 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 12/4/2001 6:47 PM (GMT -6) |   | In "God Loves Gays" we have begun talking about issues related to the God of the Old Testament verses (apparently) the God of the New Testament, revealed in Christ. I'd think the topic deserves its own thread. Lets get gutsy. Lets take this head on. This has bugged me for many many years. I’m hoping our discussion can shed some light on the topic.
I 'd like to start by raising a general question (I), and then a specific question (II).
I. The General Question
The general question concerns how Christians should read the Old Testament. An episode from the ministry of Jesus really highlights the issue. In Luke 9:53-55 the disciples are irate because a town has rejected them and Jesus. The passage continues:
" When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, "Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them [as Elijah did]?" But Jesus turned and rebuked them [and said, "you don’t know what spirit you are of, for the Son of Man has not come to destroy the lives of human beings but to save them." ]
The texts in brackets are lacking in some ancient manuscripts but at the very least reflect a widespread understanding in the early church of the implications of what Jesus was saying. (On the standard assumption that more difficult readings are to be preferred over simpler understandings – viz. its easier to see why a scribe would simplify a text rather than make it more complex – one would think the scales would be tipped in favor of the bracketed verses, all other things being equal).
In any event, the passage is extremely significant, for here the disciples are asking Jesus to act like Yahweh acted in the Elijah episode – and Jesus REBUKES them, adding, or implying, "you don’t know what spirit you are of…" Jesus is suggesting that the disciples are in error for thinking they could find anything normative about the Mt. Carmel massacre in the Old Testament, now that Christ has come.
What implications does this have for us? Jesus clearly believed the Old Testament was inspired, yet he here relegates a portion of it to a secondary status, for it is inconsistent with how God is revealing himself in his own ministry. Would we err if we adopted a similar attitude? However I explain it, are we justified in dismissing – at least as normative for us – depictions of God in the Old Testament that are contrary to the definitive revelation we find in Christ?
II. A Specific Question
Here’s my specific question. Aside from the holy massacre of the Canaanites, the biblical story that has most disturbed me over the years concerns Elisha. Just after Elijah had been taken up into the clouds, and just after receiving a double portion of the blessing that was on his predessor, the Bible says, Elisha "went up from there to Bethel; and while he was going up on the way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him, saying, "Go away, baldhead! Go away, baldhead!" When he turned around and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two she-bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys." 2 Kg 2:23-24.
The term "small" (qatanl) can be translated "young" "least" "little" lesser". The term "boy" (na’ar) can be translated "young man" "child" "underling" or, in some contexts, "servant." However you slice it, its clear that these were young people, perhaps children, shouting silly child-like slogans at the holy man.
Now, will someone please tell me how on earth it was just for Elisha to curse them and for God (apparently) to then send bears to maul them? (By the way, the term "maul" (baqa) means "divided," "ripped apart" "split apart" etc.,… NOT a pretty picture. They WEREN’T simply injured (as I was hoping).
Now, however we explain it (perhaps later in this thread?), do you think we are warranted, on the basis of the precedent set by Jesus, in concluding that this passage tells me nothing about God? Out of fidelty to Jesus, we confess, along with him, that its inspired. But also out of fidelty to Jesus, we conclude that this passage is "of a different spirit" than the spirit of Jesus’ ministry?
What do you think? Lets share the problem.
Doc
Ps. For all the guardians of truth who search this website for ammo to be used at the next ETS or BGC meeting – yes I know you’re there, you little rascals – I get e-mails of your reports!!! – know that this posting is a THOUGHT EXPERIMENT. This means I am NOT advocating this as a conclusion. I am EXPLORING these things as possibilities. This is something we who don’t yet know all truth do sometimes. So I DON’T give you permission to quote me. Love ya though.
"Three is the magic number, oh yes it is, it's the Magic Number" - De La Soul | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Triskal
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 198
| Posted 12/4/2001 7:46 PM (GMT -6) | | THANK YOU, DOC! Finally someone else on the board has decided to get people going on this question! I don't have time at the moment, but am very anxious to respond to your questions when I have more time. I'd also like to post some verses that the "God Hates Fags" website uses to claim that God hates sinners. It will have to wait till tommorow though. Unfortunately I have a midterm test in chemistry tommorow and I haven't even started studying yet. 
In His Grip,
Matt
"In Him we live and move and have our being" - Acts 17:28 | | Back to Top | | |
|
Semeia
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522
| Posted 12/4/2001 8:48 PM (GMT -6) | | Doc, I’ll just throw this out here, in the spirit of your post. This is not necessarily a BELIEF as much as it is an IDEA. One reason the open view appeals to me is because I think if the future weren’t open God would die of boredom—He’d just hang himself from the nearest galaxy. (My apologies if that offended anyone, the hour is late.) One way I’ve looked at the Old Testament—and I just know this is going to make people mad at me, because of all the “omnis”—is that I read the stories and it seems to me that God LEARNS. That he tries things—like wiping out everything with the flood—and yet the world full of new people still have a lot of the old problems, so there’s no point in doing that again. He seems sometimes like a young parent—so much harder on the first kids, by the time the last one comes around the methods are completely different. Imagine learning and growing for thousands of years: you might start out ripping kids apart for calling someone “bald-head”, and you might end up with the most radical expression of love in Jesus Christ. I mean, my oldest is 10, and I’m practically a genius compared to where I started as a parent. I definitely started out trying to enforce The Law, and I’ve ended up at Forgiveness and Love as the only methods of merit—although the Law is still there as a guideline.
Does anyone else think that God learns? I know it throws a whole monkey wrench in the omniscience thing, but it's hard for me to picture how life would be worth living, even for God, if He couldn't learn and grow. As I follow my thought it seems that I am suggesting that God is not perfect (maybe this is what Mephi is getting at on the other thread)--and yet if I had to choose between perfection (knowing all things), and being able to discover and learn and grow (which seem to me essential properties of life) I would choose learning. Jesus ministry didn't start until the end of his life. What was he doing before that, if not learning?
If you were God, would you rather have perfect knowlege--or would you rather be a changing, growing, living creature like the ones you created in your own image?
I do believe that Jesus ministry changes everything about the Old Testament. His words trump everything that came before, and everything that came after.
Anyway, this is my contribution to the brainstorming, at 1:50 am... 
Thanks,
Semeia
"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 12/5/2001 1:17 AM (GMT -6) | | Semeia, my friend, I'm going to be very, very frank.
quote:
Semeia: One way I’ve looked at the Old Testament—and I just know this is going to make people mad at me, because of all the “omnis”—is that I read the stories and it seems to me that God LEARNS. That he tries things—like wiping out everything with the flood—and yet the world full of new people still have a lot of the old problems, so there’s no point in doing that again. He seems sometimes like a young parent—so much harder on the first kids, by the time the last one comes around the methods are completely different. Imagine learning and growing for thousands of years: you might start out ripping kids apart for calling someone “bald-head”, and you might end up with the most radical expression of love in Jesus Christ.
That is one of THE most troubling aspects present among OpenThesists (I'm not). Go THAT route and you might as well all become Dispensationalists. With that read on scritpure you miss mega-ly the unfolding...
I can buy a razzle-dazzle flexibility of God getting-things-done while working with humanity "until the fullness of time" when a Virgin shall conceive is finally the now. Be carefull, though, my friend. God talks to US who are children. It is our CHILDISHNESS that can make him seem like he learns. (Christ KNEW humanity, the Gospels teach!)
There.
PotOnWheel
(ISA 64:8 "Yet, O Lord, you are our Father. We are the clay, you are the potter; we are all the work of your hand.")
| | Back to Top | | |
|
writerdad
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 448
| Posted 12/5/2001 1:34 AM (GMT -6) | | DOc: on question two: it has been suggested by some scholars I have read (and as I am writing this it is four in morning and I have been pushed out of my bed by two of my children, which I might add never happens to my loving wife who is an immovable rock when sleeping, but don't tell her I compared her to a rock, but I only write this to say don't hold me to this as far as the information goes, but I will try and find it) that the "youths" could be older and that the taunts were threats and what we could be talking about is a gang of, say, teenagers who were taunting the prophet and were about to take his life. That is one of the takes on a story that has bugged me as well.
On the first question, it could be simply that Jesus is pointing out to his disciples that such things in the OT were simply not normative for God, because God is longsuffering and even though I (Jesus) am God's appointed one, don't expect them to be normative for me either.
I would recommend, by the way, Yancey's book The Bible Jesus Read. It is a wonderful take on the OT for the layman, esprecially his chapter of reading the Psalms. Harold the PhD
Edited by - writerdad on 12/05/2001 06:36:19 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
selah
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210
| Posted 12/5/2001 2:35 AM (GMT -6) | | just a passing thought:
THIS is why I LOOOOOOOOVE the Word of God! It challenges the greatest of scholars, yet, my youngest child 'gets it'. It's like a multi-faceted diamond that you look deeper and deeper into all your days. Beautiful.
We are able to seek continually and GROW in our relationship no matter our age or level of education. To me, this is further proof of the authenticity of the Bible.
If we could figure it all out, wouldn't our relationship with Him become stagnant?
God is cool,
selah
"Then He showed me the river whose waters give life, sparkling like crystal, flowing out from the throne of God and of the Lamb." Rev. 22:1 | | Back to Top | | |
|
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 12/5/2001 5:42 AM (GMT -6) | | I'm shaking as I write this. I am starting to go CRAZY here! I can see absolutely NO ROOM to say that God LEARNS. God is PEFECT AMEN. PERIOD!
The open view makes perfect sense since God is working with us (imperfect people) and allowing us libertarian freewill. This makes sense. BUT to now say that God changed in His character or to say that GOD LEARNS is borderline blasphemy!
Give me MANY,MANY scriptures that back up this thought of God changing and LEARNING.
I AM CONCERNED!
trosie
| | Back to Top | | |
|
pia†desideria
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 301
| Posted 12/5/2001 5:44 AM (GMT -6) | | Someone should say something about Marcion (c. 84–160 CE). He was condemned as a heretic and excommunicated for rejecting the Hebrew Scriptures because he believed they portrayed God as evil and contradicted what Christ revealed about God. But both his interpretation of God as portrayed in Hebrew Scriptures and God as portrayed in Christ were seriously distorted by his own presuppositions about what God "must" be like. He believed that matter was evil, therefore he rejected the God who created matter, and he denied the humanity of Christ. Could the presuppositions we have about what God "must" be like be distorting our understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures AND our understanding Jesus?
I think our hermeneutics could stand to be a little more circular—we have no problem interpreting Scripture through the lense of our presuppositions, but we seem to be a little weak on letting Scripture shape our presuppositions.… pia
~·•·~·•·~·•·~·•·~
I think we are in “violent agreement” most of the time. § Iconoclast
Edited by - pia†desideria on 12/05/2001 12:23:16 PM | | Back to Top | | |
|
pia†desideria
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 301
| Posted 12/5/2001 5:50 AM (GMT -6) | | Someone should also say something about the long history of Anti-Semetism and Supersessionism that has led Christians to carichature, disparage, and dismiss the powerful witness of the Hebrew Bible to God’s relationship with the chosen people, the nations, and the creation. I know this is not behind Doc’s inquiry, but given this long, sad history of tension, let’s be clear about what we’re NOT questioning. pia
~·•·~·•·~·•·~·•·~
I think we are in “violent agreement” most of the time. § Iconoclast | | Back to Top | | |
|
Mephi2K
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 713
| Posted 12/5/2001 5:52 AM (GMT -6) | | Doc said:
"But also out of fidelty to Jesus, we conclude that this passage is "of a different spirit" than the spirit of Jesus’ ministry?"
If by "Jesus' ministry" you mean NEW TESTAMENT ministry, then I only have 3 words for you...
Ananias and Sapphiras
What.
Definitely more later,
See, if you'd JUST believe like me, you'd have none of these namby pamby problems with the Old Testament. You betta come on in... | | Back to Top | | |
|
pia†desideria
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 301
| Posted 12/5/2001 6:09 AM (GMT -6) | | " When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, "Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them [as Elijah did]?" But Jesus turned and rebuked them [and said, "you don’t know what spirit you are of, for the Son of Man has not come to destroy the lives of human beings but to save them." ]
Is this verse enough to counteract Jesus’ many many many references the Hebrew Scriptures: i.e. he cited them at the inauguration of his ministery, as his last words, as rebukes of the devil when he was tempted. Jesus was not just transfigured by himself—he was accompanied by Moses (the Law) and Elijah (the Prophets). He did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. I do not deny that many many MANY nasty things happy in the Hebrew Bible that I have major problems with and no explanation in sight, but I do deny that we should question the legitimacy of these Scriptures because we don’t get it. Personally, I’m with Jacob. I refuse to stop wrestling with these texts until the Lord wounds me or blesses me or both. WWF pia
~·•·~·•·~·•·~·•·~
I think we are in “violent agreement” most of the time. § Iconoclast | | Back to Top | | |
|
ScottEmerson
Registered Member
Date Joined Dec 2001
Total Posts : 17
| Posted 12/5/2001 6:16 AM (GMT -6) | | 'Yello, all!
(Okay, so I'm new here, and I'm trying to "catch up" on past posts.) I thought I'd quickly chime in regarding the second part of Doc's thread. After a long discussion in a Hebrew class while at school, we came to the conclusion that the part translated "Go on up, you baldhead" was a specific threat aimed at Elisha from youths (who were, by all intents and purposes, young men). God acted in His and Elisha's best interests, whether one believes in an open view or not.
SEC
Nobody teaches a plant to grow. If I water and care for her, she grows on her own. - F. Perls | | Back to Top | | |
|
Semeia
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522
| Posted 12/5/2001 6:43 AM (GMT -6) | | Pow and Trosie, Hey, did you guys miss the part about this being a "thought experiment"? Did you miss where Doc asked us to "get gutsy" and brainstorm? I offered an IDEA, not a BELIEF... but either way why are you reacting to it? Are you saying that it is wrong to ask questions? Is it wrong to present ideas, to be in process on something? It really frustrates me to have you come back at me when Doc clearly opened this up to speculation. Is it dangerous heresy to ask questions or consider possibilities?
Perhaps our whole idea of perfection is wrong, because we see it from a finite view. Perhaps perfection isn't some static complete knowledge; perhaps perfection is always moving toward life in any circumstance. God is so far above and beyond anything that I can imagine--the gulf between what he knows and what I know is unimaginably vast--that the question of what perfection looks like isn't one that my faith hangs upon. I love God. He's all I could ever hope for. I'm guessing God's not mad at me for trying to understand Him, for trying to get to know who He is. The command is to Love God with all your heart--and I do, to the depths of my being.
God came up with Complex Adaptive Systems, the identity of which changes as they grow. I'm getting at something like that. If He's in relationship with us, why couldn't he grow and change? I think of relationship as two people changing through each other and with each other. Is it heretical to ask questions about God, or about what perfection even means? Is perfection sending a pack of bears down to rip apart a group of boys? I offered some honest thoughts about it.
Please, make your contribution to the brainstorming, but don't condemn me for mine. Doc asked. Love you guys, but you're not being fair here.
Thanks,
Semeia
"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard | | Back to Top | | |
|
pia†desideria
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 301
| Posted 12/5/2001 7:46 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
From time to time the Church becomes aware that it doesn’t understand very well certain parts of its own vital text; however, it clings on to it, since it realizes that, whatever that original experience was, it still happens today, and it still transforms the perceptions of those who are affected by it. That means that when we look at this text we are asked to tread with care, like Moses before the bush, so that we don’t fail to notice that this text, unlike most other texts, is capable of subverting our education, of altering our perception, and of questioning our prejudices and resentments. When we say that this text is "Holy Scripture," we don’t mean to say that it is venerable, with a patina of glorious tradition, or something like that. We mean that we don’t question it so as to break it, but rather we allow it to get close enough to us to produce a break in us. If we can hear the parts of the text which make no sense, rather than only those parts which we use to justify ourselves and strengthen our self-image, then perhaps from within that same sense of strangeness we will hear the Other whose image we are called to recover. ~ James Alison, Raising Abel
POW pia
~·•·~·•·~·•·~·•·~
I think we are in “violent agreement” most of the time. § Iconoclast | | Back to Top | | |
|
churchmouse522
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 163
| Posted 12/5/2001 7:55 AM (GMT -6) | | Hi All,
I just would like to chime in initially that I love that this board is a place where you can ask a question without the fear of being branded a heretic and burned at the stake. I have a sense that I kind of know most of you through your writing, and I think it's safe to say that many of us are passionate and emotional. Chill Beloved!
Semeia: you slay me. Question away. You are going to be the wisest old woman some day with a pocket full of maybes.
Trosie and POW: I understand your strong reaction. Just pad it a bit.
Pia: good cautions. There's so much about the Old Testament that I just adore, and I wouldn't want to be the one dividing this baby like a pseudo-Solomon. It's good to be humbled by things you don't always understand.
Doc: you really are the most fearless person I know. Bless you big time.
Mouse
"We're never gonna survive unless we get a little crazy." Seal | | Back to Top | | |
|
Semeia
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522
| Posted 12/5/2001 8:25 AM (GMT -6) | | Mouse, Talk about wise...  Thanks for the word. I am definitely going to try to chill! I accept any and all prayers in my direction to accomplish that! PoW and Trosie-- I'm sorry I came back at you so hard. I'm feeling a little beleaguered these days. I love you guys.
Pia, I loved your quote: quote:
From time to time the Church becomes aware that it doesn’t understand very well certain parts of its own vital text; however, it clings on to it, since it realizes that, whatever that original experience was, it still happens today, and it still transforms the perceptions of those who are affected by it. That means that when we look at this text we are asked to tread with care, like Moses before the bush, so that we don’t fail to notice that this text, unlike most other texts, is capable of subverting our education, of altering our perception, and of questioning our prejudices and resentments. When we say that this text is "Holy Scripture," we don’t mean to say that it is venerable, with a patina of glorious tradition, or something like that. We mean that we don’t question it so as to break it, but rather we allow it to get close enough to us to produce a break in us. If we can hear the parts of the text which make no sense, rather than only those parts which we use to justify ourselves and strengthen our self-image, then perhaps from within that same sense of strangeness we will hear the Other whose image we are called to recover. ~ James Alison, Raising Abel
Is the rest of the book that good?
Thanks,
Semeia
"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard | | Back to Top | | |
|
pia†desideria
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 301
| Posted 12/5/2001 8:29 AM (GMT -6) | | Semeia, you would love this book. I thought of you the whole time I read it. Are you familiar with Reneé Girard? Alison draws on mimetic theory and the Bible to show how the “risen victim” frees us from the “death story” to tell new stories out of an “eschatological imagination.” pia
~·•·~·•·~·•·~·•·~
I think we are in “violent agreement” most of the time. § Iconoclast | | Back to Top | | |
|
Jewgrass
Registered Member
Date Joined Sep 2001
Total Posts : 113
| Posted 12/5/2001 9:15 AM (GMT -6) | | DOC: This is why we love ya. I am not an open-theist, I strongly disagree with you on certain subjects (eschatology, masturbation, the Christian call for government activism described towards the end of GOD AT WAR), but unlike most theologians out there, you're not gonna put on the holier-than-thou facade and pretend that you have all the answers and act like you're mind is divinely inspired and infallible. We're all humans: some are smarter than others, some are more experienced, some are more attune to listening to God, but we are all fallible humans, and your willingness to admit to the problem of the apparent contradiction of the old testament and new testament portrayals of God's character by saying "this has bugged me for many many years" is a humble, honest statement. This is an attitude I wish many of the other theologians out there (I'm not going to name names) would live by.
--Jewgrass
"My religious belief teaches me to feel as safe in battle as in bed." -- General Stonewall Jackson | | Back to Top | | |
|
pia†desideria
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 301
| Posted 12/5/2001 9:35 AM (GMT -6) | | Here’s a paraphrase of how James Alison uses mimetic theory to talk about God’s progressive revelation:
The story of the foundation of Rome begins with two brothers, Romulus and Remus. In order to decide who gets the right to found Rome, they organize a competition: whoever is the first to see a sign from heaven wins. Then Remus sees some birds, but Romulus sees some better birds, so they fight about it until Romulus finally kills Remus. The story concludes that Remus deserved to die because of his impiety before the gods, and Romulus is praised for killing him. History is full of similar myths about the foundation of cultures, religions, and nations. The basis for social order and structure is the sacrifice of victims who are blamed for chaos. We are all, always and everywhere, immensely violent creatures, and we control this violence through collective unanimity against a victim. This system depends upon authentic belief in the guilt of the victim.
The biblical story of the foundation of human culture begins with two brothers, Cain and Abel. The Bible agrees that culture is founded upon a murder, but Cain is not congratulated for killing Abel. On the contrary, God exposes the innocence of the victim: "Where is your brother? His blood cries out to me from the soil." Thus the murder is exposed for what it is: a pathetic crime that is impossible to justify. God grieves for the victim and confronts his brother. What if the revelation we have in the Old Testament is that little by little God is distinguished from the violence of the gods, and is perceived to be on the side of the victims and opens our eyes to their innocence?
So here’s the system in sum:
1. imitative triangular desire: when I desire an object in imitation of the desire of another, and so enter into conflict (e.g. Romulus and Remus, Cain and Abel, "thou shalt not covet," etc.)
2. scapegoat mechanism: conflict is resolved via unanimous expulsion of a victim.
3. subversion from within: this universal mechanism is subverted via the slow irruption within human history of an "Other" of a different sort than the violent "other" which normally forms out desire, culminating in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.
pia
~·•·~·•·~·•·~·•·~
I think we are in “violent agreement” most of the time. § Iconoclast | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 12/5/2001 11:40 AM (GMT -6) | | Pia, I love your quote too.
Semeia, you have my respect!!!
The Board, I will probably respond strong when the few things that really matter to my salvation are at issue! Pia's quote shows the important place of rationality in the spiritual. God is other--we can only know Him in his energies and not in his essence; but we ARE to use our rational tools!!! it is for that reason that when certain things are said, especially in the public realm of readability, that as much as responses can be directed to ideas and not to persons...they should. (Else, 1-to-1 email!)
Trosie's quote (below) reminded me of what I THINK I remember of Bob. I CAN be wrong...but I think I read him saying that God changes his mind and direction. And to me it seemed big directions, and I could only assume with big and deep differentials (word chosen for its vagueness to me right now!). When Trodie says "The open view makes perfect sense since God is working with us (imperfect people) and allowing us libertarian freewill." that seems scaled about right! To say that there is anything but the same plan, with the exception that plans DID change with the Fall -- perhaps the biggest arguement for the OpenView? -- is shakey to me too.
quote:
I'm shaking as I write this. I am starting to go CRAZY here! I can see absolutely NO ROOM to say that God LEARNS. God is PEFECT AMEN. PERIOD!
The open view makes perfect sense since God is working with us (imperfect people) and allowing us libertarian freewill. This makes sense. BUT to now say that God changed in His character or to say that GOD LEARNS is borderline blasphemy!
Give me MANY,MANY scriptures that back up this thought of God changing and LEARNING.
I AM CONCERNED!
trosie
PoW -- chill'n | | Back to Top | | |
|
trosie
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 550
| Posted 12/5/2001 12:01 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Hey, did you guys miss the part about this being a "thought experiment"? Did you miss where Doc asked us to "get gutsy" and brainstorm? I offered an IDEA, not a BELIEF... but either way why are you reacting to it? Are you saying that it is wrong to ask questions? Is it wrong to present ideas, to be in process on something? It really frustrates me to have you come back at me when Doc clearly opened this up to speculation. Is it dangerous heresy to ask questions or consider possibilities? .....
Please, make your contribution to the brainstorming, but don't condemn me for mine. Doc asked. Love you guys, but you're not being fair here.
quote:
Churchmouse: Trosie and POW: I understand your strong reaction. Just pad it a bit.
Yes, I will pad it a bit and chill out. Perhaps I need to take a break from this board. I have this enormous desire to learn about God and enjoy the discussions on this board but....
I still would appreciate the scriptures that could be used to back up this idea that God is in the learning process. That would be interesting.
God bless you all in your pursuit of seeking Christ
trosie
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Mephi2K
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 713
| Posted 12/5/2001 2:02 PM (GMT -6) | | Ok. I'm gonna get really stupid right about now. I truly don't see what the big problem is with saying that God can order some bears to maul some kids. Or command Ezekiel's wife to be killed. Or command his people to massacre others. Or command his servants to marry whore. Or...well, you get the picture. Darnit, why can't we say that God just do what God wants to do and be done with it? Sure, this sounds simplistic...but I wonder if that's just how simple it is. Let's be honest. Jesus himself does and says certain things that could be construed as morally and/or ethically questionable to some of our standards...and I think we all know that. Not to mention the occasions of the blinding of Simon Magus or the deaths of Ananias and Sapphiras. Come on, y'all. This ain't that hard. God is the friggin big dawg and does what he likes.
What I think is happening is that we have some archetypal idea of an omnibenevolent being and are trying our darnedest to make the Biblical God fit the mold. Forget all that. Just take the gracious revelation of Jesus Christ...and be DONE with it. Stop the friggin madness!
Is the only reason some people worship, love, or serve God because they "have" to believe that God fits their idea of omnibenevolence? Is the God we are fashioning for ourselves nothing more than a Freudian archetype? Hmmm...
Told ya I was gonna get stupid. Fire at will.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Semeia
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2001
Total Posts : 522
| Posted 12/5/2001 2:24 PM (GMT -6) | | Hey Mephi, How come no one ever calls you a heretic?
Let's say for a minute that I agree (in the spirit of the thought experiment) that God's just doing what he wants.
Does God learn from what he does?
Thanks,
Semeia
"The opposite of sin is not virtue, but faith."--Soren Kierkegaard | | Back to Top | | |
|
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 12/5/2001 5:37 PM (GMT -6) | | Lov'n it Lov'n it Lov'n it.
Pia: I think our hermeneutics could stand to be a little more circular—we have no problem interpreting Scripture through the lense of our presuppositions, but we seem to be a little weak on letting Scripture shape our presuppositions.
Doc: A very very good point. But does this mean that all Scripture is to be taken as "equal" in forming our presuppositions? Do you really want (say) Leviticus to have the same "presupposition-shaping-authority" as the ministry of Jesus? It seems to me that the confession that Jesus is God incarnate means that HE ALONE gets to have the authority to shape our presuppositions – and that we then read the Old Testament WITH these presuppositions. Agree?
Pia: Is this verse (Lk 9:52-55) enough to counteract Jesus’ many many many references the Hebrew Scriptures: i.e. he cited them at the inauguration of his ministery, as his last words, as rebukes of the devil when he was tempted…. I do deny that we should question the legitimacy of these Scriptures because we don’t get it.
Doc : No no no. That was not the intent of the question. The problem with the OT arises only BECAUSE we agree, with Jesus, that this is inspired writ. If I didn't believe this stuff was inspired, I'd have no more problems with it than I have with (say) the behavior of the gods in Homer's Illiad. I thus wholly agree we must wrestle with the text, as Jacob did.
But must we not include – as central – the definitive revelation of God in Christ in our wrestling? And yes, Meph, this would go along with Ananais and Sephira.
Scott Emerson: the part translated "Go on up, you baldhead" was a specific threat aimed at Elisha from youths (who were, by all intents and purposes, young men). God acted in His and Elisha's best interests, whether one believes in an open view or not.
Doc: I’ve heard this, and it helps alleviate the problem a bit. But I’ve never seen any evidence offered in support of it? Is it just a good guess at what the expression means based on the severity of God’s reaction in relation to it? (To say "just a good guess" is not BAD, for that MAY BE the best we can do here).
Now here’s a weird point, perhaps meaning nothing. I noticed yesterday in "wrestling with the text" again, like Jacob (see Pia?), that the text doesn’t say GOD SENT the bears to maul the kids. It just notes that bears came out and mauled the kids after Elisha’s curse. Just humor me here: we’re all thinking out loud -- right Semeia . What if it was one of God’s "council members" – the gods in his court – who responded to Elisha’s curse this way?
[BRACE YOURSELF FOR THIS ONE -- just a THOUGHT EXPERIMENT.] I notice that the OT has ALOT to say about the gods who form Yahweh's council (see God at War). (By the way, you'd miss much of this in the NIV which, for some crazy reason, translated "Lord of Hosts" as "Lord Almighty"). Some of these gods aren't "perfect" (e.g. Psl. 82). In fact, in the OT view, some seem evil (e.g. Satan in Job 1-2; the "lying spirit" sent to Ahab's false prophets, etc.). Yet, as was the manner of ancient potentates, an emessary of the king was regarded as an extention of the king. And, as was the case with ancient potentates -- and responsible leaders yet today -- the king takes responsibility (though no personal guilt) for what the emessary does. Is it not just-conceivable that some of what is described as the Lord's doing in the OT is actually the imperfect functioning of his emessaries??? If he has given a domain of authority to them which cannot be instantaneously revoked (because freedom is part of the plan) he must allow them to abuse (or at least be incompetent) with the authority they have. Yet they are STILL his creations who were CREATED to function as his emessaries -- just as humans are toward other humans, animals, and the creation. Nevertheless, God still accepts responsibility -- and this, I think, is one of the main emphases in the OT (viz. against all the neighboring theologies in the Mesopotamia area which held to no over arching creator-authority over the gods, the Jews were to always remain confident that there is one Creator behind everything.l) What do you think?
Semeia: Is it dangerous heresy to ask questions or consider possibilities? … Please, make your contribution to the brainstorming, but don't condemn me for mine.
Doc: I certain hope NOT!!! POW and Trosie did react strongly, but I think it was over the idea (which you just brainstormed), not toward you Semeia. I think its okay for people to express shock or worry or whatever over an idea – so long as it is toward the idea. I didn’t anyone condemning YOU.
Semeia: If He's in relationship with us, why couldn't he grow and change? I think of relationship as two people changing through each other and with each other.
Doc: At least two reasons: a) the ontological argument (see – what is the thread we’re discussing this on right now? I forget). b) Scripture says several times that God never changes (though even I don’t take this to mean "in any respect whatsoever," so maybe there’s ways to interpret this while holding to a learning God idea).
Pow:When we say that this text is "Holy Scripture," we don’t mean to say that it is venerable, with a patina of glorious tradition, or something like that. We mean that we don’t question it so as to break it, but rather we allow it to get close enough to us to produce a break in us.
Doc : GREAT quote!
Churchmouse you're one of the most courageous people I know.
Doc Or maybe one of the dumbest. I just won't be intimidated from thinking out loud with friends by the "guardians of all truth." I don't know where they get their revelation that God stopped revealing things to us with their conclusions.
Anyone want to critique my heavenly council idea -- or pick it up and explore it further? I really thing this is an area that has been almost WHOLLY ignored by classical theology.
Doc
"Three is the magic number, oh yes it is, it's the Magic Number" - De La Soul | | Back to Top | | |
|
GregBoyd
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 1818
| Posted 12/5/2001 5:44 PM (GMT -6) | | Mephi: why can't we say that God just do what God wants to do and be done with it?
Doc: Because the central thing he’s done is die for all human beings out of love on the cross and tell us over and over again that THIS is what he is like. "If you see me, you see the Father. Why then do you ask, ‘Show us the Father.’ (Jn 14:9).
Doc
ps. Maybe semeia has a point. Someone should call Mephi a heretic! "Whom shall we send? Is there no accusing spirit among us whom we can send forth?"
"Three is the magic number, oh yes it is, it's the Magic Number" - De La Soul | | Back to Top | | |
| 121 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 4:14 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|