Search Results

About Us A Society of Evangelicals working out the Faith in the Latitudinarian Spirit, appropriating the best insights and philosophy of humanity under the Aegis of Jesus Christ Learn More The Discussion Forum Dominic Foo 58 phút trước The Season is the Reason for the Season Like Reactions 0 0 comments 0 Views Dominic Foo 11 giờ trước The Good Life of Aristotle vs. the Satisfied Life of the Downy; Utilitarianism vs Virtue Flourishing Like Reactions 0 0 comments 0 Views Dominic Foo 3 ngày trước How the Roman Catholic Church will Normalise Homosexuality Like Reactions 0 0 comments 0 Views Dominic Foo 5 ngày trước The Decline in Teleological, Instrumentalist and Means-Ends Reasoning in the Anglosphere Like Reactions 0 0 comments 0 Views Dominic Foo 6 ngày trước Thomas Jefferson on Sunset Clauses for the Constitution; Why the Dead cannot Oblige the Living Like Reactions 0 0 comments 0 Views Dominic Foo Dec 15 Can Non-Christians Refer to or Worship the True God? Like Reactions 0 0 comments 0 Views The Podcasts/Streams

Statement of Confession and Intent 1. The Society of Latitudinarian Evangelicals shall be constituted and maintained by them upon the following confession: The Evangelical Alliance’s Basis of Faith and the National Association of Evangelical’s Statement of Faith ; 2.1.2 to 2.1.5 and 2.1.8 of the Constitution of the Church of England Evangelical Council ; That “the doctrine of their Churches is grounded in the Holy Scriptures, and in such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the said Scriptures.” (Covenantal Structure of the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches). 2. To the following ends: To revive and continue the spirit of the Latitudinarians in articulating the Christian faith under the supremacy of Christ as revealed by the Bible. To promote and foster the common spiritual fellowship all Christians have in the Gospel especially as can be found in 1. To defend the faith with the best insights of humanity, both past and present, ever conscious of its limits in the light of our fallen nature and the necessity of the regeneration of the Holy Spirit who works as and where He pleases. To “analyze this present time” (Luke 12:56) and discern the will of God for their present circumstance. To prop ose and contribute future projects, plans, and policies for the advancement of the Kingdom of God. ​ And these members do commend this Society unto the care of the Almighty Incarnate, and pray that He may be pleased to use it to comfort the saints, strengthen the fellowship, rebuke the recalcitrant, and above all, to expand the Kingdom of God.

Follow Us Recent Posts

To see this working, head to your live site. Categories All Posts My Posts Login / Sign up Minds to the Grindstone Welcome! Have a look around and join the discussions. Create New Post Forum Rules and Policies Follow Views Posts 1 Stop by here first to learn the rules of this forum Christian Theology Follow Views Posts 23 Properly Christian theological discussion goes here. Church and Secular History Follow Views Posts 8 History concerning the Church and World goes Here Philosophy and Humanities Follow Views Posts 7 Discuss philosophy, humanities, arts and culture here Podcast/Streaming Discussion Follow Views Posts 2 React to our podcasts/streams here Apologetics Follow Views Posts 6 One stop forum for your apologetic needs and to discuss apologetic challenges. Politics and Current Affairs Follow Views Posts 10 Discussion on Current Affairs and Politics goes here Popular Culture Follow Views Posts 2 Discussions on popular culture trends, including book and movie reviews. New Posts Dominic Foo 58m The Season is the Reason for the Season Christian Theology It seems to me that while a lot of Christmas sentiment is normally centred upon the Incarnation, the God-Made-Flesh point, the gospel narratives by and large seem to focus upon the fulfilment of the hope of Israel, where after Israel had hoped, prayed, and awaited so long, God has finally answered and come. This was what made the occasion a truly joyous and happy one. I think Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov actually captured the background feeling of Christmas very well in the chapter on the Grand Inquisitor: Fifteen centuries have passed since He promised to come in His glory, fifteen centuries since His prophet wrote, ‘Behold, I come quickly’; ‘Of that day and that hour knoweth no man, neither the Son, but the Father,’ as He Himself predicted on earth. But humanity awaits him with the same faith and with the same love. Oh, with greater faith, for it is fifteen centuries since man has ceased to see signs from heaven. No signs from heaven come to‐day To add to what the heart doth say. There was nothing left but faith in what the heart doth say... But those who remained faithful were all the more ardent in their faith. The tears of humanity rose up to Him as before, awaited His coming, loved Him, hoped for Him, yearned to suffer and die for Him as before. And so many ages mankind had prayed with faith and fervor, “O Lord our God, hasten Thy coming,” so many ages called upon Him, that in His infinite mercy He deigned to come down to His servants. While this is a fictitious account of Jesus returning to visit his people in 16th century Spain, I think it does capture what the people of Israel felt in the 1st century. For centuries since the Prophet Isaiah declared the coming of the Messiah, the hope of the salvation and restoration of Israel, the people of Israel waited, prayed, and hoped. Many had fallen away since, their hearts had since ceased to believe, their faith ravaged by the passage of time. Yet many others had continued to hold to the hope of the promise and the prophecy, with greater fervour they prayed as pagan kings and rulers conquered and oppressed Israel, as the memory of God's faithfulness to Israel and the mighty works He had done for her receded further and further in time, yet for the faithful those events were an ever present moment, and they maintained that hope in their hearts. Yet as Proverbs 13:12 puts it: Hope deferred maketh the heart sick: but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life. For faithful Israel, the deferment of the hope of salvation made their hearts heavy, piety commands that they maintain that hope, but the deferment of the promised salvation sickened them with a great longing. But then suddenly, when the "desire of the nations" had come, "it is a tree of life", that is what turned their sickened hearts into joyous celebration, for at long last, the hope of Israel has come. Hope languishing against time had been given a new lease of life. God has been true to his oath. That's why you can see throughout Luke 1 and 2 the continued emphasis on the fulfilment of the promise which God swore to Israel and their Father Abraham, that he would come and visit them and perform the oath which he swore, etc. Thus, it seems to me, that the Christmas narratives in the gospels speak less about the mystery of the God-in-Flesh incarnation but more on the fulfilment of the hope of Israel. Many gods in many religions have taken flesh and have visited people unexpectedly, incarnated gods were not unusual throughout the world, what is particular about Christmas however is that it is the fulfilment of an eschatological moment, when all the covenants, oaths, prophecies, and promises issued before by God to Israel would be cashed in in the birth of Jesus, when God finally acts in time and in history to bring to fruition the plan of Salvation issued before. We are living in the Dostoevskyian moment, after the First Coming and awaiting the Second Coming, 2000 years have passed since we were promised Christ's dominion over the world, and we wait still for that fulfilment. However, many of us, like Israel of old, had since ceased to believe, or our hearts had been so sickened by the deferred hope that it is close to death. The hope we habour of God does not have to be anything as cosmic as the dominion of Christ over the world, it could be whether God will "visit" us in our own lives in our specific space and time. Maybe we had hoped something of God for ourselves but year after year, prayer after prayer, it has gone unanswered, and over time, the sickening of the heart approaches death. Yet, the Christmas narrative tells us, we will not wait in vain, some day in the future, that hope will be fulfilled, Jesus will come, and He did come long ago, and He will come again. As Proverbs says "but when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life". When, not if, He does "visit" us, we would rejoice as Simeon, Zacharias and Mary once did of old, when God finally visited Israel with the promised Messiah, his very own Son. So let us remember the reason for the Season, it is the acceptable Season itself, that eschatological moment when God decided to make sacred that moment of history once for all: Anno Domini, and consummate all his promises, oaths, and covenants. A very Happy Christmas to one and all. Like 0 comments 0 Dominic Foo 11h The Good Life of Aristotle vs. the Satisfied Life of the Downy; Utilitarianism vs Virtue Flourishing Philosophy and Humanities Recently Richard Dawkins said on radio that it is "wise and sensible" to abort children with Down Syndrome as that would "increase the amount of happiness in the world". While a seemingly utilitarian sentiment, but this is qualified by the fact that first, Aristotle himself supported such a eugenic policy, and secondly, a friend of mine pointed out that downies are on average happier than most other people, with simple cares and simple wants. If downies however are happier than most people, then a simple utilitarian calculus would support fostering and raising them. But here we come to a famous objection by, ironically John Stuart Mill when it came to his own utilitarian theory. It is basically the "qualitative happiness" objection. It was objected that if the object of ethics was maximising happiness, why shouldn't we frame society just to maximise the simplest pleasures instead of pursuing the higher, and more difficult, goods which involves lots of suffering in the process? That's where his famous saying concerning the superiority of Socrates dissatisfied than a pig satisfied comes in. Thus Socrates, with his superior development of higher abilities, more robust character, and greater flourishing, even if he was rendered miserable by his philosophical activities, was objectively "better" than a mere pig with lower abilities but easily satisfied with its slop. But given the Christian ethic of preserving and saving the downy without regard for their ability to flourish or develop a robust or deep character, must surely reject the fundamental premise of Aristotle for "the good life", whereby "good" is defined in terms of human flourishing and development, which clearly is impossible for the downy. The downy is capable of a "good life" because he can still contribute to society and is capable of "happiness" defined in the utilitarian desire-satisfaction manner. Given the Christian egalitarian affirmation of all life qua life without regard for its "quality" or deeper flourishing or character/virtue development in the Aristotelian sense, the Christian ethic must be fundamentally utilitarian, prizing the satisfaction of desires over the development of the self, a satisfaction all persons including the downy is capable of. Some people to be sure have desires for "higher" goals and "higher" goods, but all are equal before God in the sense that we define a good life in the sense of having satisfied one's desires for the riches and goods of God, be they high or low, great or humble. The person who enjoys the "higher goods" of an exquisite mathematical proof or symphony is no more pleasing to God compared to a downy simply enjoying a chocolate ice cream on a warm day. In the end we once more note the fundamental divergence between the Christian ethic, with its fundamental "pro-life" or vitalist approach of valuing life qua life in the materialistic sense, over the classical ethic whereby a person is to be valued for the "quality" of his life, valuable only in so far as "well-lived", defined in elitist terms, of which the downy is incapable of, and therefore to be exterminated in Aristotle's polity. It is very hard, and I would contend, impossible to reconcile the universal ethic of love of Christianity for all creatures, without regard for their status or even biological abilities, with an ethic which fundamentally prizes human flourishing, the development of the self, the nurture of character, the exercise of virtues, which fundamentally requires abilities which not all are capable of, and therefore valueless in his polity. Like 0 comments 0 Dominic Foo 3d How the Roman Catholic Church will Normalise Homosexuality Current Church Affairs The Church does not disapprove of a loving relationship between same-sex individuals that is chaste and faithful but a sexual relationship between same-sex individuals as it is not in accordance with the divine plan of God. Same-sex inclination in itself is not a sin but as love often seeks to express itself physically, the challenge to be chaste and faithful to the divine plan of God is ever present. -Archbishop William Goh: Pastoral Letter To Catholics With Same-sex Orientation In the light of the unusual gesture by our local Archbishop to publicly legitimise celibate same-sex relationships as an alternative to marriage, I have a guess at how the Roman Church will cave in to the homosexual lobby while claiming that everything is perfectly consistent with their nitpicking canon law and constantly gerrymandered "Tradition". First, in place of monogamous marriage, they will promote monogamous but sexually celibate same-sex relationships. Then these Roman same-sex couples will start entering into civil unions, not marriages. And since canon law and their tradition is essentially silent about civil unions, they would have no grounds to refuse it. Then some of them will be calling for church "blessings" of these same-sex civilly union couple. They will say, oh, we are not saying that we are celebrating the sacrament of marriage, just a prayer of blessing for our celibate same-sex relationship which is endorsed by the church anyway. So how can they refuse? On what possible theological grounds can they say no? Which canon or church document can they cite? Then what we have here is a normalised homosexual marriage in all but name. They will function exactly like a married couple, they will live together and do everything together, heck they can even adopt children because there is nothing in canon law which says they cant. And then now and then they will "fall into sin" and have sex, but then they can just go to a priest and confess on Sunday and everything will be a okay as their priest absolves them with a nod and a wink. Wash, rinse, repeat. Thus, so what you have here is Church endorsement of gay marriage in all but name. But of course, everything will be perfectly legal according to canon law and perfectly consistent with the never changing Magisterium of the Church and everything will be all jolly and fabulous and great because all Jesus is concerned with is that his disciples obey canon law and believe documents generated by the Vatican bureaucratic machinery. Dont believe me? The present Pope has already suggested the legitimacy of same-sex civil unions. It is a very real and distinct possibility. Like 0 comments 0 Forum - Frameless