quotes tagged with 'theology'

...we dont want a discussion to get too theological, we want to keep it practical, as though good practice did not require careful thought to direct it.

Author: J.P. Moreland, Source: Love Your God With All Your MindSaved by tabe218 in theology antiintellectualism jpmoreland 7 years ago[save this] [permalink]
It may be that this mortal existence is the only flash of eternity where we are allowed to have a veil over our minds and are allowed to experience incompleteness, pain, and sorrow, which give us such richness of experience. From this view, then, perhaps feeling lonely would not be seen as a disease condition but rather as one of the very purposes for being alive.
Pain, sorrow, suffering, and evil, then, may not be deficits to be overcome, controlled, removed, or eradicated, but rather they may be gifts from a benevolent Father that can serve as instruments for developing a divine nature. We may perhaps go so far as to see the traditionally tragic elements of life as the very tools of the trade in the construction of heavenly mansions.
Author: Robert Gleave, Source: Sorrow, Suffering, and Evil - Is There Reason to Hope?Saved by ldsphilosopher in suffering philosophy theology tragedy theodicy hedonism 12 years ago[save this] [permalink]
In the end, many of the world's thinkers and theologians have difficulties finding a way to reconcile the presence of misery with the existence of God's omniscience, omnipotence, and benevolence. The problem, it seems to me, boils down to the premise that pain, sorrow, suffering, difficulty, and misery are tragic, to be avoided at all costs, that they are definitely not part of a benevolent plan. ...
Perhaps by reexamining the beginning premise that misery is tragic and embracing the notion that it is possible for a benevolent Father in Heaven (with a divine purpose in mind) to be causally responsible for the presence of evil and sorrow in the world, we can arrive at a ... satisfying resolution.
Author: Robert Gleave, Source: Sorrow, Suffering, and Evil - Is There Reason to Hope?Saved by ldsphilosopher in philosophy theology theodicy 12 years ago[save this] [permalink]
It would not be unreasonable for a Christian to argue that since even Christ suffered on the cross, with suffering incomparable to any of our own, we have no right to ask why we suffer. To do so is impertinent, perhaps impertinent to the point of blasphemy. To complain about my suffering when faced with the suffering of Jesus Christ is, implicitly, to deny the gravity and effect of his suffering. I have no right to ask why I suffer. Here is another way to put the same point: if Jesus Christ asked the question of God’s justice while on the cross—“O God, why hast thou forsaken me?”—we have no right to think that we can avoid the same question. And if he did not receive an answer while in mortality, we have no reason to think that we can.
Author: James Faulconer, Source: Another Look at the Problem of TheodicySaved by ldsphilosopher in suffering philosophy theology theodicy 12 years ago[save this] [permalink]
I believe one could argue that, by definition, embodied beings are necessarily passive as well as active. They can be acted on; to be embodied is to be able to be affected. In technical terms, it is to be pathetic, to have things happen to one. But to be pathetic is to suffer in the broad sense of the word (and, for our purposes, suffering is not best defined as “feeling pain” because feeling pain is a species of suffering, of being affected). If an argument from the nature of embodiment were successful, it would show that it is logically contradictory to create a world without creating suffering and, therefore, evil.
Author: James Faulconer, Source: Another Look at the Problem of TheodicySaved by ldsphilosopher in philosophy theology theodicy 12 years ago[save this] [permalink]
The argument is that if God is all-loving, all-powerful, and all-knowing, then the existence of evil is inexplicable, for such a God could create a world without evil—he has the power and the knowledge to do so—and he would create it, for his love would require that he do so. According to the argument, therefore, the existence of God is incompatible with the existence of evil. For many, the suppressed conclusion is that it is irrational to believe in God if one recognizes the existence of evil, as most people do.
Author: James Faulconer, Source: Another Look at the Problem of TheodicySaved by ldsphilosopher in evil philosophy theology omnipotence theodicy 12 years ago[save this] [permalink]
The truth of Mormonism does not rest on reason. We do not draw our authority, our identity, or our mission from any set of propositions or from any interpretation of doctrine. We do not draw upon theology at all as justification for our truth claims. The truth of Mormonism rests on the occurrence of certain events.
Author: Richard Williams, Source: Faith, Knowledge, Reason, and TruthSaved by ldsphilosopher in truth doctrine reason authority mormonism theology 12 years ago[save this] [permalink]
You can do philosophy sitting on your caboose, but you do ethics on your knees.
Author: Joseph S. Hogan, S.J., Source: UnknownSaved by Doc in virtue ethics philosophy prayer theology spirituality 12 years ago[save this] [permalink]
It’s no safer to say that spiritual urges and sensations are caused by brain activity than it is to say that the neurological changes through which we experience the pleasure of eating an apple cause the apple to exist. … There is no way to determine whether the neurological changes associated with spiritual experience mean that the brain is causing those experiences … or is instead perceiving a spiritual reality
Author: Andrew Newburg, Source: http://www.meridianmagazine.com/ideas/040216neurotheology.htmlSaved by Doc in materialism theology brain spirituality neurology mysticism 12 years ago[save this] [permalink]
As a Church we have critics, many of them. They say we do not believe in the traditional Christ of Christianity. There is some substance to what they say. Our faith, our knowledge is not based on ancient tradition, the creeds which came of a finite understanding and out of the almost infinite discussions of men trying to arrive at a definition of the risen Christ. Our faith, our knowledge comes of the witness of a prophet in this dispensation who saw before him the great God of the universe and His Beloved Son, the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ. They spoke to him. He spoke with Them. He testified openly, unequivocally, and unabashedly of that great vision. It was a vision of the Almighty and of the Redeemer of the world, glorious beyond our understanding but certain and unequivocating in the knowledge which it brought. It is out of that knowledge, rooted deep in the soil of modern revelation, that we, in the words of Nephi, "talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that [we and] our children may know to what source [we] may look for a remission of [our] sins" (2 Ne. 25:26).
Author: Gordon B. Hinckley, Source: http://beta.lds.org/portal/site/LDSOrg/menuitem.b12f9d18fae655...Saved by joeyday in god christ christianity tradition mormonism theology creeds 13 years ago[save this] [permalink]

« Previous 12 » Next

tag cloud

Visit the tag cloud to see a visual representation of all the tags saved in Quoty.

popular tags