Judy, this "perichoresis" is not something I attach to the 4th century. I am not a theologian -- but I respect them and am willing to learn from them. I am a bible thumping "liberal." I am not sure you think such is possible. I used share such an opinion. I bought two books, years ago, that I considered "liberal." Might still have that impression. Joesph Fletcher's Situation Ethics and a book by Albert Switzer - something about the Historical Christ. I was a 20 year old pastor, fresh out of school and "loaded for bear" (number 20 buckshot and all !!!). Well, those who are on this forum have nothing to do with my ancient impressions of those liberals. These are people who
are Christ controlled -- I would have litle to do with them if I did not see the work of God in their lives. They would little to do with me for the same reason, I suppose.
Whatever "perichoresis" was, it is an evolving understanding and with different applications, no doubt. Not all of the message is off limits -- correct? Since "perichoesis" as a word is not off limits - only because of what that word might suggest in terms of (false) doctrine -- what is it that you are concerned about?
Understand that "perichoresis" is not a word I use much around the peasant people. It is practical talk and 8th grade level English for me. For one thing -- I understand that level of communication best !!
But tell your concerns.
JD
JD
-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 16:56:16 -0400
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Apologetic for the eternal sonship of Christ
Of course you don't think it is to be avoided JD because you embrace the concepts the "perichoresis" theologians promote.
However, I don't believe they know God or that the 4th Century creed makers had an accurate view of Him either. Knowing Him is important so far as relationship is concerned. jt
On Sun, 03 Jul 2005 16:44:44 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I understand, Judy. I think you did not address my post and the "dance" as a way of _expression_ or life -- not an actual four-step saunder across the floor. And It is not complicated, at all -- not to me. If the passages listed below present this happy ontological alternative -- surely it is an easy thing to see God, His Son and His Spirit as intertwined with each other in a fully joyous _expression_ -- no negatives whatsoever -- King David could have easily described this as a dance. I do not see it as a concept to be libeled or avoided.
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We are starting to complicate things again JD. I have no problem with choirs and/or dancing as an act of worshipby creation in honor of Creator - didn't Jesus say that if we fail to praise that the rocks would cry out? However,the Godhead dancing with itself or dancing with each other is another matter entirely and I would like to see someclear precedent for this in God's Word. judytOn Sun, 03 Jul 2005 15:56:47 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Well, I think that if you can have your "symphony," others can have their "dance" (of life). Your choice of words has no more authority others. DM imagines "great dance" to be "unbiblical" rather than "non-biblical." I see no such distinction here. And let us not forget that all English words are approximations of the original language. There are no holy English words.Lam 5:15 is the contrast of two life styles - one of rejoicing and joy (the dance) and the other of sadness and dismay (mourning). Psalms 30:11 speaks to this very way of life - of joy and happiness -- dancing, if you will. More than this, Bill has given some very good comments, exegetical/biblcial comments in past postings. JD
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No JD, I know you are not referring to dancing in Church or the kind of worshipful dance David wasdoing when Saul's daughter judged him in her heart. Those kinds of dances have precedent in truthThe kind you, Lance, and Bill promote are nowhere to be seen in the Word of God and is some figmentof a 4th Century religious imagination. judytOn Sun, 03 Jul 2005 08:29:44 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Judy -- do you think we speak of dancing church when we speak of the Great Dance?JD
From: Judy Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
David danced as an act of worship and so did Miriam; I hardly see this "perichosis" in the same lightWhat are the Godhead worshipping one another?Do you dance in church 'G?"On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 21:41:42 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 13:02:28 -0400 Judy Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:I know what the scriptures below mean ..I don't see what any of them have to do with a "dance".."..my feet are on the rock, my name is on the rollbut movin' and a-groovin' does not satisfy my soulso when i'm down, i go up on my ownwhen i feel moved, i dance before the throne(just like David).."
