 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
BBBCanada
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 2763
| Posted 1/31/2004 7:27 AM (GMT -6) |   | Over on the "Keep Doc and Denay in prayer" thread, Greg said this:
quote:
She earned a medical degree and had a red carpet future layed out for her, but felt God calling her back to her country. She now ministers to Vietnamese refuges who are among the poorest people on the planet.
I was going to talk about this before, (I think might-be-don asked about this), but it seems to me that in all the time that we have had this board up? That we have never discussed this issue. And that is VERY ironic because it is related to the whole sovereignty question. It seems to me that we can get all caught up on the sovereignty issue but forget that maybe it is to (partly) serve the issue is personal guidance.
Mel Gibson has a new movie coming out called, "The Passion." In an interview
www.gazette.com/popupNews.php?id=408774
he says, “But I really feel my career was leading me to make this. The Holy Ghost was working through me on this film, and I was just directing traffic. I hope the film has the power to evangelize.”
So we have two statements. One by Hyun Tranberg and the other by Mel Gibson. Now, I'm sure A LOT of us know of people who make, God told me this and God told me that kind of statements. And we are skeptical of them. And we should be. Should these statements be made when one is the President of the United States justifying entering into war with another country? For the most part, if you have thought through this issue, the President would not be wise in making statements like this. But we don't have a problem throwing them around with our own personal lives.
So when someone makes statements like those above, how do we make sense of them? Should someone show "proof" that the Holy Spirit has led them to this or that decision? That is, when they make a claim, do they have to somehow "prove" this claim? How would they be able to do that? What language should they use? Is not the problem of personal guidance one of "practical decision making skills" rather than knowledge of the future or some imagined plan on God's part? How should the Christian view "personal guidance?"
Brandon
"Corporations are simply the kind of structure that rises when hordes of people need to be managed, and after spending some time in a large church, I've found that our spirituality does not exempt us from these inefficient and dehumanizing practices."--Steve Lansingh's review of "The Office" at The Film Form | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 1/31/2004 8:10 AM (GMT -6) | | I think the greater the potential to influence others one's action has, the more justification one should give for believing "God told me to do it." Mel said God told him to make a movie which no one even has to view. Bid deal. Who cares? Bush said God told him to make war which no one has the opportunity to avoid being influenced by. That's a big deal and it demands more justification (if Bush really expected people to be process "God told me to do it" as a reason for going to war). Did Bush really claim that God told us to lead us to war? When and where?
Tom | | Back to Top | | |
|
might-be-don
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 830
| Posted 2/1/2004 2:51 AM (GMT -6) | | Here's one I see at the very forefront of the issue...
Acts 8:29
The Spirit told Philip, "Go to that chariot and stay near it."
I would assume ( although that could get me in trouble ) that Philip told this story to Luke. So Philip said, "The Lord told me..." .
Look at the fruit of that encounter, love is spread.
Did God speak to me can be can be summed up in results of what was spoken and in the results of my confession to others that God spoke to me.
I once had a life changing decision to make that I was in torment over, should I, or not. I think God spoke to me, not like Joan, but to my spirit, that I could base my decision on whether or not it was a loving thing to do. The proof is in the pudding.
The bottom line is... you can't argue with someone that says , "God told me...". But you can see the results of the encounter.
peace, don
"Life is a gift from God, but the years have weight in them."
Terry Scott Taylor | | Back to Top | | |
|
selah
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210
| Posted 2/1/2004 12:38 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by might-be-don
Here's one I see at the very forefront of the issue...
Acts 8:29
The Spirit told Philip, "Go to that chariot and stay near it."
I would assume ( although that could get me in trouble ) that Philip told this story to Luke. So Philip said, "The Lord told me..." .
Look at the fruit of that encounter, love is spread.
Did God speak to me can be can be summed up in results of what was spoken and in the results of my confession to others that God spoke to me.
I once had a life changing decision to make that I was in torment over, should I, or not. I think God spoke to me, not like Joan, but to my spirit, that I could base my decision on whether or not it was a loving thing to do. The proof is in the pudding.
The bottom line is... you can't argue with someone that says , "God told me...". But you can see the results of the encounter.
peace, don
I completely agree Don. A few years ago I sensed God leading me to move back to Minnesota (instead of the east coast). Of course, I thought that was silly. Minnesota is freezing and I don't particularily like that! I tried to ignore it, but caved in after a season of prayer and fasting. It's only now that I see (in hindsight) the results of that decision to move. Clearly God was leading and I chose (this time) to follow. Now, I'm actually in awe at the outcome. It worked out. God is good. That's my opinion.
love
selah
"When we acknowledge that all of life is sacred and that each act is an act of choice and therefore sacred, then life is a sacred dance lived consciously each moment. When we live at this level, we participate in the creation of a better world."
Scout Cloud Lee | | Back to Top | | |
|
BBBCanada
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 2763
| Posted 2/2/2004 3:11 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
I once had a life changing decision to make that I was in torment over, should I, or not.
Whenever you have to make a decision (especially of that magnitude) there will ALWAYS be some reservation, hesitancy, or lack of “peace” which many seem to take as an indication that this is not a leading of the Lord. Many times, people are paralyzed in making a decision when in reality God wants us to be take responsibility and initiative. I’m convinced that the crux of the problem with the issue of personal guidance is the whole decision making process. Here is basically how I see personal guidance from a scriptural standpoint.
First I believe many Christians desire to have a book of Acts experience. They desire to know God in the realness and concreteness of their lives. They want to know that those choices they are making and doing in terms of financial, vocational and marital decisions are pleasing to him. They ask like Paul did on the road to Damascus, “What shall I do?” Acts 22:8-10.
Now throughout the history of the church there have been different models of personal guidance. One is called the “blueprint model”, the other is the “wisdom model” and the one that I adhere to would be the “discernment model.” It appears to me that when God gives us guidance to do a something, (financial, vocational and marital) that he IS present and that we must listen to God (I strongly react against deism in its blatant and subtle forms). For God DOES speak and we can respond to him if we are attuned to listening.
But because of abuses,
Sidebar:Calvin had mega problems with the “spiritualists” though some credit him with introducing “the inner witness of the spirit.” The spiritualists were uninformed by scripture and community which is the lesson for us that ANY subjective word that we receive must be balanced by the objective witness of the Spirit through the Scripture and church. End of Sidebar
the idea that God can speak to someone to lead and guide them not only in terms of moral but non-moral decisions is outright rejected. We can’t trust a subjective “impression” or “vision” or what have you. So Catholics say, “Listen to the church!” and Protestants say, “Listen to the Scriptures!” Some ask for “proof.” And yet, the Bible does say all throughout that God is a shepherd. And shepherds GUIDE their sheep. That is to say, both biblically and historically many individuals in the Bible and in church have had DIRECT encounters with God.
Question. Is not the VOICE of God A PROVISION to the church?
I affirm that God does speak SPECIFIC WORDS to his children at critical moments of their lives. BUT these words are not the norm, not even for those who received these words directly. My belief is that God does this in a step-by-step process as we are in friendship with him, a friendship that is unique, personal and dynamic. It will be helpful to look at tangible examples to get the drift of what I’m trying to say here.
Acts 16:6-40
6 They went through the region of Phrygia and Galatia and were prevented by the Holy Spirit from speaking the message in the province of Asia. 7 When they came to Mysia, they tried to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them.
We have two thwarted attempts BY THE HOLY SPIRIT for Paul and his buds to preach in both the province of Asia and Bithynia.
Sidebar: Imagine the Holy Spirit preventing evangelization! End of Sidebar
This would have taken months of traveling and strategizing. We are not told HOW the Holy Spirit did this. The Greek may imply that a physical prevention of some sort took place. Either way, there is not revelation that these doors would be shut. Question. Were Paul and his buds out of God’s will because they were heading toward Asia and Bithynia? I mean, the HS stopped ‘em. The implication of this question is that they were right in following the light that they had at the time. Next.
8 So, bypassing Mysia, they came down to Troas. 9 During the night a vision appeared to Paul: a Macedonian man was standing and pleading with him, "Cross over to Macedonia and help us!" 10 After he had seen the vision, we immediately made efforts to set out for Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to evangelize them.
What do we have here? Divine guidance! Now, though this kind of experience is exceptional to Paul? They did happen. Also, this is the only place in the New Testament where someone is “called” to specific geographical region to do ministry. That is, they concluded that they were to evangelize.
So, two thwarted starts and one good one? Must’ve felt good! Yet what do you know? This doesn’t seem very “accurate” or “definitive.” Why? Because by today’s standards of “personal guidance,”
1. The vision doesn’t transpire exactly as they receive it.
2. They may want further direction in carrying out this call through divine guidance.
3. The “call” came and therefore the implication is that they would minister for long periods of time.
As you can see, NOTHING like this happens in Acts 16. Though we can’t say that Paul NEVER found this man, it seems unlikely that Luke would omit this piece of information. As a matter of fact, the direction of ministry is shifted from what they anticipated.
13 On the Sabbath day we went outside the city gate by the river, where we thought there was a place of prayer. We sat down and spoke to the women gathered there. 14 A woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who worshiped God, was listening. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was spoken by Paul. 15 After she and her household were baptized, she urged us, "If you consider me a believer in the Lord, come and stay at my house." And she persuaded us.
Hmmm…it seems that the only people that are met are not this man in a vision but a woman named Lydia. It is interesting that Paul ministers to this woman instead of looking for the man in the vision. Also, considering the demeaning views of women at this time, Paul and his buds would have concluded that it was better to invest their time with men. Also, another interesting point is that Paul doesn’t get direct guidance to do this, but rather he takes advantage of the CIRCUMSTANCE or the opportunity to minister to these women. In other words he adjusts his plans and expectations. None of this “fits into” his initial vision.
But this is also big, because this was not a superficial acquaintance, for Lydia becomes a believer and they stay with her. If Paul had found the man he would have stayed with him. Even at the end of Paul’s stay in Macedonia, Lydia’s home is STILL the focus of Paul’s ministry. Hmmm…no dramatic guidance there. They stay there because she “persuaded us.” In other words, she reasons with them and they take her argument as “light for their path” even though it doesn’t coincide well with Paul’s vision. Indeed, it would have been a radical alteration of their plan.
16 Once, as we were on our way to prayer, a slave girl met us who had a spirit of prediction and made a large profit for her owners by fortune-telling. 17 As she followed Paul and us she cried out, "These men are the slaves of the Most High God, who are proclaiming to you the way of salvation." 18 And she did this for many days. But Paul was greatly aggravated, and turning to the spirit, said, "I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her!" And it came out right away. 19 When her owners saw that their hope of profit was gone, they seized Paul and Silas and dragged them into the marketplace to the authorities. 20 And bringing them before the chief magistrates, they said, "These men are seriously disturbing our city. They are Jews, 21 and are promoting customs that are not legal for us as Romans to adopt or practice." 22 Then the mob joined in the attack against them, and the chief magistrates stripped off their clothes and ordered them to be beaten with rods. 23 After they had inflicted many blows on them, they threw them in jail, ordering the jailer to keep them securely guarded. 24 Receiving such an order, he put them into the inner prison and secured their feet in the stocks.
In the case of this slave-girl we see that God did not intervene to give Paul guidance, but that Paul became quite peeved and he exorcises this spirit. Well this ticks her owners off and they end up in jail.
25 About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening to them. 26 Suddenly there was such a violent earthquake that the foundations of the jail were shaken, and immediately all the doors were opened, and everyone's chains came loose. 27 When the jailer woke up and saw the doors of the prison open, he drew his sword and was going to kill himself, since he thought the prisoners had escaped. 28 But Paul called out in a loud voice, "Don't harm yourself, because all of us are here!" 29 Then the jailer called for lights, rushed in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 Then he escorted them out and said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31 So they said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved--you and your household." 32 Then they spoke the message of the Lord to him along with everyone in his house. 33 He took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds. Right away he and all his family were baptized. 34 He brought them up into his house, set a meal before them, and rejoiced because he had believed God with his entire household. 35 When daylight came, the chief magistrates sent the police to say, "Release those men!" 36 The jailer reported these words to Paul: "The magistrates have sent orders for you to be released. So come out now and go in peace." 37 But Paul said to them, "They beat us in public without a trial, although we are Roman citizens, and threw us in jail. And now are they going to smuggle us out secretly? Certainly not! On the contrary, let them come themselves and escort us out!" 38 Then the police reported these words to the magistrates. And they were afraid when they heard that Paul and Silas were Roman citizens. 39 So they came and apologized to them, and escorting them out, they urged them to leave town. 40 After leaving the jail, they came to Lydia's house where they saw and encouraged the brothers, and departed.
Paul receives a vision to come to the Macedonia by supernatural means. His decision to leave the city was by…a JUGEMENT CALL based on what was most spiritually expedient at the time i.e. the town authorities urging.
In all of this, Paul’s vision is not some infallible guidance system (IGS).  All it seem to do was nudge Paul in the direction of Macedonia. It told him nothing of what would happen or what to expect once he arrived. Paul felt free to seek further light and renegotiate the original vision in view of the light he received.
What can we learn from this passage? Can we not say that guidance comes more in subtle incremental ways? In the on-going details of life and in the ability he gives us to make wise assessments? So we may get some sort of enlightenment, but that comes in a step-by-step process and in a forward moving direction before we will understand what direction to take next. What’s soooo cool about this is that we can take major steps without some sort of direct spiritual guidance. If anything, we should seek further insight and even consider moving in another direction in view of any new understanding we gain. Our adjusting of ”the vision” for our own lives may be in needed. This is because our PERCEPTION of the vision is filtered through our own internal filters as it possibly was with Paul’s.
We can also see that we are not “locked into” ministry or vocational situations forever. This means that there is NOTHING inherent even in a supernatural call that binds us to a course of direction perpetually. This also means that we are not to wait for dramatic or UNMISTAKEABLE guidance before taking important steps in seizing ministry or vocational opportunities and relationships. We should also understand that no matter how dramatic the guidance will be, there is no guarantee that events will transpire in a particular way. Karl Rahner has pointed out that Roman Catholic mystics over the centuries have had visions of the baby Jesus pictured in clothes and settings of his own time and culture. This is so because of the Roman Catholic veneration of the infant Jesus unique to their tradition. If that is the case, this shows that there is strong biblical evidence for Rahner’s observation in Acts 16.
1. Paul has a vision to go to Macedonia.
2. Paul had to adjust his vision of what God wanted him to do as he moved forward.
3. His vision was influenced by a number of human presuppositions.
Conclusion? We can conclude that even though we receive some genuine dramatic guidance, we can still question INDIVIDUAL ELEMENTS and continue to seek God for fresh guidance to move forward.
One last point. Acts 21:3-4
3 After we sighted Cyprus, leaving it on the left, we sailed on to Syria and arrived at Tyre, because the ship was to unload its cargo there. 4 So we found some disciples and stayed there seven days. They said to Paul through the Spirit not to go to Jerusalem.
“Through the Spirit” indicates that these disciples believed that they had received a revelation of God’s will for Paul. Paul disregards their advice and continues to go on to Jerusalem. There is no indication that he was disobeying God. Rather it seems that the impression is that he was following God’s will by proceeding down to Jerusalem. He recognizes the validity of their prediction Acts 20:22-23 however he doesn’t think it is divine and ignores it. What are we to think of this? On the whole, we are not to take it “prophecy” as guidance. New Testament guidance for the most part is given directly to the individual not through another person as in the Old Testament. What do ya think?
Brandon
"Corporations are simply the kind of structure that rises when hordes of people need to be managed, and after spending some time in a large church, I've found that our spirituality does not exempt us from these inefficient and dehumanizing practices."--Steve Lansingh's review of "The Office" at The Film Form | | Back to Top | | |
|
selah
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210
| Posted 2/2/2004 5:02 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by BBBCanada
In all of this, Paul’s vision is not some infallible guidance system (IGS). All it seem to do was nudge Paul in the direction of Macedonia. It told him nothing of what would happen or what to expect once he arrived. Paul felt free to seek further light and renegotiate the original vision in view of the light he received.
...
What can we learn from this passage? Can we not say that guidance comes more in subtle incremental ways? In the on-going details of life and in the ability he gives us to make wise assessments? So we may get some sort of enlightenment, but that comes in a step-by-step process and in a forward moving direction before we will understand what direction to take next. What’s soooo cool about this is that we can take major steps without some sort of direct spiritual guidance. If anything, we should seek further insight and even consider moving in another direction in view of any new understanding we gain. Our adjusting of ”the vision” for our own lives may be in needed. This is because our PERCEPTION of the vision is filtered through our own internal filters as it possibly was with Paul’s.
selah
This is similar to how I've experienced God's leading. It's clear I don't have an IGS (know where I can get one?  ) I am constantly re-adjusting what I envision. I know my perception is always limited and I know what you mean by subtle incremental ways.
Additionally, I agree that it's necessary to step out on our own when spiritual guidance is absent. In my view, God works TOGETHER with us as we co-create our future. In other words, there is always a plan "B" if I jump too soon.
One thing I will add though, I'm convinced more than ever that listening/looking for and pursuing (with passion) God's lead is an exceedingly wise way to do life.
quote:
Brandon
We can also see that we are not “locked into” ministry or vocational situations forever. This means that there is NOTHING inherent even in a supernatural call that binds us to a course of direction perpetually. This also means that we are not to wait for dramatic or UNMISTAKEABLE guidance before taking important steps in seizing ministry or vocational opportunities and relationships. We should also understand that no matter how dramatic the guidance will be, there is no guarantee that events will transpire in a particular way.
Yep :0)
oops gotta run,
love
selah
"When we acknowledge that all of life is sacred and that each act is an act of choice and therefore sacred, then life is a sacred dance lived consciously each moment. When we live at this level, we participate in the creation of a better world."
Scout Cloud Lee | | Back to Top | | |
|
feelinahole
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 754
| Posted 2/3/2004 9:58 AM (GMT -6) | | I am reading a book called "Knowing The Unknowable God," which deals with paradoxes and in a footnote on a chapter on choice, the author states, "See I Thess. 4:3. Many Christians talk about "finding God's will," as though it were some magical, detailed formula for life. This verse says, "It is God's will that you should be sancitified." His will concerns character, not a daily-to-do list."
From my own experience, I had heard people make statements about "God speaking to me," etc. which got me curious. So I started asking people about it, to find out how they knew God wanted them to do it. What I found is that the more I dug and asked questions, the more it came down to the fact that, by and large, what was God's will ended up being exactly what most people want to do anyway. Being God's will just affirmed what they wanted to do.
Having said that I would add that I have no doubt about their sincerity, so it wasn't like they were lying or anything. But I think Christians, by and large, are like all people: they want to be special and want to believe that what they are doing is important and special, so it doesn't take a leap to see that adding "God's will" to the occasion makes it all the more better particularly when people cannot give anyone concrete proof of God's will.
For my self, I take a negative view of God's will. I use the wisdom God gave me and make a decision based on the good and bad of it. I worry little if God wants to me do something specifically. Why? Look at scripture. When God didn't or did want someone to do something, he was pretty upfront about it. Does any of us really believe that if God really had something specific for us to do that he wouldn't let us know?
I find it surprising that so many open theists seem to still believe the "blueprint" idea, that God has all these "one" things he wants us to do, then they go off and worry their heads to death over it. Such thinking paralyzes a person, makes them unsure and afraid of making the wrong decision. If God wants or doesn't want us to do something, he'll let us know. But even if we refuse, he is big enough to find something else for us to do. He forgives.
I think the only set plan God has for Christians is that we conform to the image of his Son. Everything else I think he is pretty flexible about.
For me, I take all "God's will" stuff about moving ministry missions will a big ole grain of salt. I have had one true time in my life when I truly believe God stepped in and did something miraclous. But I also realize it doesn't look like it from the outside and there is no way to prove it, so I have no problem when people don't believe me. No problem at all.
FOr myself, I simply wish Christians could simply be more unfront about what they are doing, simply accept it is something they want to do, and not always try to justify it as "God's will." Its God's will that we are transformed and that we love him and others. Everything else is so much mystery and circumstance.
OH, and I also think Christians should recognize that the happenings (how God worked) in the gospels and Acts were never promised to us. They are not our "rights." So assuming we can expect them is a road to trouble. | | Back to Top | | |
|
BBBCanada
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 2763
| Posted 2/5/2004 3:55 AM (GMT -6) | | feelinahole,
I agree that God doesn’t have a “daily-to-do-list.” Even in the references I provided, Paul made a number of “moves” based on what he thought was best at the time. That is the “light” that he had at that time. I certainly don’t think that we should make any move saying “certainty statements” about God’s will. For example, with Greg’s friend, I think the best that she could say is that she BELIEVED God was “calling” her to go back to her country, though she could probably not say a “fo sheezy” outside of “direct guidance” and even then, it may not be all that clear because of our human perception of things.
In his book, “Decision Making and the Will of God” Garry Friesen argues against the “daily-to-do-list” based on pragmatism. Why seek God for the big stuff and not the small stuff? Why not seek God’s will for the colour of socks you may wear today? Isn’t it just as important as marriage, vocation and financial decisions that Christians deem the “big stuff?” So why draw the line? Also, concerning “non-moral decisions,” does God have a will for these? Friesen holds to the same view as your self and believes that God’s will is restricted to the moral arena and that there is “no dot (God’s will for NON-moral decisions).” I have decided against that as I have come to believe that this is an almost deistic position. I can’t blame Friesen for holding to such a view for he is clearly being pastoral here. I mean, how many Christians are frustrated or confused when they follow the “blueprint model” with its ambiguous “road signs” (circumstance, inner witness, scripture)? Also, the problem with the view of there being a “perfect will” is that people go nuts trying to FIND it (being paralysed, procrastination, etc). In the mean time they could actually be productive using their God given rational capabilities and make some kind of sensible, practical decision. But the view above (that I put up earlier this week) does not entail that of which I hope I can make a little clearer below.
First, let me something about the decisions we make which should respond to the delineation between the “big stuff” and the “small stuff.” Imagine if you will, a continuum or spectrum. At one end of the pole (say the left side) there are “straightforward moral decisions,” i.e. don’t murder, steal, adultery, etc. I think most of us would say that we don’t have to seek for guidance on those things. As we move toward the right the next would be “complicated moral decisions.” Now, we start running into problems with being “sanctified in our character” or with the moral areas because these are not quite so clearly laid out as to what these may look like (so much for the author of the book you mentioned, "Knowing The Unknowable God" and Friesen’s moral stance). They actually require some deliberation and careful balancing or juggling on our part, i.e. abortion, a response to war, etc. Next we would have “grey area decisions” where the Bible leaves these types of decisions up to the individual, i.e. smoking, gambling, drinking, dancing, etc. After that we have “complex decisions” which have more to do with matters pertaining to moral decisions. These are personal decisions, i.e. college, marriage, church, etc. When we talk about wanting to know God’s will as Greg’s friend seemed to do, we usually concern our self with these questions. Lastly, there are the “straightforward NON-moral decisions.” These have to do with what I noted above concerning wearing the “right” colour socks. There is absolutely no moral relevance to these questions. That is where, I think Friesen makes an error when he delineates between the “big stuff” (marriage, vocation, financial decision) and the “small stuff” (what socks to wear today). He tries to make a case against the “missing dot” (God’s perfect will on the “big stuff”) by addressing the “small stuff” (God should have a will for this too) which is totally irrelevant or is simply beside the point.
Now, as you say,
quote:
”But I think Christians, by and large, are like all people: they want to be special and want to believe that what they are doing is important and special…”
It is this that may be what is the driving point behind prayer, studying the Bible, missions, etc rather than what Greg has alluded to which was knowing that we can “make a difference” in prayer. As TGB had stated in one thread, open theism doesn’t make that much of a difference to his personal life. Rather, it is in knowing that God has a personal will for them. Also, it seems to do something to one’s psyche knowing that they are distinctive and that a part of this distinctiveness is knowing that we can make a contribution to life that someone else may not be quite as equipped to make. That is to say, that there is some significant work to be done that will not get done unless YOU do it. There is good reason for this below.
Having said that, whenever the New Testament speaks of our responsibility for knowing or doing God’s will the Greek term always used for “will” is “thelema.” This indicates not God’s resolute intention but rather his desire or wish requiring our cooperation. This is used in the scripture you mentioned. God desires that the Thessalonians be sanctified. He is not talking about something he will do regardless of our cooperation. Another Greek term is “boule” which indicates God’s immutable plan which will be carried out regardless of our cooperation (Acts 2:23).
“Thelema”/Matt 7:21, Matt 12:50 and Mark 3:35
In none of the above passages is the term defined. Therefore the context could allow for a moral or personal will or both. While God’s moral will is intended, i.e. Matt 7:21 occurs in on the Sermon on the Mount, a personal will is probably intended as well. I say this because “thelema” is the word used for God’s will in the Gethsemane passages in Matt 26:42 and Luke 22:42. Here, God’s will refers to a UNIQUE matter of personal guidance for Jesus.
Johannine writings/John 7:17, 9:31 and 1 John 2:17
The reason why thelema refers to God's personal will is because on three other occasions (4:34, 5:30, 6:38-39) Jesus refers to himself as doing the "thelema" of God. This does not refer to obedience to moral commandments but to Jesus unique mission. Therefore it would seem that John's references to believers doing the "thelema" of God is for personal guidance and not for areas of moral conduct.
Pauline writings/Ephesians 5:15-17
The "Lord's will" refers to making wise decisions to make the best use of their time and circumstances for God's glory. Obviously these commands go beyond mere moral commands.
Romans 12:1-2
Though Paul exhorts them to "prove what is the will of God," in the verses immediately following this he commands them to have a clear view of their own distinctiveness encouraging them to make use of the spiritual gifts that they possess vss 3-8.
There are others but I hope these are sufficient enough.
In 1 Cor 12:4-7 Paul does NOT make use of "thelema" but the idea of a personal will is in use. In this passage Paul says that God INTENTIONALLY endows Christians characterized by "gifts," "service," and "working."
Gifts= abilities and personal potential.
Service= specific responsibilities we assume i.e. the situations and vocations of life where our gifts can be exercised.
Working=energizing. God inspires and motivates the believer by providing the believer with desires to serve him in specific ways.
In this passage, Paul is speaking about distinctive endowments that believers have and that they come to the clearest understanding of their unique gifts to use them for the glory of Christ. This corresponds with your statement, "...by and large, what was God's will ended up being exactly what most people want to do anyway. Being God's will just affirmed what they wanted to do." We should view our gifts, situations and motivational patterns as indicators of God's guidance for our lives.
Ironically in the end, it seems that those who use the "wisdom model" that is that we should make every effort to make our decisions sensibly speak of finding "the best" alternative before us in a given decision. The problem is, if there is a "best alternative" in a decision and God knows what it is then this seems to be tantamount to saying that God has an ideal choice for our decisions. And if that is the case then we could say that God has a "personal will" for us.
Brandon
"Corporations are simply the kind of structure that rises when hordes of people need to be managed, and after spending some time in a large church, I've found that our spirituality does not exempt us from these inefficient and dehumanizing practices."--Steve Lansingh's review of "The Office" at The Film Form | | Back to Top | | |
|
feelinahole
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 754
| Posted 2/5/2004 6:22 AM (GMT -6) | | BBC: In all honesty, I am not really sure of what view you are advocating, but I will respond as best I can.
First, I do realize that my view is almost deist, but I have no problem with that. Because I believe God's concern, primarly, for us is in molding us and equiping us, not in finding certain specific jobs for us. I believe God mainly works through what happens in a world he programmed to run on its own (through his power). He does, of course, intercede upon occasion, but that is unusual, rare, and not of the norm. Evidence completely shows this to be true.
He works through his children to bring about others like them, growing closer to him and loving each other. He hears our needs and gentlely pushs us toward those needs around us, but I find it incom-prehendable the notion that there is a job on this earth that only III (or anyone else) can do. While I may do it differently and (perhaps better) than another, I find it foolish (and somewhat arrogant) to think I would be the only one to be able to accomplish a task. Only God is irreplacable.
Finally, yes, God wants us to make the best decision. But, many times, the best decision and the next best decision are not that far apart. And, regardless, God can use ANY decision we make to his glory. So it may be that there is no BEST decision in any circumstance. | | Back to Top | | |
|
BBBCanada
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 2763
| Posted 2/6/2004 3:05 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Because I believe God's concern, primarly, for us is in molding us and equiping us, not in finding certain specific jobs for us.
and
He hears our needs and gentlely pushs us toward those needs around us, but I find it incom-prehendable the notion that there is a job on this earth that only III (or anyone else) can do. While I may do it differently and (perhaps better) than another, I find it foolish (and somewhat arrogant) to think I would be the only one to be able to accomplish a task.
No. I think it WOULD be arrogant. But this is not what I’m saying. I’m speaking in terms of two SEEMINGLY EQUAL CHOICES that we may face. We can never say that we will know FOR SURE that by picking one of those choices that that is a leading of the Holy Spirit (THAT would be speaking presumptuously don’t you think?). However, it is possible that one choice is "the Lord's will" over the other. Again, guidance happens in the on-going details of life and in the ability he gives us to make wise assessments. So we may get some sort of enlightenment, but that comes in a step-by-step process and in a forward moving direction before we will understand what direction to take next. And remember, moving in a certain direction is not something we are BOUND to perpetually make. It is a huge mistake in my opinion that we WAIT for some dramatic guidance before we take important steps in seizing ministry and vocational opportunities. Points or "tips" come where we need to move forward in the light of information that we have. This may happen when "all the facts" are not in and there is the need for further clarity. But this clarity WILL ONLY COME as we move forward.
See what I mean?
Brandon
"Corporations are simply the kind of structure that rises when hordes of people need to be managed, and after spending some time in a large church, I've found that our spirituality does not exempt us from these inefficient and dehumanizing practices."--Steve Lansingh's review of "The Office" at The Film Form | | Back to Top | | |
|
selah
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210
| Posted 2/11/2004 6:32 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by BBBCanada
Selah,
I wrote you an e-mail, did you get it? It looks like you put something up and then took it back down. What did you post?
Hey Brandon,
I wrote you back, didn't you get it? I think what happened is that I was editing somethign a few slides up when you were looking for my post. Often, for some reason, (satan?) my posts are out of alignment... so, perhaps I was trying to fix that.
Don't worry, nothing profound I can assure you :)
I guess I better get back to my genogram project... (this is teeeeeeeeeediouus yuk... oh, no offense to my wonderful prof. wherever you are ;)
Blessings and love,
selah
"When we acknowledge that all of life is sacred and that each act is an act of choice and therefore sacred, then life is a sacred dance lived consciously each moment. When we live at this level, we participate in the creation of a better world."
Scout Cloud Lee | | Back to Top | | |
|
selah
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1210
| Posted 2/11/2004 7:16 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by BBBCanada
Selah,
Nope. Didn't get it. Huh. Anyway, did you have a question or comment? I'd still like to know. You see, around here, one's thoughts are important.
Well Brandon, all I can remember saying is this: "One thing I will add, I'm convinced more than ever that listening/looking for and pursuing (with passion) God's lead is an exceedingly wise way to do life. "
Now, as for my thoughts...you don't want to go there. Apparently I have a tornado in my head right now. Maybe I'll come back when it calms down ok?
love
selah
PS I'm cheating on my genogram by reading "Works of Love" instead...somebody help me. Brandon, ever read it? Wow, it's so good I think I could eat it! :) time management time management I gotta go.
"When we acknowledge that all of life is sacred and that each act is an act of choice and therefore sacred, then life is a sacred dance lived consciously each moment. When we live at this level, we participate in the creation of a better world."
Scout Cloud Lee | | Back to Top | | |
|
BBBCanada
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 2763
| Posted 2/11/2004 10:22 AM (GMT -6) | | Laika,
So does that mean that Greg Boyd's and Tom Belt's "mom" is Virginia Mayo? And does that mean that Greg and Tom are bros?
Selah, I have never read SK's "Works of Love." But as I recall, when I was up in St. Paul last year? A certain "Modes" was suppose to GIVE ME A COPY. I'm just say'n that's all...
Anyhoo, at the moment I am reading "Strange Virtues: Ethics in a Multicultural World" by Bernard T. Adeney.
www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0830818553/qid=1076533625/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-8954116-5583255?v=glance&s=books
The whole "ethics" thread got me to picking this book up. Here is what I wrote about it on another site from what I have read thus far.
quote:
Right now I'm reading a book by Bernard T. Adeney entitled, "Strange Virtues: Ethics in a Multicultural World." Have any of you read on ethics? Are there absolutes? Of all the books that I have read on ethics this is probably the best one so far. According to Adeney, we CANNOT do ethics in the abstract. Ethics can only be done IN the situation. For example, if I say, "Stealing is wrong" most of us would agree to that. But that is too far a blanket of a statement for Adeney. If we get "into" the situation, we may find that "stealing" may mean different things in different cultures. Adeney makes a very interesting statement that is exactly the opposite of what most conservative Christian ethicists make. He says that many scholars err when they say, "The law is based upon timeless eternal principles (another one of those abstract statements)." Rather, we should look at it from the other way around. That is, that we derive our principles from the the law. In other words, we can deduce from the law what the principle would be. That is to say that that law was "worked out" of a situation and we come up with what the principle would be. A good analogy for this would be, the rules of grammar. As many of you know, grammar and linguistics "break" the rules the more complex it gets. The "rules" (principles) are DERIVED from the usuage rather than the other way around.
Part of what makes Adeney an authority (in my opinion) is that he has lived abroad most of his life being that his parents are missionaries. So he has extensive knowledge of different cultures. Plus, he has adopted children from other countries, which forces him to look at the cultural aspects of ethics. Anybody have any thoughts?
P.S. I'm at the University right now. I hope to pick up "Works" here. Now you done got me interested in it.
Brandon
"Corporations are simply the kind of structure that rises when hordes of people need to be managed, and after spending some time in a large church, I've found that our spirituality does not exempt us from these inefficient and dehumanizing practices."--Steve Lansingh's review of "The Office" at The Film Form | | Back to Top | | |
| 27 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:53 AM (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 |
|
|