholar, no expert, or...

No, I don't agree with you at all here, Thomas. Sorry. For example, Eckhart is very pantheistic and clearly states that God is all things. That makes him s a major alternative to classical theism. it also appears to be what got him in trouble with the church, especially the way he identifies...

The rest of your material, Thomas, I find highly debatable. For example, yes, Eckhart does present passages where he writes off the spacio-material world as unreal, an illusion. I just showed you two of them. Eckhart is noted for appearing very contradictory. In Eckhart, the universe would...

Thanks for yur review, Thomas. Yes, I was already aware of that material. But thanks for reminding me.

Shudny, I dam done, d-o-n-e, discussing this issue with you.

Again, Shuny, I pointed out where Augustine is in fact an exception. You do not seem responsive to what I am saying, so I am not going to address this topic any more with you.

Well, as I have said, Augustine is also an exception. Probably also St. Thomas Aquinas, as I am pretty sure he had the notion Adam and Eve represented a whole society of humans living in Eden. Calvin is very interesting here. In his commentary on Genesis, he says that God did not intend to...

Making any progress to what? What are we supposed to be making progress to? Maybe I'm a dummy, I don't know. But I am not clear on hat his model of God is. Is he following classical theism? Neo-classical theism? What? Since you know his model of God, how about you present it to me...

I think your understanding of my position needs a major overhaul. Classical theism, the high God of traditional Christianity, presented a world-negating image of God as static and aloof. God was said to be without body, parts, passions, compassion, wholly immutable, having no "real"...

That's my point. Unless some intelligent mind acts on them, we have no watch. That's a major example of the fact that all complex order requires an ordering mind.

I am citing Eckhart largely from Pfeiffer, "Deutsche Mystiker." Try pp. 514, 605. I'm not calling Catholic doctrines anything. I have no idea what doctrines you are talking abut. Are you trying to speak for the Catholic Church? Is that it? I do think the classical model of God, from both...

Christianity, since day one, has also argued that not all will be saved. Again, Gnosticism is arguing that one can go directly to the divine and connect with it. Some training is needed, of course. Incidentally, gnostic systems can vary. Not all have this three-part division. The church...

Then you didn't have very solid doctrines, to start with. Where is that rejected? The Bible presents a highly anthropomorphic of God. Jer. 23:23-24 speaks of God's omnipresence. Now if creation was something totally foreign to God, then God could not be omnipresent. I Cor. 15:28, plus the...

Yes, but apparently he was of two minds on it. I just explained about "Genesis in teh Literal Sense" and do not want to repeat myself.