Tom Caylor wrote: > (Schaeffer's phrase "Is Not Silent" is an answer to Wittengenstein's > famous quote.) >
Sorry, Wittgenstein. I must have had Witten on the brane ;) Regarding Bruno's use of the word 'theology', I agree with Brent that it is unconventional to the point of targeting the wrong audience, at least from the perspective of the English speaking Western world. Largely, only believers in a personal God are interested in 'theology' in this day, as far as Western theology goes. An impersonal god is not considered as part of this theology. On the other hand, I still stand by my statements regarding the present day abandonment of the historical connection of the real personal God (in whose image we are made), and turning to a "personal" (new meaning: non-rational, first-person perspective) God made after our image. With this abandonment comes putting man at the center of the philosophical universe, which is the tendency of all of us since the Fall. My guess is that Bruno's impersonal 'god' falls into the category of philosophy. The believer in the personal God believes that all of philosophy can be pursued from this perspective (it would only make sense!). However, of course only a believer in the personal God can have this perspective. From the modern existentialist view, philosophy can be pursued only by first cleansing the mind of all historical facts. The following link on Thomas Aquinas, a controversial character between theology and philosophy, has some interesting thoughts on the perceived (relative) border(s) between the two. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aquinas/ Tom --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---