The Christian worldview is an over-arching story that binds together all the various facets of life and knowledge. I am realizing that I have not done justice to isolate an aspect of this worldview without reference to the context of the full story. To do so is like analyzing a piece of a puzzle without the box top to guide where it fits into the whole.
To quote Saul Bellow’s 1976 Noble Laureate lecture, “The intelligent public is waiting to hear from art what it does not hear from theology, philosophy, and social theory and what it cannot hear from pure science: a broader, fuller, more coherent, more comprehensive account of what we human beings are, who we are, and what this life is for. If writers do not come into the center, it will not be because the center is pre-empted; it is not.”
Bellow invokes the need for artisans and writers to paint the picture of the story that all these things fit into to provide the more coherent, comprehensive picture of who we are and what this life is all about.
For too long we have kept our knowledge separated from the grand story thereby keeping it secular and distinct from anything religious in nature. However, knowledge was never intended to be learned in a vacuum. It is to be gained to tell us more about the story we are living in and not just to fodder our minds with more interesting facts. At the same time, it has been problematic for the Church to siphon off theology and ‘religious knowledge’ and hold it separate from the whole picture as if it is irrelevant to the world’s systems. There needs to be a reemergence of knowledge that interconnects to tell the story that gives meaning to all the systems of this world.
The picture I would like to paint for you is one that starts with the eternally good and relational God who out of His love and glory created the universe and all that is in it with great splendor. He created a habitat for man on earth that is finely tuned for life. He created man in His image and likeness and gave him dominion over the world to cultivate the earth without the sweat of the brow. Man was to live in peace and harmony with the animals caring for them as well as tending the earth. But something happened to interrupt this paradise when man, who had it all, was allured by Satan to have knowledge that was outside the good and he chose to taste that knowledge and took into himself the poison of sin which corrupted not only the line of men, but the nature he was designed to cultivate in the goodness and glory of God.
Man and nature now knew pain, decay, death, darkness, etc. The world became something different from what God created, but God was not without a plan to bring its grand restoration. We still see the glory in the nature, we see it in a sunrise over the ocean or the mountains, we see it in the rainbow, we see it in the stars, and we see it in the birth of a baby or the wings of a butterfly. But we see also the corruption and death and decay and pain in this world. We know intuitively that pain, death, sickness, decay, tragedy are not good things and we desire peace on this earth, and to heal pain and stop decay. We strive at this in our medicine and in our science. We go after these good things because were designed to live in such a world where we are free from all these distresses and vices. We strive for that world through natural means because it is in us to want the restoration of this world.
God also wants the restoration of this world and of humanity and He has put a plan into place that involves our interaction with Him through relationship with Him made possible by Jesus. We can now work with God as He works through us to work out the redemption already made complete with the work of Christ through his death and resurrection. When an event happens there is a change, but that change takes time to become manifest. Transition is that process that works out the change to its fulfillment. When a person gets married they are married upon saying “I do,” but a transition process begins to occur in order to actualize that singleness is being transformed to a marriage relationship. It is something walked out in time.
This is what has been happening in this world. Jesus brought a change into individuals who are collectively the Church who are working out their redemption in life and as a community upon this earth to reveal the glory of God in all spheres of life. Jesus said that he did not come to condemn the world, but to give it life. He came to bring life and restoration to end the perishing of people due to their sin. He came to free us from the bonds of sin and death as well as giving us the power to redeem the world around us to its intended glory.
The miracles of God are there to bring life and restoration and not to tamper with nature for the fun of it. A traditional doctor repairs a broken body to restore it to health, not to play around with the natural makeup of man. God is the Great Physician who is in the restoration business and He along with those who have found life in Him uses supernatural means to mend nature and infuse it with its natural glory. He brings out the life that was lying dormant and unveils it without its corruption to the watching world. He does this in people and He does it in creation and in anything that is submitted to Him to be made whole.
A day will come when this process is complete and the old corruption of the earth will be no more and the earth will be as new; fully redeemed and shining in its full glory with a humanity that is also fully redeemed and fully righteous and holy.
The story of God and His relationship to man cannot be fully revealed by only arguing for His existence. It is a whole picture that includes mans place in the story and our relationship to the Redeemer, Jesus. It is a worldview that is a grand story of which we are very much a part. It is this story that causes my desire to share the reality of God and to point to the way of our entering into the reality of His love.
As I’ve said, it’s not about mere intellectual assent to a set of beliefs. It’s about a real life encounter with the essence and being of truth. It’s a truth that heals hearts and restores what is lost or damaged to its full health and glory. It’s a story you can find your place in that also has chapters yet to be written by your contribution by entering it as a royal child of God through Jesus.
17 comments:
I hardly know where to start....
karla said: But something happened to interrupt this paradise when man, who had it all, was allured by Satan to have knowledge that was outside the good and he chose to taste that knowledge and took into himself the poison of sin which corrupted not only the line of men, but the nature he was designed to cultivate in the goodness and glory of God.
Let's unpack that shall we...?
"But something happened to interrupt this paradise..."
Something that God allowed to happen or caused to happen...? Presumably God knew it was happening or going to happen, yes?
"man, who had it all, was allured by Satan..."
Whom God created of course... as he created Man who was flawed and corruptable.....
"to have knowledge that was outside the good and he chose to taste that knowledge and took into himself the poison of sin..."
Knowledge that God allowed to exist knowing that Man would take it and use it. Knowing what would happen when he did so....
"which corrupted not only the line of men, but the nature he was designed to cultivate in the goodness and glory of God...."
Which God allowed to happen, did he not? He built a world capable of being corrupted by the sins of Man, then gave Man the opportunity to be 'infected' by that sin. Either it was a mistake, an oversight or part of the plan... Or was it something else?
karla said: The world became something different from what God created, but God was not without a plan to bring its grand restoration.
If God created an original perfect world why did he let it (or plan for it) to fall? Without the fall there would be no need for restoration. Or is that the whole point? Which is kind of odd don't you think?
karla said: God also wants the restoration of this world and of humanity and He has put a plan into place that involves our interaction with Him through relationship with Him made possible by Jesus.
Presumably He doesn't *need* us to help him restore things? So why are we necessary to the restoration?
Oh, and the whole plan thing:
Is everything part of the plan or just some/most things? If not everything is part of the plan then how can we tell what is and what isn't part of it? Is it possible to oppose His plan? Can we make it fail?
karla said: It’s a story you can find your place in that also has chapters yet to be written by your contribution by entering it as a royal child of God through Jesus.
...and what happens to the 'story' and us if we chose *not* to take part?
Cyber “I hardly know where to start....”
I welcome your questions, but the purpose was to paint picture broader than taking one item in isolation.
Cyber: “Something that God allowed to happen or caused to happen...? Presumably God knew it was happening or going to happen, yes?”
Would not a perfect eternal good loving and just God be worthy of our trust in this question that His allowance of it with foreknowledge was not a wrong on His part?
Cyber: “Whom God created of course... as he created Man who was flawed and corruptable.....”
God didn’t make man flawed, He made Him free. Same with Satan who was created as a angel with great authority over other angles, yet with freedom.
"to have knowledge that was outside the good and he chose to taste that knowledge and took into himself the poison of sin..."
Cyber: “Knowledge that God allowed to exist knowing that Man would take it and use it. Knowing what would happen when he did so....”
When good is actualized into being evil is that which is outside of that good. It is a passive existence until it is made a reality. It is not created into being by God.
Cyber “Which God allowed to happen, did he not? He built a world capable of being corrupted by the sins of Man, then gave Man the opportunity to be 'infected' by that sin. Either it was a mistake, an oversight or part of the plan... Or was it something else?”
It wasn’t a mistake; it was man’s mistake if anyone’s, not God’s. God was still sovereign and still ready to redeem fallen man and after this process we are even greater than the first because our freedom is exercised to bring life forevermore.
Cyber “If God created an original perfect world why did he let it (or plan for it) to fall? Without the fall there would be no need for restoration. Or is that the whole point? Which is kind of odd don't you think?”
This is the same question you’ve asked at least three times which I addressed above. Without the freedom for the fall we would be robots. The fall happened as is evidenced by the corruption of nature around us and the sin in our lives. God has walked through it all with us, even taking on the pain and suffering Himself of the fullness of corruption in this world and put it all to death, rose again without the corruption, breaking forever off of us. We are now able to walk out that freedom and bring about that transformation of our world.
Cyber “Presumably He doesn't *need* us to help him restore things? So why are we necessary to the restoration?”
Remember we were created with authority over the world to cultivate it well for the glory of God. So we still have authority to exercise in this world, even greater authority than before because what we had has now been redeemed. He delights to let us aid Him in this wonderful mission. He could certainly do it without us, but it is for our pleasure that He enlist our joining in the mission, and for His pleasure that we are pleased.
Cyber “Oh, and the whole plan thing:
Is everything part of the plan or just some/most things? If not everything is part of the plan then how can we tell what is and what isn't part of it? Is it possible to oppose His plan? Can we make it fail?”
It won’t fail. The world will be restored and many people will know the Lord the way we were designed to in great glory and splendor. I don’t believe God pulls the strings in each person’s life to make them do anything. I do believe He pursues us with His love and aides us as much as we desire to help us come into our destiny. We can choose life with Him or to continue in our bondage.
Cyber “...and what happens to the 'story' and us if we chose *not* to take part?”
The story continues with us missing the glory of our destiny and that is something that grieves God for He desires that all come to Him. Jesus told the story of the Shepard who left the 99 sheep to go find the lost 1 so that all would be safe. He pursues our hearts so that we can share in His life.
"Would not a perfect eternal good loving and just God be worthy of our trust in this question that His allowance of it with foreknowledge was not a wrong on His part?"
Begging the question. You assume god is perfectly just and good, so you apologize for all the things he does and then declare them perfectly good and just. This, however, is logically incoherent and fallacious.
"It wasn’t a mistake; it was man’s mistake if anyone’s, not God’s."
god knew it would happen and set everything in motion to have it happen, yet it's completely our fault?
"Without the freedom for the fall we would be robots."
Does god have the freedom to fall?
Do people in heaven have the freedom to fall?
"The story continues with us missing the glory of our destiny and that is something that grieves God for He desires that all come to Him."
Then why does the Bible say that most people will go to hell? If most people going to hell is considered a success for an omni-max being that supposedly desires that no one go to hell, what would be considered a failure? Why is god so impotent?
Anon "Begging the question. You assume god is perfectly just and good, so you apologize for all the things he does and then declare them perfectly good and just. This, however, is logically incoherent and fallacious."
He necessarily has to be perfectly good to be God. It goes with the package.
Anon "Does god have the freedom to fall?"
Jesus did, He was tempted and to be tempted He had to have been able to have fallen into temptation. He did not though. He was sinless, not because He couldn't sin, but did not sin. So God the Father being one with the Son has faced and passed temptation.
Anon "Do people in heaven have the freedom to fall?"
We have graduated beyond that I think for we will have reached the fullness of the sinless, holy, righteous living and will be in perfect harmony with God. The old will no longer have a hold on us drawing us towards sin. We will be free from that forever because we went through the process to gain that freedom without having our will subverted by force.
"He necessarily has to be perfectly good to be God."
No, he doesn't. If we grant that supernatural entities exist, there's no reason that they have to be perfectly good. You yourself believe in the existence of entities that are not perfectly good but are supernatural. There's no logical necessity for god to be perfectly good.
And, to make matters worse, it's still begging the question.
"Jesus did, He was tempted and to be tempted He had to have been able to have fallen into temptation."
That does not answer the question. Does god have the ability to fall? If you are equating Jesus with god, then you've got some problems to deal with. One, simply because one tried to tempt Jesus doesn't mean he was capable of a fall. Two, if god is capable of falling, how is god perfect?
"So God the Father being one with the Son has faced and passed temptation."
How does an omni-max being face temptation at all? This is non-sensical. In order to be tempted, god would have to not know the outcome of the events in question, for if he knew that what was tempting him would lead to worse conditions, then he would be perfectly bound to not follow through with it. But, here's where it gets tricky. Since he already knew about it and the outcomes, he can't be tempted. Again, we find your theology not able to pass logical muster.
"We have graduated beyond that I think for we will have reached the fullness of the sinless, holy, righteous living and will be in perfect harmony with God."
What do you mean by "graduated beyond that?" Are you claiming that it was perfect to make Adam and Eve capable of sin, but it's even more perfect to no longer be able to sin?
"We will be free from that forever because we went through the process to gain that freedom without having our will subverted by force."
So, you are alleging that it's possible to have free will without wishing to do evil? Then, why not do that from the beginning? That would have saved countless souls from suffering and going to hell. Nice god you've got there.
Anon, we've been over many of the things you are bringing up time and again.
I will address the matter of Jesus. Yes, Jesus is God. You should know that this is a central component of Christianity and you know I am a Christian.
Jesus was tempted. He was both fully God and fully man but He surrendered His God powers to live as a man perfectly related to God to show us how it is possible for us to live. So He was really tempted and could have sinned, but didn't. Jesus being fully God, Himself, means that God in some way experienced what Jesus felt to be tempted and He also experienced all the pain and suffering Jesus took upon Himself when He took our sins on His sinless self.
"I will address the matter of Jesus. Yes, Jesus is God. You should know that this is a central component of Christianity and you know I am a Christian."
Not all Xians believe exactly what you believe, so I had to ask.
Anyway, the objections are on the table already.
"Jesus was tempted. He was both fully God and fully man but He surrendered His God powers to live as a man perfectly related to God to show us how it is possible for us to live. So He was really tempted and could have sinned, but didn't."
There's quite a few problems with this. He already knew all the outcomes and chose to forget? Is that even possible? Did he really live the life of a human, considering that he didn't have original sin? Are you claiming that a human could live a life free from sin? How does this square with your insistence that Jesus is god, when you are now claiming that Jesus was also not god?
"Jesus being fully God, Himself, means that God in some way experienced what Jesus felt to be tempted and He also experienced all the pain and suffering Jesus took upon Himself when He took our sins on His sinless self."
If god felt temptation, was that something that god had never experienced before? Does that mean that god is more perfect now or is no longer perfect? There goes your omni-max god. Face it, your theology is not logically consistent.
BTW, by god making himself human (i.e. not perfect) doesn't that contradict your previous assertions that god can't lie since he can't be less than perfect?
If I didn't know better, I'd think you were joking with me.
Anon, didn't you say you used to be a Christian? I don't see how you don't understand the basics of the Gospel that you spend so much time refuting. I can take some time to explain some of these things if you are interested, but no matter what I say you jump right in with an attack against it without giving time to understand the full picture.
I appreciate how Cyber really tries to understand what I'm saying even while disagreeing. I don't get that sense from you. Maybe I am misinterpreting your stance, but it is how you are coming across.
I will spend many hours if necessary trying to explain these things, but would it do any good at all? Is there any evidence at all that you would accept? Is there any explanation that would be good enough?
I have never been interested in quarreling with you or anyone. I know there is a fine line between discussion and quarreling, but I try to keep it on the discussion side of things.
It would be good if you could tell me from your point of view if there is any worth in my continuing to give responses to your questions? Is there nothing I could say that would aid your understanding of the truth claims I'm making and their validity?
Karla, how do you know this?
"Anon, didn't you say you used to be a Christian? I don't see how you don't understand the basics of the Gospel that you spend so much time refuting."
Because I learned quite a while ago that not all Xians agree on the "basics" as you call them. Insisting that all Xians agree with you is arrogant, to say the least. Not only that, but since you can't keep your story straight, I get confused as to what it is that you actually believe, since I find it hard to believe that you hold such cognitive dissonance.
"Is there any evidence at all that you would accept?"
When you actually present some evidence, we can talk.
"Is there any explanation that would be good enough?"
Yes, one that makes sense and also agrees with reality and empirical results. How about one that isn't logically contradictory.
"I have never been interested in quarreling with you or anyone. I know there is a fine line between discussion and quarreling, but I try to keep it on the discussion side of things."
Ah, I see. So, pointing out that your beliefs are contradictory is quarreling, but I'm sure that if I didn't challenge your beliefs you'd be quite happy to call it a discussion? Is this from the person that claimed that she examines her worldview to make sure it lines up with reality (while also claiming that she knows god is reality, so everything has to line up with her beliefs about god)?
"It would be good if you could tell me from your point of view if there is any worth in my continuing to give responses to your questions?"
You might want to try and explain how the obvious contradictions are not actually contradictory, or you can act like I'm a mean ol' atheist that's just spoiling your party and that you have answers, but you don't want to give them because you'd rather pout. Of course, that would probably be rather dishonest, considering that you don't have answers, which is why you are avoiding the objections, as you usually do. (You don't alwasy avoid, but when you do you end up sticking your foot in your mouth, so maybe it's a good strategy for you.)
"Is there nothing I could say that would aid your understanding of the truth claims I'm making and their validity?"
For the umpteenth time, you could present actual, you know, evidence for you claims! Whining about how the mean atheist won't accept your bald assertions and wishful thinking and then retreating to, "You won't accept what I say, so why bother," without ever actually backing up your claims is absurd to the highest degree. If you are going to present yourself as a thinker, philosopher, or whatever else you seem to think of yourself (like an expert on history, for example?) you should be able to walk the walk.
Anon, I was not implying that your questions was quarreling, I feel I am quarreling with you and don't want to do that. The manner in which you respond is rather brazen and I try to ignore that as best I can, but I want to keep my response from being reactionary so I am asking how I can help aid your understanding.
I apologize to have confused you with my position. Most Christian churches, accept the divine Jesus as being one part of the Triune God. I have written about this in the past so I assumed you knew I believe Jesus to be God in the flesh, fully God and fully man.
This isn't inconsistent with anything I have said previously, maybe I took for granted that you knew this.
I have also said nothing against other Christians nor anyone of any other belief system. I have talked about the belief systems and their validity or lack of validity, but I have never spoken ill of anyone who holds any worldview contrary to my own.
CL, has repeatedly asked what kind of evidence are you looking for? Saying generally "evidence" or giving "reasonable answers" is ambiguous and leaves you as the determiner of what constitutes evidence or reason. What is the objective standard you want to use for determining something as evidence or something as a reseaonable arguement?
Clearly what I have given you don't see as reasonable or evidential. So please help me be able to meet your question by defining what kind of thing you are looking for that constitutes evidence.
You should realize I am not skirting your questions as I have written hundreds of comments in response to you alone and have written full post in response to some of your questions. I am going out of my way for you and I'm not asking much in return.
You and Cyber and Mike are all on my heart and I really hope I can help give some answers to your satisfaction. I don't give up easily.
So tell me, how can I meet your qualification of evidence and reason? What specifically are you looking for and please don't respond with "evidence and reason" as your answer. Please quantify and clarify and describe what you are looking for. (ie Jesus to show up to you in the flesh? Archeological proof of the people, places, and events of Scripture? An angelic visitation?
What would it take for you personally to see the God of the Bible as credible and real?
Ali, maybe you could answer the same question I asked GCT/Anon?
"Most Christian churches, accept the divine Jesus as being one part of the Triune God."
The point is that there are variations in thought, and you can hardly chide me for recognizing that fact. Also, this incoherent belief is self-contradictory anyway.
"This isn't inconsistent with anything I have said previously..."
I have pointed out the inconsistencies in this thread.
"Saying generally "evidence" or giving "reasonable answers" is ambiguous and leaves you as the determiner of what constitutes evidence or reason."
Well, you could start by precisely defining this idea you call god, you could point out where the idea came from, and then you can point out the logical necessity of why this god exists and/or point out something that is factual that necessarily leads us to belief in god. The factual portion is the evidence. Showing how it leads to god is the hard part. For example, I can factually say that objects fall to the Earth when dropped (for the most part), which leads me to gravity, etc. It does not lead me to the moon being made of cheese, there is no causal connection. It also doesn't lead me to god due to the lack of causal connection.
"What is the objective standard you want to use for determining something as evidence or something as a reseaonable arguement?"
I would say empirical results of something is good to start with and then a solid logical chain to god.
"You should realize I am not skirting your questions as I have written hundreds of comments in response to you alone and have written full post in response to some of your questions."
Simply vomiting words on the page doesn't constitute answering.
"What would it take for you personally to see the God of the Bible as credible and real?"
An account that isn't logically contradictory would be good. It's already been demonstrated by many others that omni-max gods are not logically possible. You might want to start with something that is logically possible.
I think I'm mainly here to work out why you believe what you believe.
That's why I asked how you know.
Ali, sorry to take so long to get back with you.
While I have studied much factual evidence that backs up what I am advocating and can point you to many sources where you can study it for yourself, I also know because I have seen the truth of it in my life. My life is daily lived in its reality.
"While I have studied much factual evidence that backs up what I am advocating..."
Which have all been torn to shreds. Your "factual evidence" is all based on assumption and non-factual data. Epic fail.
Post a Comment