quote:

---

Here's something. Given one has a PANENTHEISTIC view of God, how would this work out. Wouldn't God already be "in" us? If so, why would BELIEF be necessary to say that God "resides" in us? Just wondering.

Sorry so brief.



Love God. Love People. Love Truth. Dedicate your all to that which you love.

---

quote:

---

One can speak quite coherently about the intensification and withdrawl of God's power but I think all Christians are committed to God's full omnipresence. The decisive point is whether one has "only" the omnipresence of God qua Spirit or whether one has the Word as well. It seems that the Spirit gives breath and life for this time and place, but the Word offers eternal life. I would concieve of God's Spirit as the omnipresent aspect whereby God is pursuing creation and present to creation universally, and the Word as the Gospel. When the two come together one of the effects is a radical intensification of the Spirit by the Word, just preceding this was a drawing of the Word by the Spirit (prevenient grace). This is really too brief and so may raise more questions than it solves....

---

I think I know where you are coming from. Dr. Amos Yong has an idea that he presents in a paper called "Discerning the Spirit(s) in the World of Religions: Toward a Pneumatological Theology of Religions" where he discusses this idea somewhat. He makes a very good case for having a thoroughly trinitarian theology in which God is seen as always working through "Word" and "Spirit". From the paper, page 11 (emphasis mine):

quote:

---

I would suggest that one way to forge a robust trinitarianism is to revisit the patristic metaphor of Word and Spirit as "the two hands of the Father." Briefly stated, the Word represents concreteness-as in, e.g., Jesus of Nazareth and the written Scriptures-historical particularity and the human experience of objectivity; the Spirit represents the dynamism of the anointed one-as in, e.g., the Christ, and the living, inspired, and illuminating word of God-cosmic relationality and the human experience of subjectivity. Rather than being understood literalistically, these categories are meant to function heuristically and metaphorically. Their objective is to enable us to envision the truth that God works all things with the divine hands: by and through both Word and Spirit. If that is the case, then any assessment that neglects either aspect of what God does fails truly to capture the heart or essence of that work or reality.

---

I think the idea works quite well, actually. I believe that Dr. Yong would disagree with your take of bificurcating the "Spirit" and "Word" elements for certain cases. I believe that he would more likely say that the two components are involved in ALL divine activity, but act on a continuum of sorts where there may be different EMPHASES on the two components in various divine actions, but "Spirit" and "Word" are always existent in both. A footnote from the emphasized sentence in the quoted paragraph above (again, emphasis mine):

quote:

---

This means not that some things are to be considered manifestations of Word and other things of Spirit, but that Word and Spirit are inseparable features of all things. Thus, there is the universality of Word (e.g., the cosmic Christ) as well as a particularity of Spirit (e.g., that accentuates and values the differentiated order of determinate things) precisely because both aspects inhere-as in the patristic notion of circumincessio and the Greek notion of perichoresis-and inform each other. On the notion of the particularity of Spirit, see Colin Gunton, The One, the Three and the Many: God, Creation and the Culture of Modernity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 180-209.

---

But in any case, I believe he "Word/Spirit" idea is a good one for this subject. In the context of what we are discussing here, we could say that the "wooing" process by the Spirit and the active presentation of the Gospel to a person, and possible subsequent regeneration, we see a process of heightened particularity for BOTH Word and Spirit. What do you think? Good stuff, Modes.




Love God. Love People. Love Truth. Dedicate your all to that which you love.



Edited by - mephi2K on 02/05/2002 09:54:46 AM

quote:

---

I believe that Dr. Yong would disagree with your take of bificurcating the "Spirit" and "Word" elements for certain cases. I believe that he would more likely say that the two components are involved in ALL divine activity, but act on a continuum of sorts where there may be different EMPHASES on the two components in various divine actions, but "Spirit" and "Word" are always existent in both.

---

Could this difference be attributed to tendencies toward a more psychological (different emphases within one) or social model of the trinity (different persons within one). pia

~·•·~·•·~·•·~·•·~
“Peace to the one who wrote and to the one who reads and to those who love the Lord in simplicity of heart.” § Melito of Sardis

Edited by - pia†desideria on 02/05/2002 10:17:23 AM

quote:

---

Could this difference be attributed to tendencies toward a more psychological (different emphases within one) or social model of the trinity (different persons within one).

---

Good thought. This may well be. From a footnote on page 11 of Dr. Yong's paper:

quote:

---

The origins of this metaphor [Meph's note: the metaphor of Word and Spirit being the "two hands of the Father"] go back to Irenaeus (Against Heresies 4, Preface, 4). I prefer this trinitarian model over the communitarian model currently advocated by social trinitarians because it seems to me to be capable of preserving the centrality of the notion of community inherent in the social doctrine without the latter's tendencies toward tritheism.

---

Good consideration. However, I'd side with Dr. Yong on this one. Even IF we were to take the social model of the Trinity, it seems far more useful to look at it Dr. Yong's way with Spirit and Word involved in all things. I think it does greater justice to how things are in ALL of reality, not just the saving event.





Love God. Love People. Love Truth. Dedicate your all to that which you love.

quote:

---

Good consideration. However, I'd side with Dr. Yong on this one. Even IF we were to take the social model of the Trinity, it seems far more useful to look at it Dr. Yong's way with Spirit and Word involved in all things. I think it does greater justice to how things are in ALL of reality, not just the saving event.

---

quote:

---

OK then, how do you understand the Word’s presence/activity/relationship (feel free to pick one) regarding unbelievers?

---

Just a thought. How about creation and sustenance of all things?

John 1:1-4
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

Colossians 1:15-18
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.


1 Cor 8:5-6
For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Heb 1:1-3
In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.


If one were inclined toward creation continua, wouldn't this give some clue that the Word had something substantial to do with ALL things that exist...including unbelievers. If the Word has something substantial to do in this regard, then He is instrumental in what we'd call "general revelation"...which I would think is very important to unbelievers.

See, Dr. Yong talks about the Spirit being involved in the aspects of "creation", "re-creation", and the "final creation." But not to single out the Spirit in these actions, but to emphasize it because of the way it's so DEemphasized. Surely we see that ALL members of the Trinity were significantly involved in all of these things...and that's what Dr. Yong is saying. This is why I bring up the heightened particularity idea up. Though both Word and Spirit are in play in creation, they are both have much more particularity as applied to humanity in the RE-CREATIVE or redemptive event.



Love God. Love People. Love Truth. Dedicate your all to that which you love.

quote:

---

Pia said:

quote:

---

OK then, how do you understand the Word’s presence/activity/relationship (feel free to pick one) regarding unbelievers?

---

Just a thought. How about creation and sustenance of all things?

---

Wow. Thanks for serving me up such a great softball!

quote:

---

John 1:1-4
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

Colossians 1:15-18
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.


1 Cor 8:5-6
For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Heb 1:1-3
In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.

---

You forgot Proverbs 8. Seriously though, if you hook Jesus up with the Hebraic Wisdom tradition—whose activity included creation, salvation (transforming sinners into friends of God), and invitation (knocking on doors, banqueting, calling out in the streets, etc.)—your thesis would be greatly stengthened.

Random passages and quotes regarding Wisdom:

Remember that chorus that goes:

Lord you are more precious than silver,
Lord you are more costly than gold.
Lord you are more beautiful than diamonds,
And nothing I desire compares to you.

It is a hymn to Wisdom:

[H]er income is better than silver,
and her revenue is better than gold.
She is more precious than jewels,
and nothing you desire can compare with her. (Prov. 3:14–15)

The passage goes on to say “all her paths are peace. She is a tree of life to those who lay hold of her…The LORD by Wisdom founded the earth…”

“…Wisdom, the fashioner of all things…she pervades and penetrates all things.…she is a a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness.…she can do all things…against Wisdom evil does not prevail” (Wis. of Sol. 7:22ff.).

Check this out:

quote:

---

It has long been recognised that Jesus’s appeal, “Come to me, all who labour, etc.” (Mt. xi.28–30) is couched in a form and in terms which originally belonged to Wisdom’s invitation. She too called men to her, bade them take her yoke upon them, and promised them rest (Ecclesisticus li.23–7, vi.24–30 [see also Sirach 24:19, 22; 51:26]). How is the matthean passage to be interpreted? Unquestionably, the use of this unusual diction signifies more than merely a casual and uncommitted rhetorical borrowing. The fact that this appeal is clothed to such an extent in an Old Testament form is of the utmost theological importance. Jesus enters authoritatively into the realm to which these Old Testament expressions belong and claims for himself the form and content of this final Old Testament offer of salvation. Here too then there are considerable hermeneutic complications. It would be too naîve to say that the form belongs to the Old Testament, but the content to the New. Going far beyond the merely formal aspect, a considerably number of the actual expressions used in this saying of Jesus’s were already in existence—the invitation, the idea of the yoke, and of the peace which men can find. Yet, the very fact that it is Jesus who says this, and says it with reference to himself, puts the whole thing on a different plane. The fact that Jesus describes his yoke as “easy,” and, in particular, that he calls attention to his relationship with the Father, and speaks of himself as merciful, puts the old invitation into an entirely new perspective. Jesus speaks as one who “fulfils” the Old Testament. (von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 2.334–335)

---

Mephi, I agree with you. I think that associating Christ with creatio continua is the basis for continuity between the work of the preexistant Christ and the incarnate Jesus. I think it also helps guard against a supersessionistic understanding of the Old Testament, as the von Rad quote indicates.

pia

Now we’re WAY off track! Sorry JG!

~·•·~·•·~·•·~·•·~
“Peace to the one who wrote and to the one who reads and to those who love the Lord in simplicity of heart.” § Melito of Sardis

Edited by - pia†desideria on 02/05/2002 1:41:33 PM

quote:

---

Wow, great thread.

Modes, for some reason you seem to want to avoid beginning with the Father as source, choose a kind-of PC route to begin with instead, and then cobble (expertly--you are certainly an intellect) your way back to where the map says you need to end up; and shake off the hit-hickers you pick up along the way.

Why such a complicated task?

Edited by - potonwheel on 02/06/2002 06:23:56 AM

---

quote:

---

Thanks for the answer. SUPER great to have you around again.

---

Thanks friend. I was beginning to wonder if anyone noticed that i was gone for over a month.

"Christianly understood, truth is obviously not to know the truth but to be the truth. Despite all modern philosophy, there is an infinite difference here..." SK

quote:

---

However, Jesus, speaking in the context of salvation in John 4:13-14, likened it to "a well of water springing up into everlasting life". Is a well water? Of course yes. But a well only provides water for a few people ie. a domestic boreholes only provides the water needs for say one household. But the infilling of the Spirit (Baptism of the Holy Spirit) is likened to "rivers of living water flowing out of his belly" in John 7:37-39. The difference is of course a river provides water for a multitude of people. Thus the difference is that a born again man has ability to have “water for a few”, but the Spirit filled man “water to a multitude”. This suggests that the 'well' of salvation is for the individual, and the 'rivers' of the baptism in the Holy Spirit are for ministering to others.

---