![]() The problem is that classical theism, as especially emphasized in Aquinas, held that God was loving already and the source of joy and that we should pray to Him and seek His blessings. God has to be able to experience our love in a sort of real-time scenario and be able to experience rejection from us. God IS love.ĭolezal’s main interaction in the book is with a side of theistic mutualism whereby it is said that God needs to have what is called a real relationship with us or else it isn’t real. It means you cannot alter God in anyway and that God does not change and that He is not a composite being at all even in His attributes. That is important, to be sure, but that is not the main emphasis of simplicity. Sometimes, some people think that this means that God has no physical body. Dolezal says it is the underlying and inviolable conviction that God does not derive any aspect of His being from outside Himself and is not in any way caused to be. If you go to most of them and say God is simple, they will be thinking you are talking about God being an easy concept to understand, such as saying 2 + 2 = 4 or something of that sort. What is striking about all of this is that you have someone here saying how important this is and the majority of Protestants I fear have no idea what simplicity is. James Dolezal could be the leading voice in Protestantism on the simplicity of God and how important it is. What do I think about James Dolezal’s book published by Reformation Heritage? Let’s plunge into the Deeper Waters and find out. Nick Peters on Book Plunge: Why Christianity Is Not True Chapter 6.Nick Peters on Book Plunge: Why Christianity Is Not True Chapter 3. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |