TheoBlog.com

Have you heard of Michael Servetus a.k.a. Miguel Servet? He was a truly amazing person. Short answer: he was a sixteenth century (1509-1553) scholar, author, translator, and theologian who attracted the ire of both the Catholic church and Calvin and his followers. You can learn more about him from the Servetus International Society and the Michael Servetus Institute.

The theology that eventually got Servetus burnt at the stake on a pyre made from his own books (literally), shares remarkable similarities with the New Christian theology presented in the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg. I wrote a paper doing a side-by-side-by-side cursory comparison, that is posted here.

The professor that first turned me on to Servetus, Rev. Dr. Andrew M. T. Dibb, just had his doctoral thesis published. It is available on Amazon, and directly from the publisher. The title is Servetus, Swedenborg And the Nature of God, and is a comparative look at the Christologies of the two theologians.

The following is from the official book description:

The Trinity was defined at the Council of Nicaea and the relationship of the human and divine natures of Christ was defined at Chalcedon. Very few questioned the Church's depictions of the nature of God. Two such mavericks, Michael Servetus (1509-1553) and Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772), in spite of their Christian educations, rejected the Church's creedal understanding of God and the Trinity. Although they lived in two different ages- the Reformation and Enlightenment, and there is no evidence that Swedenborg ever read or even knew of Servetus- the two men came to remarkably similar conclusions about the nature of God. Each scholar stated that the Trinity does not rest in three Persons, but rather takes form in the single person of Jesus Christ, the visible God.

Servetus was a superb scholar in his day. He mastered the Church Fathers and possessed an encyclopedic knowledge of the Bible. Servetus tragically perished in the flames at Geneva because of his beliefs. Swedenborg, likewise, was a well-known and respected scholar, philosopher, and anatomist. He dedicated the last thirty years of his life to biblical research, producing a series of some thirty volumes (in English) of theological writings. His work influenced many of the great thinkers and artists of the nineteenth century and continues to be read and studied in many parts of the world today.

If you are interested in Christology, the New Christian view of the Trinity, or Michael Servetus, you've got to get hold of a copy.

Posted by Mac at 8:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (1)

Dennis Prager is arguing that Judaism is suffering from a lack of understanding of their mission, in Judeo-Christian values, Part XII: The Jews have a mission:

Ask believing Christians -- probably from as young as 8 years of age -- what their mission as Christians is, and it is overwhelmingly likely they will answer, "to bring people to Christ" or "spread the Gospel." Ask any non-Christian what the Christian mission is, and you will get the same answer. Just about everyone, Christian or non-Christian, knows the Christian mission. Now ask any Jew, religious or secular, "What is the Jewish mission?" and the most likely response will be: "What do you mean?"

A fellow New Christian brought this interesting article to my attention, with the following comment:

I sense that many people in the New Church might answer "What do you mean?"

I understand what he means, and I suspect that in many instances he would be right. However, this is an example of the current New Christian culture being at variance with New Christian theology.

So to all New Christians, Swedenborgians, members of the New Church, I ask you: what is your mission as a New Christian?

Posted by Mac at 5:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Ever been to the website, ExploreFaith.org? I only just noticed it myself. One of their ads showed up in the ad banner at the top of this site here, in fact.

I haven't really given the site a thourough looking-at, but something there has caught my attention straightaway. They have a list of questions under the headings of God's Love, Your Faith, The Church, and Who We Are. In the category of "The Church", is this question:

How can Christians accept Christianity as the way to God, and still give credence to the truth and reality of other religions?

I found the opening paragraph to Dr. Marcus Borg's answer striking:

Religious pluralism is a fact of life in North America, and in the world. To absolutize one's own religion as the only way means that one sees all of the other religious traditions of the world as wrong, and dialogue, genuine dialogue, becomes impossible. Conversion can be the only goal.

What I find interesting, here, is that in most frames of reference, this is a true statement. However, from a New Christian standpoint, this presents a false dilemma.

You see, this idea they present is correct only if the person "absolutizing" their own religion believes that being right is the key to salvation.

As a New Christian, I am perfectly comfortable saying that other religions are not as correct in their theological understanding of God, Humanity and Creation as I am, and also that that's okay. I simultaneously believe that the New Church is the crown of all the churches, and that followers of other creeds will also be saved. In other words, I can "absolutize" my religion without reducing all dialogue with those of other faiths to a mere attempt to convert them.

As can be seen throughout the internal sense of the Word, it is not Truth that saves, but Good. Yes, having more truth makes doing good easier. Yes, having more truth will reduce the amount of spiritual suffering one goes through when trying to be good. But good is still possible among those who have practically no truth at all. And it is those who strive to be good—to lead lives of charity, to love their neighbor, to love their God—that find their reward in heaven. Whether they expect to or not.

For example, from Matthew:

"Then the King will say to those on His right hand, 'Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.'

"Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?'

"And the King will answer and say to them, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.' Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.'

"Then they also will answer Him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?'

"Then He will answer them, saying, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.'

"And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (Mat. 25:34-46)

This is explained in the book Arcana Coelestia here:

As for judgement it is twofold, that is to say, there is judgement from good and judgement from truth. People who have faith are judged from good, but those who do not have it are judged from truth. The fact that those who have faith are judged from good is quite clear in Matthew 25: 34-40, while those who do not have it are judged from truth, in verses 41-46. Those judged from good are saved since they have accepted good, but those judged from truth are condemned because they have rejected good. Good is the Lord's, and those who acknowledge this in life and faith are the Lord's, and are therefore saved; but those who do not acknowledge it in life, nor consequently in faith, cannot be the Lord's nor thus be saved. They are judged therefore according to the actions done in their life and according to their thoughts and ends in view. And when judged according to these they are inevitably condemned, for the truth is that of himself man can do, think, and intend nothing but evil, and of himself rushes towards hell insofar as he is not held back from that place by the Lord. The situation with regard to judgement from truth is this: The Lord never judges anyone except from good, for His will is to lift all men, however many these may be, up to heaven, indeed if it were possible, up to Himself. For the Lord is mercy itself and good itself, and mercy itself and good itself cannot possibly condemn anyone. It is man who, in rejecting good, condemns himself. As a person has fled habitually from good during his lifetime, so in the next life he flees from it, and therefore from heaven and the Lord. For the Lord cannot be present except within good. He is present in truth as well, but not in truth separated from good. That the Lord does not condemn anyone, that is, does not judge them to hell, He Himself declares in John,

God did not send His Son into the world to judge the world but that the world might be saved through Him. This is the judgement, that the light has come into the world, but men preferred darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. John 3: 17, 19.

And in the same gospel,

If anyone hears My words, yet does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. John 12: 47.

...[A]ll judgement belongs to the Lord's Divine Human and His Holy proceeding, according to the Lord's words in John,

The Father does not judge anyone, but has given all judgement to the Son. John 5: 22.

Now however it is said that the Lord does not judge anyone by condemning him. This shows the nature of the Word in the letter - that unless understood from a sense other than the letter, namely from the internal sense, it would be unintelligible. The internal sense alone shows what is really involved in judgement. (AC 2335:2-3, 4)

The final key needed to properly understand the above is the New Christian teaching that true faith is not something of the lips, or of thought, but is something that is lived. True belief in the omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God can only be truly expressed by a life of good that acknowledges that God as the source of all good.

There are countless more examples, for those who care to explore them.

Posted by Mac at 4:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

OneChristianity.org has this as its mission:

...to unify the people of the world in the name of Jesus Christ. It is our aim to make all people brothers and sisters through baptism into the one true faith in the one true God.

The first two principles of what is called there "The One True Faith" are these:

God is ONE in all respects - ONE person, ONE being, ONE essence, ONE existence, ONE will, ONE thought, ONE influence, ONE action.

Although He has many names (Adonai, Yahweh, Vishnu, El Shaddai, Allah, Jehovah, Lord God, Elohim, The Great Spirit, Father, Son, Holy Spirit, etc.), Jesus Christ is WHO He is.

What is OneChristianity.org? It's a new ministry that follows in the path of New Christianity. It is founded on the idea that each one of us is called to Pray, Serve, Read, Evangelize, and Love.

Check it out.

Posted by Mac at 3:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I knew that AA-founder Bill Wilson had been influenced by the New Church through his wife Lois Burnham. What I had not heard before was a specific explanation of the Twelve Steps as an expansion of a Swedenborgian "six-step ritual of spiritual and mutual" from something called "the Oxford movement":

Bill had stayed away from alcohol until the age of 22 because of his family history of drinking problems. Having already suffered from episodes of depression, he took his first drink at 22 and experienced a glow of self-confidence and escape from dysphoria. This was followed by his descent into alcoholism and many failed attempts at detoxifications to curb his compulsive drinking. On June 10, 1935, the date affixed to the beginning of AA, Bill had been traveling on business in Akron, Ohio, and struggling to control his urge to drink. He sat down with another alcoholic, a physician, so that both could stave off their craving for alcohol, which they succeeded in doing. He later drew on his experience with the Oxford movement, which was premised on the Swedenborgian conception of steps leading to salvation, and expanded on their six-step ritual of spiritual and mutual support into the AA creed.

This tidbit (which should be followed up on) is from Marc Galanter's "My Name Is Bill: Bill Wilson—His Life and the Creation of Alcoholics Anonymous", a review of a 2004 book with the same title, published in the May 2005 The American Journal of Psychiatry.

Posted by Mac at 7:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Swedenborgian (Convention) church in San Francisco has attendance problems like many other denominations' churches in the area:

Because its weekly attendance hovers at only about 60, the Swedenborgian Church, an exquisite Arts and Crafts building drafted by noted local architect Bernard Maybeck, supports itself largely as a wedding venue. "It's our bread and butter," says Jackie Guenter, the church's office manager and wedding coordinator, who says that in this less-than-booming economy, it hosts about 50 nuptials a year.

This is from Carol Lloyd's "Its property can become church's saving grace" in the April 24, 2005 San Francisco Chronicle.

Posted by Mac at 7:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This is from "Burrell's 'Postcards' gives the mind plenty to dwell on", Hannah Merker's April 17, 2005 MaineToday.com book review of Brian Burrell's Postcards from the Brain Museum:

"The heads of Franz Joseph Haydn, Pancho Villa, Emanuel Swedenborg, all have simply gone missing, while the brains of John Dilinger and John F. Kennedy, among others, have vanished."

People are weird.

Posted by Mac at 7:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Welcome to TheoBlog.com. There's not much here, yet, but stay tuned....

Posted by Mac at 1:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)