David, the words you are searching for are "Lagomorphic Potential". 'There is no sort of Lagomorphic potential to be found within the Brassicarapa.' - sounds very Hartian. :)
Nothing is unchanging but change. Flux. Dao. Change is the natural state of the universe; it moves like the sea's tides, between opposites like ebb and flow, high and low, front and back.
Does anyone know if/where DBH interacts directly with process thought? He mentioned theogonic becoming in the interview and gave his reasons for rejecting it. Namely, it makes God’s identity violent, transgressing actus purus and divine simplicity. God has no history, etc. I would love to hear DBH review Iain McGilchrist’s work, The Matter with Things, in which process thought factors prominently. Any leads would be appreciated!
He does so fairly consistently throughout his work, but one point I can clearly recall is in The Experience of God when he speaks on divine impassibility, simplicity etc. Can’t recall the page numbers but hope that helps somewhat
yes, we come from God, but we are not God. "Christian monism" would seem to mean: we are God, not by nature but by grace, or by participation. so no, the analogia entis is not negated. but the (neo)Thomists of the Strict Observance want to revive the "pure nature" theory and therefore want to position themselves politically to take control of power in the world...
Conversation with Hart begins at 14:30
Thank you 🙏🏿
Goodness, thank you 😅
Some interesting moments in this interview!
Nice work!
Found it:
A Separate God: The Christian Origins of Gnosticism
by Simone Petrement (Author), Carol Harrison (Translator)
What you clicked on the thumbnail to view, namely the interview, starts at 16:35
DBH is my spirit animal
David, the words you are searching for are "Lagomorphic Potential".
'There is no sort of Lagomorphic potential to be found within the Brassicarapa.' - sounds very Hartian. :)
@40:06 LOL 😆 He’s talking about Prof Ed Feser. These guys beef all the time
Does anyone know where Maximus says we are destined to become uncreated?
Nothing is unchanging but change. Flux. Dao. Change is the natural state of the universe; it moves like the sea's tides, between opposites like ebb and flow, high and low, front and back.
Does anyone know if/where DBH interacts directly with process thought? He mentioned theogonic becoming in the interview and gave his reasons for rejecting it. Namely, it makes God’s identity violent, transgressing actus purus and divine simplicity. God has no history, etc. I would love to hear DBH review Iain McGilchrist’s work, The Matter with Things, in which process thought factors prominently. Any leads would be appreciated!
He addresses process theology briefly here: ruclips.net/video/o9UAHJvML_E/видео.html
He does so fairly consistently throughout his work, but one point I can clearly recall is in The Experience of God when he speaks on divine impassibility, simplicity etc. Can’t recall the page numbers but hope that helps somewhat
Somewhere on RUclips there is a conversation between the pair.
45:00 😂
yes, we come from God, but we are not God. "Christian monism" would seem to mean: we are God, not by nature but by grace, or by participation. so no, the analogia entis is not negated. but the (neo)Thomists of the Strict Observance want to revive the "pure nature" theory and therefore want to position themselves politically to take control of power in the world...