Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XTalk] The Little Apocalypse--Part V

Expand Messages
  • mgrondin@tir.com
    ... I don t follow this logic at all. An image cannot be the same as that of which it is an image, and yet you conclude the opposite, namely that the image
    Message 1 of 2 , Aug 31 11:05 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- Frank McCoy wrote:
      > ... in declaring the Logos to be the Man, Philo emphasises that
      > he is the Image of God. Since an image reflects the original, this
      > means that God is the MAN. This, in turn, means that the Logos, as
      > he is the Son of God, is also the Son of MAN.

      I don't follow this logic at all. An image cannot be the same as
      that of which it is an image, and yet you conclude the opposite,
      namely that the image (Man) is identical with that of which it is
      an image (God)!

      Mike
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.