Marbaniang, Domenic

In the Foreword of his book Jesus Rediscovered , Malcolm Muggeridge , referred to the French philosopher Simone Weil (1909– 1943) as "the most luminous intelligence of our time". Despite her brief life, much constrained by ill-health, she made important contributions to the field of philosophy and philosophical theology. One key concept of Weil's philosophy of God was "Absence". I quote from Wikipedia: Absence is the key image for her metaphysics , cosmology, cosmogeny, and theodicy . She believed that God created by an act of self-delimitation—in other words, because God is conceived as a kind of utter fullness, a perfect being, no creature could exist except where God was not. Thus creation occurred only when God withdrew in part. This is, for Weil, an original kenosis preceding the corrective kenosis of Christ's incarnation (cf. Athanasius). We are thus born in a sort of damned position not owing to original sin as such, but because to be created at

To walk by faith means to never react to doubts or conjectures: faith is the cement of all relationship; love, the foundation.

Lectures in Hamartiology The Sinful Nature 'Nature' here must not be understood as similar to that in 'human nature' or 'feline nature'. It is the principle of sin, which Romans 7 talks about, the law of sin. In essence, it is selfishness, covetousness, the end by which 'good' or 'evil' is defined. When Adam sinned, the choice broke him off from the Life of God and mankind became autonomous. Man could decide what was right or wrong by reference to himself. [Even philosophers have referred to happiness as the desired end]. That is the principle of lawlessness that is internal, intense, and universal. Therefore, the condemnation hangs over the head. Man is not compelled by the sin principle, he chooses to walk according to it in his condemned state of separation from God, in his state of Spiritless carnality, and thus subservience and enslavement to sin. He is now flesh (in the sense of not having the dominance of the law of the Spirit, Rom 8:2) an

There is, however, no indication that the fruit of life could render the human body indestructible (as if even God could not destroy it). Hamartiology, p.11 Indestructibility will be a quality of the spiritual body given to the believer on resurrection or glorification: the source, Christ (1 Cor.15:42-49).

God created humans as mortals. Mortality was known to Adam, or else reference to it in the command would have meant nothing to him.... ...through Adam’s disobedience and choice of autonomy (physical well-being), mortality reached finality in Adam...." Hamartiology, p.10 (1) If man were created immortal, death could not be predicted of him in any condition. For “immortality” implies inability to die (physically). (2) If man were created immortal, the Tree of Life would be a meaningless addition to the Garden. Perhaps, a safer proposition might be “God created humans as neither mortals nor immortals” because of the condition of non-finality.

SHUNNING OVER-FAMILIARITY DO NOT open your heart to every man, but discuss your affairs with one who is wise and who fears God. Do not keep company with young people and strangers. Do not fawn upon the rich, and do not be fond of mingling with the great. Associate with the humble and the simple, with the devout and virtuous, and with them speak of edifying things. Be not intimate with any woman, but generally commend all good women to God. Seek only the intimacy of God and of His angels, and avoid the notice of men. We ought to have charity for all men but familiarity with all is not expedient. Sometimes it happens that a person enjoys a good reputation among those who do not know him, but at the same time is held in slight regard by those who do. Frequently we think we are pleasing others by our presence and we begin rather to displease them by the faults they find in us. From Imitation of Christ by Thomas A. Kempis (trans. Aloysius Croft & Harold Bolton), Chapter 8.

Anyone reading the New Testament will immediately be able to observe a few distinctive things: 1. Variety. There is a great variety of styles by different authors. It is not just the perspective of one person. We find here the united testimony of several authors from various backgrounds and perspectives, doctors, government officials, theologians, and fishermen. Yet, they all share the same faith. 2. Sincerity. Not only the tone and the appeal is sincere, but the testimonies of life are also outstandingly genuine. Luke writes about the life of Paul and Peter also mentions him. Then, Paul himself speaks a few times about how he came to know Christ, about the spiritual revelation, about the presence and power of Christ through the Holy Spirit. What a testimony! What a sacrifice! Would anyone, and such intellectuals as Paul and Luke, dare to forsake everything to live such lives unless they were really encountered by God? Every word they spoke bore marks of sincerity. The words themselv

OUTLINE Daniel can be divided into two parts: PART I: DANIEL THE INTERPRETER A. The Test of Dainty (Ch.1) B. The Vision & Interpretation: The Great Image Broken (Ch.2): The Four Kingdoms: Babylon (Golden Head): 606-538 BC Medo-Persia (Silver Breast & Arms): 538-333 BC Greece (Brass Belly & Thigh): 333-63 BC Rome (Iron & Clay Legs): BC 63-AD? C. The Test of Devotion: Shadrach, Meshech, & Abednego in Fire (Ch.3) D. The Vision & Interpretation: The Great Tree Cut Down (Ch.4) Nebuchadnezzar ’s Pride brings him to the fields, perhaps zoanthrophy or lycanthropy E. The Writing & Interpretation: MENE MENE TEKEL UPHARSIN (Ch.5) Belshazzar and Babylon’s Fall (538BC) F. The Test of Decree: Daniel in Lion’s Den (Ch.6) PART II: DANIEL THE SEER A. The Four Beasts: The Four Beasts-Four Kings (Ch.7) B. The Ram, the Goat, and the Horn (Ch.8) Medo-Persia, Alexander, Antiochus Epiphanes ( Anti-Christ ) C. Daniel’s Prayer & the Revelation of the 70 Weeks (Explained be

The next key verse is 2:44 which talks about the coming everlasting Kingdom of Jesus Christ . And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever. (Daniel 2:44) Daniel, unlike his contemporary Ezekiel , is more concerned about the political future of the world and emphasizes on the Kingdom of God. He hailed from Judah and the Lord had chartered his course into the palace of Babylon . Ezekiel, on the other hand, was of a priestly family and his visions were primarily related to the religious life of the people. Ezekiel's visions relate to the TEMPLE - the Glory of God, the Cherubim, etc. Daniel's vision is about the THRONE - the Kingdom of God. Ezekiel envisions a coming world to be filled with the presence, knowledge, and glory of God. Daniel envisions a world ruled absolutely by Jesus Christ.

The Book of Daniel was written sometime between 606-530 BC when Daniel prophesied through the times of Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, and Darius the son of Ahasurus in Babylon. The Book contains dreams, visions, and prophecies related to global politics revolving around the Jews whose nation Israel/Judah was snatched from them through conquests, first by Assyria and then by Babylon in 586 BC. The dreams, visions, and prophecies declare that though Israel was suspended as a nation from the realm of politics, God ‘s sovereign rulership over world politics had not come to cease. In terms of ethno-religio-political locus, the Book portrays one center: The Messiah who is the Son of David (the next immediate circumferential center being the Jewish people to whom He first belongs, ethno-religio-politically speaking). In terms of geo-political locus, the center is Jerusalem, the City of David (the immediate circumferential center being Palestine ). Jerusalem is destined to be the Capital of th

From Finney's Systematic Theology , Lecture 39 (1) Different passages must be so interpreted, if they can be, as not to contradict each other. (2) Language is to be interpreted according to the subject matter of discourse. (3) Respect is always to be had, to the general scope and design of the speaker or writer . (4) Texts that are consistent with either theory, prove neither. (5) Language is to be so interpreted, if it can be, as not to conflict with sound philosophy , matters of fact, the nature of things, or immutable justice.