Announcement

Collapse

Comparative Religions 101 Guidelines

Welcome to Comp Religions, this is where the sights and sounds of the many world religions come together in a big World's Fair type atmosphere, without those delicious funnel cakes.

World Religions is a theist only type place, but that does not exclude certain religionists who practice non-theistic faiths ala Buddhism. If you are not sure, ask a moderator.

This is not a place where we argue the existence / non-existence of God.

And as usual, the forum rules apply.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Unitarian Universalism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    First, I did not bring up the Baha'i Faith in this thread, you 'choose' to. Second, I did not abandon any threads. They are still active if you wish to stay on topic and address you problems with the Baha'i Faith in those threads. Third your challenging statements are unwarranted in this thread, and I have responded to everything you have posted in the other threads.
    If you have not abandoned the other threads, does that mean that you now intend to return to them?
    βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
    ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

    אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by robrecht View Post
      I have no need to be dependent upon sources when using normal words in their normal sense.
      What you have presented does not represent the common use of Theological Reflection as defined by many sources. Still waiting . . .

      No, you are proving that you completely misunderstand. My point has always been that a literalist, propositional approach to revelation in closed written scriptures is not needed when one can accept the validity of theological reflection.
      Problem remains you are misusing Theological reflection.

      Try to at least quote a full sentence at a time and you may be able to better understand. Just because theological reflection has produced new doctrines, sometimes over the course of several centuries, does not mean that the theological reflection was seen (then or now) or ever intended as a form of revelation or to produce new doctrine.
      Theological reflection has not produced new Doctrines by Definition.

      It would help if you got back on topic of UU. The other threads were open, are open and will remain open.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
        What you have presented does not represent the common use of Theological Reflection as defined by many sources. Still waiting . . .

        Problem remains you are misusing Theological reflection.

        Theological reflection has not produced new Doctrines by Definition.

        It would help if you got back on topic of UU. The other threads were open, are open and will remain open.
        Please explain how you think I have misused the words 'theological reflection' and this time try to do so without misrepresenting or misunderstanding what I have been saying.

        You did not answer my question: If you have not abandoned the other threads, does that mean that you now intend to return to them?
        βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
        ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

        אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by robrecht View Post
          Please explain how you think I have misused the words 'theological reflection' and this time try to do so without misrepresenting or misunderstanding what I have been saying.

          You did not answer my question: If you have not abandoned the other threads, does that mean that you now intend to return to them?
          I never have left them. There is one here in Comparative religions, right below this one that has always been open. I have been the last one to post in all my threads and all remain open.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            I never have left them. There is one here in Comparative religions, right below this one that has always been open. I have been the last one to post in all my threads and all remain open.
            I did not claim that you have abandoned all of your threads. If you are not aware of the one to which I was referring, I will look it up for you. As for the others, I can also dig through them to find the specific questions you have still not answered. I note, again, that you have avoided my question and request here in this very thread:

            Please explain how you think I have misused the words 'theological reflection' and this time try to do so without misrepresenting or misunderstanding what I have been saying.

            Is the original language for the name of this body (Universal House of Justice) Arabic? Happen to know the actual terms used?
            βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
            ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

            אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by robrecht View Post
              I did not claim that you have abandoned all of your threads. If you are not aware of the one to which I was referring, I will look it up for you. As for the others, I can also dig through them to find the specific questions you have still not answered. I note, again, that you have avoided my question and request here in this very thread:

              Please explain how you think I have misused the words 'theological reflection' and this time try to do so without misrepresenting or misunderstanding what I have been saying.

              Is the original language for the name of this body (Universal House of Justice) Arabic? Happen to know the actual terms used?
              You have equated 'Theological Reflection' as referring to change and evolution of doctrine and dogma, and every source I have been able to find other then you bears no resemblance to this use.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                You have equated 'Theological Reflection' as referring to change and evolution of doctrine and dogma, and every source I have been able to find other then you bears no resemblance to this use.
                Untrue. Once again. Now please try and explain how you think I have misused the words 'theological reflection' and this time try to do so without misrepresenting or misunderstanding what I have been saying. I have said that theological reflection has sometimes contributed to the evolution of doctrine and dogma in the Christian traidition. This is hardly equating 'theological reflection' to 'change and evolution of doctrine and dogma' or saying that 'theological reflection' refers to 'change and evolution of doctrine and dogma'.
                βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                  Untrue. Once again. Now please try and explain how you think I have misused the words 'theological reflection' and this time try to do so without misrepresenting or misunderstanding what I have been saying. I have said that theological reflection has sometimes contributed to the evolution of doctrine and dogma in the Christian traidition. This is hardly equating 'theological reflection' to 'change and evolution of doctrine and dogma' or saying that 'theological reflection' refers to 'change and evolution of doctrine and dogma'.

                  You have equated 'Theological Reflection' as referring to change and evolution of doctrine and dogma, and every source I have been able to find other then you bears no resemblance to this use.

                  Source: [DOC
                  WHAT IS THEOLOGICAL REFLECTION teachersites.schoolworld.com/.../WHAT%20IS%20THEOLOGICAL%20..]

                  The explicit goal of theological reflection is not a dogmatic statement or a contribution to academic theology. Its goal is pastoral and practical: it aims at transformation of social structures and institutions and at fuller personal integration and conversion.
                  As a result, it criteria for truth and value are practical as well. This theological reflection is “true” and successful when it liberates the fullest living of the Christian spirit possible in the context, the fullest and most aware response to what the Spirit of God is doing here and now and inviting us to do. As a result, it criteria for truth and value are practical as well. This theological reflection is “true” and successful when it liberates the fullest living of the Christian spirit possible in the context, the fullest and most aware response to what the Spirit of God is doing here and now and inviting us to do.

                  © Copyright Original Source
                  Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-24-2014, 10:57 AM.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    You have equated 'Theological Reflection' as referring to change and evolution of doctrine and dogma, and every source I have been able to find other then you bears no resemblance to this use.

                    Source: [DOC
                    WHAT IS THEOLOGICAL REFLECTION teachersites.schoolworld.com/.../WHAT%20IS%20THEOLOGICAL%20..]

                    The explicit goal of theological reflection is not a dogmatic statement or a contribution to academic theology. Its goal is pastoral and practical: it aims at transformation of social structures and institutions and at fuller personal integration and conversion.
                    As a result, it criteria for truth and value are practical as well. This theological reflection is “true” and successful when it liberates the fullest living of the Christian spirit possible in the context, the fullest and most aware response to what the Spirit of God is doing here and now and inviting us to do. As a result, it criteria for truth and value are practical as well. This theological reflection is “true” and successful when it liberates the fullest living of the Christian spirit possible in the context, the fullest and most aware response to what the Spirit of God is doing here and now and inviting us to do.

                    © Copyright Original Source
                    No I have never, ever equated theological reflection' with change or evolution of doctrine or dogma. You are still misunderstanding and misrepresenting my view. I have said that theological reflection can contribute to the development of doctrine in the Christian tradition and given you three or four concrete examples. Please try to understand my position before arguing.
                    βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                    ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                    אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                      No I have never, ever equated theological reflection' with change or evolution of doctrine or dogma. You are still misunderstanding and misrepresenting my view. I have said that theological reflection can contribute to the development of doctrine in the Christian tradition and given you three or four concrete examples. Please try to understand my position before arguing.
                      Yes you have made that relationship, and failed to provide an outside definition supporting it. Your position has been combative, distorted. concerning the Baha'i Faith, and vague and foggy concerning how you are using 'Theological Reflection,' You most definitely have been using it in how change takes pace in Christianity, and that is not how it is defined.

                      Let's get back to the UU discussion.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                        Yes you have made that relationship, and failed to provide an outside definition supporting it. Your position has been combative, distorted. concerning the Baha'i Faith, and vague and foggy concerning how you are using 'Theological Reflection,' You most definitely have been using it in how change takes pace in Christianity, and that is not how it is defined.

                        Let's get back to the UU discussion.
                        Too bad you cannot provide a single quote of mine equating theological reflection to change or evolution of doctrine or dogma or using the terms other than how they are normally defined in dictionaries. Your affirmation does not make it so. Likewise, I have no opposition to the Baha'i Faith. In fact, I have have nothing but high praise for most of their positions as I understand them. I am no expert so there may be some positions of theirs that I would not agree with, were I more aware of their theology.
                        βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                        ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                        אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          I do not know much about Baha'i.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by __ View Post
                            I do not know much about Baha'i.
                            You can google Baha'i Faith, or go to this thread http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...e-in-God/page6, and read and ask questions.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                              Too bad you cannot provide a single quote of mine equating theological reflection to change or evolution of doctrine or dogma or using the terms other than how they are normally defined in dictionaries. Your affirmation does not make it so. Likewise, I have no opposition to the Baha'i Faith. In fact, I have have nothing but high praise for most of their positions as I understand them. I am no expert so there may be some positions of theirs that I would not agree with, were I more aware of their theology.
                              Here:

                              Originally posted by robrecht$26
                              Without yet turning to the citation from your link, your above description of the role of theological reflection is much too individualistic not only for my personal taste but also for describing its role in the Christian intellectual tradition. Within the Christian intellectual tradition, one has major schools of theology that have influenced the development of doctrine from the beginning and into medieval and modern times and, apart from doctrinal development, still provide for rather profound theological pluralism within individual churches, not to mention the differences that exist between denominations. (By the way, I am only speaking of the Christian theological traditions, but similar processes may also be described within Judaism and Islam.)

                              Originally posted by robrecht#41
                              Try to at least quote a full sentence at a time and you may be able to better understand. Just because theological reflection has produced new doctrines, sometimes over the course of several centuries, does not mean that the theological reflection was seen (then or now) or ever intended as a form of revelation or to produce new doctrine.
                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                                Here:
                                Shuny, you claimed (10/23 8:51pm) that I said the purpose of theological reflection is to be some kind of revelation or to change doctrine. But, of course, I never said that. Your quotations of me do not say what you think they do. Read my posts again, more carefully, please: Theological reflection, especially as part of a larger school of theology (eg, Antochene, Alexandrian, Franciscan, Dominican) can certainly contribute to the development of doctrine. It can indeed perform this role. See, eg, the role of the Franciscan school of theology in defining what eventually became the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception and Papal Infallibility as later defined by the Roman Catholic Church in the 19th century. That is not at all the same thing as equating theological reflection with Revelation or saying that the purpose of theological reflection is to change doctrine. I'm sorry you cannot see that, but please do not continue to misrepresent what i have said. I've asked you before, but you declined to answer, what would you prefer to call the theological reflection that took place within these theological schools of thought and which contributed to what eventually came to be defined as dogma? If you do not want to call it 'theological reflection', what would you call it???
                                βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                                ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                                אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X