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
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
-
The ones i have visited are a spiritual haven for the homosexual community of whom many feel uncomfortable in christianity.
Leave a comment:
-
I would like to get back to the issue at hand, which is, 'What are the advantages of UU? Unfortunately the early part of the thread was dominated by 'flippy' meaningless remarks and insults and later went way off topic.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Spartacus View PostBecause Trinitarianism is the product of a literalist interpretation of Scripture and not extended and sophisticated philosophical and theological discourse within the Church, and everyone who has ever supported Trinitarianism is violent. Riiiiiiiight.Last edited by shunyadragon; 11-24-2014, 09:10 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostAlready done that in spades.
I was very specific what the following was in your previous post. There is no need to repeat.
Let's get back to the subject at hand UU.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostOnce again, if you want to prove me wrong, all you have to do is merely speak intelligently about these issues. So far you just try to criticize what I've said by misrepresentation and refusing to present any alternative view or alternative terminology of the examples I have given you.
What do you mean, 'not the following'?
Let's get back to the subject at hand UU.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostNot funny at all. I am doing no such thing.
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostYou are making up your own private definitions.
Originally posted by shunyadragon View Postok, but not the following
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThis is quite involved, but most definitely not anything to do with 'Theological Reflection,' nor the discussion concerning UU. Your going somewhere else with this maybe another thread.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostI wonder if you even realize that you are precisely demonstrating the truth of my remark to Spartacus that you will not discuss the subtleties of theological reflection. Too funny!
[quote] Your description of the definition of each word is fine. It is indeed what I mean. Yet you say that it only applies to one's personal life, and while that can indeed be very true, [quote]
ok, but not the following
it need not only be about one's personal life. Recall that I was speaking of theological schools of thought and theological traditions. For example, the Franciscan school of thought is not merely a single individual thiking or reflecting theologically about his own personal life. It is a whole school of thought. It is shared by a rather large group of scholars and communities over several centuries. Some ideas developed in the Franciscan school of thought eventually contribute to the defintion of dogmas in the Roman Catholic Church several centuries later. In the defintion of the Immaculate Conception, for example, the theological tradition that found expression in the Franciscan school of thought, especially as eventually expressed by John Duns Scotus, was later adopted by the Roman Catholic Church. Members of the Franciscan school of theology do not consider the writings of Bonneventure, William of Occam, Scotus, Roger Bacon, and others to be divinely inspired scriptures, much less do the opposing members of the Dominican school, but all recognize that the church eventally came to accept the tradition of theological reflection in one school as doctrine.
The Lutheran theological tradition in the Western church or other reform traditions, Protestant and othewise, are likewise not based on new revealed scriptures, but on the theological views and traditions developed first by its founders and later elaborated upon by others. Karl Barth did not view the theological writings of Martin Luther as inspired scripture, but rather as valid theological reflection that did not merely relate to the inidividual personal experience of Martin Luther but the beginnings of a fruitful tradition that he too would contribute to in his own time. It has become a rich and successful school of thought. Lutheran theology does not believe in a separate text or act of special revelation, but it most certainly does have its own character and the Luther traditional school of thought will specifically reject ideas and practices that Roman Catholics continue to consider revealed truths. There are many other rich theological traditions in the Christian church. One can stand within these theological traditions and engage in theological reflection merely about one's own personal experience, if that is all one wants to do, but one can also reflect on the larger experience of whole communities and denominations over centuries and continue to give life to a tradition that will continue to thrive and evolve for centures to come.Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-29-2014, 09:20 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostYes I found them in the dictionary, but the definitions did not resolve the issue at hand. The use of the phrase 'Theological Reflections' cannot realistically be equated to the individual words, nonetheless here goes, reflection simply translated to thinking, contemplation, deliberation, meditation or maybe musing. This comes closest to a personal process. To vague and anecdotal to have any meaning broader meaning. When combine with 'Theological' you may describe thinking, contemplation, deliberation of theological questions. Considering the definitions it better fits the personal contemplation and meditation of theological questions in ones personal life. The clear academic definition I cited extends this to small groups, but clearly fits the definition of the individual words.
You are creating your own 'personal' definition of the 'phrase,' which creates too high a fog index for further dialogue. I have not found any other reference that uses this phrase in the context you use it.
This thread is supposed to be about UU, where 'Philosophical Reflection' fits better. The following is a good definition:
Please note, reflection is very personal in nature. The question of the nature of 'Theological or Philosophical Reflection' would deserve a separate thread.
Your description of the definition of each word is fine. It is indeed what I mean. Yet you say that it only applies to one's personal life, and while that can indeed be very true, it need not only be about one's personal life. Recall that I was speaking of theological schools of thought and theological traditions. For example, the Franciscan school of thought is not merely a single individual thiking or reflecting theologically about his own personal life. It is a whole school of thought. It is shared by a rather large group of scholars and communities over several centuries. Some ideas developed in the Franciscan school of thought eventually contribute to the defintion of dogmas in the Roman Catholic Church several centuries later. In the defintion of the Immaculate Conception, for example, the theological tradition that found expression in the Franciscan school of thought, especially as eventually expressed by John Duns Scotus, was later adopted by the Roman Catholic Church. Members of the Franciscan school of theology do not consider the writings of Bonneventure, William of Occam, Scotus, Roger Bacon, and others to be divinely inspired scriptures, much less do the opposing members of the Dominican school, but all recognize that the church eventally came to accept the tradition of theological reflection in one school as doctrine.
The Lutheran theological tradition in the Western church or other reform traditions, Protestant and othewise, are likewise not based on new revealed scriptures, but on the theological views and traditions developed first by its founders and later elaborated upon by others. Karl Barth did not view the theological writings of Martin Luther as inspired scripture, but rather as valid theological reflection that did not merely relate to the inidividual personal experience of Martin Luther but the beginnings of a fruitful tradition that he too would contribute to in his own time. It has become a rich and successful school of thought. Lutheran theology does not believe in a separate text or act of special revelation, but it most certainly does have its own character and the Luther traditional school of thought will specifically reject ideas and practices that Roman Catholics continue to consider revealed truths. There are many other rich theological traditions in the Christian church. One can stand within these theological traditions and engage in theological reflection merely about one's own personal experience, if that is all one wants to do, but one can also reflect on the larger experience of whole communities and denominations over centuries and continue to give life to a tradition that will continue to thrive and evolve for centures to come.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostYou already admitted to the fact of your assumption when you tried to claim it was a necessary assumption (it is not). You will need to look up 'theological' and 'reflection' separately in most dictionaries. Once you have done so, perhaps you could try to explain why you think my use and definition of these terms is somehow incorrect. I've also asked you how you might alternatively describe the phenomenon and examples I have given to you. I assure you there is nothing unusual about how I am using these terms. Once you find them in a dictionary, this should become obvious to you. If not, let me know.
You are creating your own 'personal' definition of the 'phrase,' which creates too high a fog index for further dialogue. I have not found any other reference that uses this phrase in the context you use it.
This thread is supposed to be about UU, where 'Philosophical Reflection' fits better. The following is a good definition:
Please note, reflection is very personal in nature. The question of the nature of 'Theological or Philosophical Reflection' would deserve a separate thread.Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-29-2014, 05:18 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostNot an assumption on my part. I used academic definitions and usage, and your own words of your unique personal definition not entailing any particular definition has too high a fog index for a constructive dialogue, No good unless you can provide an outside source to justify your use as I did.
Sure I looked them up, but 'Theological Reflections' is not in the Dictionary. I used legitimate academic sources to provide the definition. You have provided nothing. Still waiting. . .
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostFalse assumption on your part, and certainly not a necessary one. Let's see if you can come up with a better way of describing the process and examples I have given you. Certainly seems like theological reflection to me and that does not entail any peculiar definition of the terms. Did you bother looking them up in the dictionary, as I suggested?
Sure I looked them up, but 'Theological Reflections' is not in the Dictionary. I used legitimate academic sources to provide the definition. You have provided nothing. Still waiting. . .Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-29-2014, 12:25 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostAnswered, you indeed did just as I said:
It is how it is defined and used from my sources. Unless you can provide an alternative citation, I can only assume that this is your 'personal view.'
. . . 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.)
Quote 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.
That is a different question. I will give it some thought, but NO, it is not Theological Reflection as defined and used in the sources I cited. I of course can cite more if it would help, but I do not think it will.
You have failed to provide a source that defines Theological Reflection as you use it in the above cited posts as contributing to the formation of doctrines..
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by robrecht View PostShuny, 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, . . .
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 . . . .
[quote] . . . 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.)
Quote 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.
. . . 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???
You have failed to provide a source that defines Theological Reflection as you use it in the above cited posts as contributing to the formation of doctrines..Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-29-2014, 09:00 AM.
Leave a comment:
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Leave a comment: