It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Theology: Prayer

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Theophorus
 



Originally posted by Theophorus
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Not to be disrespectful in anyway, but you seem a little bit harsh towards NYT.


Really? Harsh? Me? Honestly, I'm being harsh for a reason.



FYI , theology would be defined as the study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.


...which is what I said earlier on.



Question is,is how is this NOT theology?


Wow, a thumbs down after you say something I already stated and then ignore all of my other posts. How is this not theolgoy? Well, there's no rational inquiry into religious questions, there's a statement of doctrinal position and that's about it.




posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 08:06 AM
link   
I didn't want to do this...


1: the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world


Merriam-Webster



1. The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.


The Free Online Dictionary



1. the field of study and analysis that treats of God and of God's attributes and relations to the universe; study of divine things or religious truth; divinity.


Dictionary.com



The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.


Answers.com



The word “theology” comes from two Greek words that combined mean “the study of God.” Christian theology is simply an attempt to understand God as He is revealed in the Bible.... The study of theology, then, is nothing more than digging into God’s Word to discover what He has revealed about Himself.


Got Questions?




THREE times in this thread I've stated "Theology is the study of God and His nature."






posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Finally, CAN WE MOVE ON?



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Finally, CAN WE MOVE ON?


To something which will conveniently fit with your preaching?

As an alternative I repeat my earlier suggestion, that a comparative and general perspective is used on theology and prayer.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 




The Fig Tree

The question of great moment, therefore, is what the fig tree represents. Many commentators throughout church history have agreed that it represents the nation of Israel. In this symbolism Jesus is alluding to a vision of Jeremiah.

1 The LORD shewed me, and, behold, two baskets of figs were set before the temple of the LORD, after that Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon had carried away captive Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, and the princes of Judah, with the carpenters and smiths, from Jerusalem, and had brought them to Babylon.
2 One basket had very good figs, even like the figs that are first ripe: and the other basket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they were so bad.
3 Then said the LORD unto me, What seest thou, Jeremiah? And I said, Figs; the good figs, very good; and the evil, very evil, that cannot be eaten, they are so evil.
4 Again the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
5 Thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel; Like these good figs, so will I acknowledge them that are carried away captive of Judah, whom I have sent out of this place into the land of the Chaldeans for their good.
6 For I will set mine eyes upon them for good, and I will bring them again to this land: and I will build them, and not pull them down; and I will plant them, and not pluck them up.
7 And I will give them an heart to know me, that I am the LORD: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God: for they shall return unto me with their whole heart.
8 And as the evil figs, which cannot be eaten, they are so evil; surely thus saith the LORD, So will I give Zedekiah the king of Judah, and his princes, and the residue of Jerusalem, that remain in this land, and them that dwell in the land of Egypt:
9 And I will deliver them to be removed into all the kingdoms of the earth for their hurt, to be a reproach and a proverb, a taunt and a curse, in all places whither I shall drive them.
10 And I will send the sword, the famine, and the pestilence, among them, till they be consumed from off the land that I gave unto them and to their fathers.

Jeremiah 24:1-10

The prophet saw the people of Israel as two groups of figs, one good, the other bad. The Lord told him that the good figs, representing the godly portion of the nation, would someday be planted like a fig tree, never to be rooted up. The same imagery occurs more than once during Jesus' ministry. For example, He uttered the following parable about a year before His death.

6 He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none.
7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?
8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it:
9 And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.

Luke 13:6-9

The standard interpretation is that the owner is the Father, the keeper is Christ, and tree is Israel. If this interpretation is correct, the meaning of the parable is transparent. Jesus' ministry has gone on for three years without any fruit and the Father is ready to set Israel aside, but the Son pleads for the nation, asking that it be cultivated another year and given another chance. But notice Jesus' view of the fig tree a year later, after the year of prolonged opportunity had passed by.

11 And Jesus entered into Jerusalem, and into the temple: and when he had looked round about upon all things, and now the eventide was come, he went out unto Bethany with the twelve.
12 And on the morrow, when they were come from Bethany, he was hungry:
13 And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet.
14 And Jesus answered and said unto it, No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever. And his disciples heard it.
15 And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves;
16 And would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through the temple.
17 And he taught, saying unto them, Is it not written, My house shall be called of all nations the house of prayer? but ye have made it a den of thieves.
18 And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was astonished at his doctrine.
19 And when even was come, he went out of the city.
20 And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots.
21 And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away.

Mark 11:11-21

Why did Jesus curse the fig tree—a mere tree whose only fault was that it had not yet borne fruit? The incident is obviously symbolic. The day before the cursing of the tree was Palm Sunday, the day of Jesus' Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, when He presented Himself to the people and their leaders as the Messiah, in fulfillment of Zechariah 9:9. The response of the nation was divided. Although some individuals accepted Him, the nation as a whole rejected Him. In particular, the elders of the people rejected and severely opposed Him (Matt. 21:15).

Therefore, in His justice and holiness, God rejected the Jewish nation. Subsequently, less than forty years later, in A.D. 70, God judged the Jews by destroying their city and scattering them throughout the civilized world. Now it should be perfectly clear why Jesus cursed the fig tree on the morning after His triumphal entry. The two incidents are linked together. The cursing of the tree was a picture of the judgment that would soon fall on Israel because Israel had rejected their Messiah. Now it should also be perfectly clear what the parable of the fig tree in the Olivet Discourse means. As the disciples were walking into the city on Tuesday morning after Palm Sunday, they noticed that the tree which Jesus had cursed the day before had withered and dried up. Later, on Tuesday evening, when the memory of the withered fig tree was still fresh in their minds, Jesus spoke the parable in question. He said that when the church sees the fig tree leafing out again, it will know that "it is . . . at the doors." The Greek for "it is" can also be translated "he is." In prophecy, "door" is often a symbol for the passageway between heaven and earth (Rev. 4:1). What the parable means, therefore, is that when the nation of Israel revives after its coming disintegration and death in A.D. 70, the return of Christ will be imminent.


Signs of Israel's Rebirth: The Fig Tree Parable




"The Fig Tree" is always an allegorical metaphor for the nation of Israel throughout scripture.

"What the parable means, therefore, is that when the nation of Israel revives after its coming disintegration and death in A.D. 70, the return of Christ will be imminent."

Like I said, YOU are in the "this generation" Christ spoke of.
edit on 6-3-2011 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I see, so you're just going to go along with the post-hoc arguments then? You're going to fit the declarations of the document with the information rather than reading what's there on paper?

Jesus compared how fig trees are an indicator of seasonal change to how the signs he mentions are an indicator of the end times.

On theology, study is the key word. As in to look into things, to research. Not to preach.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 



Yes, I realize this. I study, and share my thoughts of my study.

Do you admit now the term Theology means the study of God and His nature?



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Post hoc? Lol, what does the parable have to do with the order of events? Scripture is used to interperet scripture. People think Revelation is allegory, but those are poor scholars, the book is in code with all the references decoded with other verses throughout scripture.

Read 2 Thesselonians. The apostles themselves didn't even teach Jesus was referring to them when He made the "this generation" statement. I'll say it again:

Madness, YOU are in the "this generation" Jesus spoke of. This has been the "end times" since 1948.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


You wrote:

["Scripture is used to interperet scripture."]

A perfect circle-argument.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 



Yes, I realize this. I study, and share my thoughts of my study.

Do you admit now the term Theology means the study of God and His nature?


Not A specific 'god' or THE 'god'.

'God' in general, as a concept in an inductive category.

Examples from such a study have no external 'absolute' value in the study per se, except as a demonstration of values/etc being part of the religion considered. Simply something in a 'test-tube' to be looked at.

The Big Bang theory is not overall 'Cosmology', Behaviourism is not overall 'Psychology', consumerism is not overall 'Sociology'.
edit on 6-3-2011 by bogomil because: clarification



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 



On theology, study is the key word. As in to look into things, to research. Not to preach.

sorry to butt in once again, but your are wrong. the key word is not 'study' as a scientist researches and studies the universe in which he never fully comes to an absolute truth, Rather its absolute truth in which the theologian studies. Key word would be "truth". NurT made it clear of these truths in which the theologian studies.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Theophorus
 


You wrote:

["......Rather its absolute truth in which the theologian studies. Key word would be "truth"."]

That's quite an extensive mouthful, you've taken upon yourself there (even just by 'defining' it).



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Theophorus
 


Actually, not at all. Theology doesn't deal with truths, it deals with ideas regarding the metaphysical concepts of gods, either inside or outside a religious tradition. These ideas are often contradictory. For example, within Christian theology there are three main schools of thought on redemption. There are several schools of thought on prayer within Christianity, there are also several schools of thought regarding scriptural influence on theological thought.

This thread ignores all of that and simply decided to preach one idea within one tradition. It ignores all sorts of basics within theology.



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Sorry wrong again. The definition is clear. 'Theology is the rational and systematic study of religion and its influences and of the nature of religious truth' -en.wikipedia.org...

your problem is is that you have no concept of what truth is, never mind religious truth. How can anyone ever have an intelligent conversation regarding religion if we have no clear concept of what truth is? Your arguments are pointless and quite drab.perhaps maybe you should take a rudimentary theology class before you embarrass yourself anymore



posted on Mar, 6 2011 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Theophorus
 


Don't bother linking definitions, he doesn't care what they are as you can see from earlier in this thread.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 02:26 AM
link   
God is spiritual. The mysteries of God are known by men when they hunger for this knowledge. Hunger for the spiritual. Men need to become aware of the spiritual aspect of themselves and need to let themselves grow up in it ascending the world of the sentences into the spiritual realm, alive. First there needs to be the hunger for the spiritual otherwise none of it will and can be realised.

It's a total transformation of man. Very few attain enlightement.

Jesus prepared this road for his diciples.

I'm reading a book on the subject, it explains very good the way to enlightment. Very great understanding in the matter. I didn't find it in english. I suppose his other books are very good too. Konrad Dietzfelbinger is the authors name. Good luck on your road. Never forget to pray.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


are you posting in the wrong thread?



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
THREE times in this thread I've stated "Theology is the study of God and His nature."



And for those that accept that god is inherent in all things, that would encompass the natural sciences, they are integral to many of the religious teachings after all. For those who believe that man is a microcosm of god, then psychology and most of medical science can be encompassed within your definition of theology also. Or the development of those disciplines can anyway. Certain psychological methods are comparable to the concepts of confession and prayer, that is where psychology evolved from, most particularly influenced by Jesuit practices.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Theophorus
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


Sorry wrong again. The definition is clear. 'Theology is the rational and systematic study of religion and its influences and of the nature of religious truth' -en.wikipedia.org...

your problem is is that you have no concept of what truth is, never mind religious truth. How can anyone ever have an intelligent conversation regarding religion if we have no clear concept of what truth is? Your arguments are pointless and quite drab.perhaps maybe you should take a rudimentary theology class before you embarrass yourself anymore


So when do we get around to the 'rational and systematic study.....'?

Sofar I've only seen presentations of doctrinal points.

You could become an example of 'rational and systematic study' on this thread by initiating a process leading towards 'the concept truth', which you talk ABOUT in a round-about way, but never approach directly. Truth is certainly a subject worth considering.

So do you have any suggestions?

(PS The rest of your post sets its own standards. And are you talking as an individual or as a representative of some christian group? Do you feel, that trying to establish a sandbox-hierarchy on 'authority'/'knowing' gives credibility to your claims?).



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Within days, things will clearly be understood.



new topics




 
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join