tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19775846.post8298687564101574796..comments2023-09-01T16:11:44.564+08:00Comments on Daniel's Place - (Reformata et semper reformanda): Paper: The Submission, Authority and Glory of the SonDaniel Chttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00678184721218949112noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19775846.post-47533006616002711722011-12-16T07:41:37.333+08:002011-12-16T07:41:37.333+08:00@Ron:
well, I don't recognize any of these pe...@Ron:<br /><br />well, I don't recognize any of these people as authorities. Their endorsements mean nothing to me, just as an endorsement by Hitler of a book on the history of the Jews holds absolutely no weight to me.Daniel Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00678184721218949112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19775846.post-38637087531448598582011-12-16T00:35:32.594+08:002011-12-16T00:35:32.594+08:00Here are some reviews of that book by Dr. Ravindra...Here are some reviews of that book by Dr. Ravindra:<br /><br />“Catches the tone and spirit of St. John and this gospel’s profound coherence with other traditions, particularly the Hindu tradition in India and of course the Bhagavad Gita.” <br />--Father Thomas Berry, coauthor of The Universe Story <br /><br />“A dazzlingly brilliant spiritual and cross-cultural study of the most mystical of the Ron Krumposhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05371279514024960026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19775846.post-29756342897541039922011-12-15T10:20:43.333+08:002011-12-15T10:20:43.333+08:00Whether it is better has to be proven. What the ti...Whether it is better has to be proven. What the title itself shows is a denial of the primacy of Scripture. I doubt a syncretistic reading is actually derived from the text of Scripture itself.Daniel Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00678184721218949112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19775846.post-55224320125577162011-12-15T10:16:38.217+08:002011-12-15T10:16:38.217+08:00Sorry, I was responding to his comment "espec...Sorry, I was responding to his comment "<i>especially as seen in mysticism which denies that we can positively know anything about God’s essence</i>. I should have pressed "more" to read the rest of the paper.<br /><br />For a fascinating (and better) exegesis I recommend "The Gospel of John in the Light of Indian Mysticism," by Ravi Ravindra (published by Inner Ron Krumposhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05371279514024960026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19775846.post-84688455417438711262011-12-15T09:58:31.063+08:002011-12-15T09:58:31.063+08:00and your point with respects to the paper is?and your point with respects to the paper is?Daniel Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00678184721218949112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19775846.post-54765638077528596852011-12-15T09:52:32.574+08:002011-12-15T09:52:32.574+08:00We cannot rationally conceive of divine essence, b...We cannot rationally conceive of divine essence, but we can have conscious awareness of being in it.<br /><br /> E=mc², Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, is probably the best known scientific equation. In my free ebook on comparative mysticism, I revised it to help better understand the relationship between divine <b>E</b>ssence (Love, Grace, Spirit), <b>m</b>atter (mass/energy: Ron Krumposhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05371279514024960026noreply@blogger.com