Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Harvey_Mozolak

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 311
Your Turn / Re: God's regard
« on: March 27, 2021, 05:39:13 PM »
I will not argue that you make a good case but to the average human ear... it is not that clear, you either have all the baggage of human ordinary birth attributed to God or you have the gods have sons and daughters as Greeks and Romans described in their myths and legends.  IMO, of course.  St. John, as you probably agree, handles it best as he describes our Lord's relationship to his and our Father.  But that is set in prayer, in our Lord's teaching and proclamation and not in Pieper-like paragraphs peering into the inner workings of the Trinity using specially crafted and defined terms apart from ordinary usage and often in Latin or Greek.  One of the first notes I wrote in my volumes of Francis' triple header was, "Let's give God some privacy!"  That is why I would never come close to being a lower level dogmatician.  But these things are never taught in average parish bible classes, inquirers classes or confirmation instruction.  And that is a good thing.  IMO.

Your Turn / Re: God's regard
« on: March 27, 2021, 04:55:37 PM »
I am not sure I am understanding what you all are saying about the Father and the Son (and we haven't added the Holy Spirit yet) but I do think it can become-- not so helpful things to say.  If one thinks that begotten is a difficult term and subordinate also... being born of the Father can also be very misunderstood (as if one could at all understand anything of the things-within-the-Godhead processes). 

And the difficulty is doubled when we take a mysterious feature of the Trinity (confessed but not understood) and apply it to human relationships like husband and wife or for some women and men...  now we have added more cracks to spring pond. 

Your Turn / Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
« on: March 27, 2021, 01:51:20 PM »
Has it been offered here or elsewhere... a possible connection of the Messianic Secret and the short ending of Mark?  I wrote the following elsewhere in one of my mailings.

Is the ending another piece in the puzzle of the Marcian secret that Christ delivered any number of times-- “don’t tell anyone” and “don’t tell anyone until after….”   Could the so-called Messianic Secret be an applied tool used in crafting the conclusion of the Gospel?

This being the last instance of Jesus warning given one final time to be undone by his resurrection.  Well, no one to tell….  Or so someone would think if they didn’t have this manuscript in their hand or being read to them or being told to them with a loooooong pause... and know that the church is well and alive, thank you very much, Jesus!

Has anyone done any reading among NT scholars that suggests such a use of the ending’s seemingly truncated conclusion?

We are used to and enjoy secretly hidden, colorful Easter eggs, chocolate candy and once waxed, black outlined, European pysanky hidden behind the couch or in the grass and best in the crook of a backyard tree with eggs hanging like blood red and yellow sun-filled and blue as the waiting Virgin rain drops baptizing creation with hope and promise and risen love.  Blessed days of discovery ahead!   

Your Turn / Re: God's regard
« on: March 27, 2021, 01:43:32 PM »
There’s nothing wrong with subordinate. It communicates just fine. It’s a mistake, however, to apply it to the Eternal Son and Word of the Father in His divine nature; it works just fine, however, when describing the relation to the Father of that nature which the Eternal and co-equal Son assumed from the Theotokos.

And in the human nature he was subordinate because he was the truest, perfect man (like Eve and Adam before the Fall) as well as true God.

Your Turn / Re: Study Bibles
« on: March 27, 2021, 01:40:11 PM »
Luth Study Bible presents any number of interesting challenges to what is proper commentary and what is opinion or pious or personal hope or conjecture.   

p. 2120 note the percentages in the article; perhaps the 80% figure might have some documentation but where did the theologians get access to the second silly guess 47%?   After all, is sin fun or not and is fun, sin or not? 

Exodus 7. 17… text says the Lord says he will turn the Nile into blood but the footnote commentary is quite assured there is no chemical change but rather due to red colored algae….  Is there a cross reference to later events at Cana, of course not but why not?  Not Old Testament Literalists, why not?  Just interesting.

The “New Woman” comments on p. 2067 sound less like a historic observation as a prep for attacking any modern-day feminism, commentary or application jump.  Sophomoric.

and the topic “Men and Women in the Church” is less about that and more about contrasting them than relating them to the church.

Your Turn / Re: God's regard
« on: March 27, 2021, 10:36:16 AM »
Will,  as far as the relationship of wife and husband:  I have always taught couples, in premarital counseling, that the relationship is one of ebb and flow... if one of the couple is mentally ill, authority must say in the case of forced hospitalization fall to the one who is healthy, a decision regarding the education of their children may just more heavily flow to the person who is by vocation a teacher rather than the husband who is a mechanic and some decision about the car be more his than hers... whether to go to church or not should go more helpfully to the more faithful Christian or to the one who is rather than to the weaker of the two or one who is not a Christian.  And in the case of toss ups, he should buy her a comb for her lovely hair and he a chain and fob for his watch (or was it a watch for this fob and chain)... and do the Matthias prayerful casting  of lots or asking someone of great wisdom for advice and follow it.  Two heads doth a monster make, death for the headless but woe also to a head behaving monstrously not only hatefully or sinfully but also stupidly.  And I have seen more relationship with an unreasonable husband asserting headship and wifely submission than I have seen partnership and companionship of shared leadership without regard to submission and obedience issues. 

Your Turn / Re: God's regard
« on: March 27, 2021, 09:20:54 AM »
In many and various ways that whole enterprise was used as a "biblical" way to buttress the ongoing decisions against women's ordination to the pastoral office. 
Dave Benke

Dave, I wonder if that is not the way the church has often functioned in any number of issues....and said, "Oh, we don't ordain women (or whatever issue), never have, what kind of walls are there around doing or saying that... and where there are no walls, are there nearby rocks and stones we can build up into a barrier."   And what is the opposite in the illustration?n I think it might be an honest look at the terrain and any existing structure, when and how completed and how low the bar.   As some of you have aptly pointed out... the doctrine of the Trinity stands quite clearly in many perimeters but to use its materials to deal with teachings on marriage can be less clearly drawn, at least by some. 

Side thought:  Our teaching and practice for infant baptism is far less controversial among Lutherans but we have used Sacred Tradition to carry some stones and rocks into place, haven't we?

Your Turn / Re: God's regard
« on: March 26, 2021, 07:07:35 PM »
 “Equal to the Father as touching His godhead; inferior to the Father as touching His manhood.”

Obviously good words but the term inferior (no Latin or Greek scholar here) can sound, at least in English, as open to several meanings also, like subordination.  Remembering the recently (in these parts) referenced meditation by the Papal Chaplain on the True God and True Man distinctions... true man is something readily accepted by moderns (and mostly no more than that) but "certainly a man" may not capture well what the chaplain nicely pointed out might be more the weight of the terminology-- perfect man. 

Jesus is the New Adam, the Good Adam in the midst of all fallen Adams and Eves. 

So is the inferiority (infierior nature/status one simply that of the fact that, not using his divine prerogatives and abilities, Jesus couldn't because he didn't will to... do things like walk thru walls most of the time and used doorways prior to the resurrection.   Is this a weak illustration?  If someone is shorter or younger than I am, one could say they are inferior (everyone scream now!)... or the short and young person might consider me inferior to them (swallow the scream).  But in either case it might not be a value or moral judgement so much as a simple comparison, we are not the same.  Someone come up with a better illustration.  Is that all that we are talking about?  Inferior in the sense that the perfect Adam does not move like a spirit.... or have perfect wisdom being used like God, does it mean that?

I am writing a paper on Life and why it may not be an attribute of God and that it does not fit as a replacement for love in the sense of the text:  God is love.  We do not say, God is life.  God gives life.  Life comes from within him but the eternal may not be life, but rather is beyond life, the creator of life and certainly Eve's life and resurrected life.  Subordination of course readily falls into trouble as one introduces obedience as a characteristic of subordination.  But is that obedience less like groveling and more like gravity obeys on earth.  Human beings are just under God because God created them, we must bow because of the gravity of God.  We are earthbound.  Furthermore now, sin sunk.  Cakes will never achieve obedience from bakers but always be subordinate. 

Your Turn / the page 1726 note on the BVM
« on: March 26, 2021, 05:29:23 PM »
no one has mentioned that the note on page 1726 has one last hang nail to file....  The section ill-named Mary of Nazareth, concludes: "Rv 12 may memorialize her special role in history as a representative of Israel and as the mother of the Church." 

back in the days of my youth when first reading this and asking about this and later in at least my Junior College days in Milwaukee (and I think at Sem in Springfield) the Rev 12 description of this woman was taught not to, definitely, be Mary of Nazareth, Mother of God.  Maybe it was a symbol of the church or something like that... but not Mary definitely.  Now, of course, the commentary on the page of Rev 12 does not mention Mary at all and uses the term REPRESENTATIVE and the pronoun SHE... but not her name Mary as such (unless I over look it).   How does that match any of you who were taught this text pre-1970?

Not that I ever thought it was anyone other, obviously, than blessed Mary.

But this is not merely an idea.  Armed means it carries killing potential and that ain't always civil.  If a society depends on being armed to be civil as its basic need... then it is a not a society but a mob or in civil war.   Bring a small recently recieved splinter to the doctor and if he brings a bone saw to the exam table...   

"An armed society is a polite society."   Let's just let that sit out there for a bit.  Maybe while we wait, someone can find a Scriptural proof text or even sort of text.  Or we can oil our words and ream out the barrels of our sentences. 

someone correct me if I am wrong, there was a time... a decade ago when hard, difficult and even divisive opinions, stances and theologies were discussed with candor and care... and without what now exists.   Those of you who were here then, as I was, what changed... not the topics really...

some of us have too much retired time on hand
politics has become too much talked about
a whole change of folks with different loyalties
respect for age (I know that is self serving to say, but is it possible)
a change in how we were educated

what else?

George, your re-entrance into this forum is not enhancing things any more than my ongoing presence. 

and if a gas pipe fails or a tornado with a high number hits or a plane drops out of the sky or if you can't get to you gun fast enough...  so, shut off all utilities at night, build a basement bunker and I am not sure how you stop planes, well maybe the bunker will stop that and intruders... 

I guess I must be hearing things wrong... but a fair amount of the talk about Trump not being such a nice guy but doing really nice things does sound on the face like the end justifies the means... 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 311