Well, good Minstrel, you said 500 words or less – and I count more than 900 in your post! That’s a relief, because it gives me license to ramble a bit, since it was your gauntlet and all! This will be a response to your musings on the Evil One; my first contribution to the discussion. Should only be about twice as long as yours. ;)
First off, I think it’s essential to this discussion to properly understand the statement in Revelation 20:3 regarding the binding of Satan. I completely agree with you that this is a reference to the present age, and not some future, utopic Millennial kingdom – whether it be a premillennial or a postmillennial one. It is my belief, from the Scriptures, that this 1,000 year binding of Satan is a reference to the “Church age” – that is, the age intervening the Ascension of Christ and His Second Advent. The age in which we now live. But how are we to understand Satan’s binding during this present age? As you note, John’s words are clear – he is bound “So that he would not deceive the nations any longer”. But this is not the complete context. In order to understand the nature of his binding (what he is prevented from doing), it is critical to understand what he does do once he is let loose (“After these things he must be released for a short time”).
When he is released – Revelation 20:7, “And when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison, and will come out to deceive the nations…” - it is what he does specifically in his deception of the nations that defines the nature of his binding during the 1,000 years (what he is kept from doing during the Church Age). Is it a general, absolute binding, where he is prevented from doing anything? From deceiving anyone to any extent? It can't be, because throughout the book of Revelation, Satan – the Great Red Dragon – is portrayed as being closely allied with the Beast and the False Prophet to persecute and deceive people throughout the Church Age (described also as a period of great tribulation, when the Dragon himself deceives and persecutes the Church, which is sovereignly protected by God - cf., Revelation 12:13-17). Jesus’ words in Matthew 24 – forewarning his disciples of what will come after His death and Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven (between then and His Second Advent) – are, “False christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.” This supplies context to John's Revelation, where Satan’s ally, the Beast of Revelation 13, “Performs great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in front of people, and by the signs that it is allowed to work … it deceives those who dwell on earth…” So, active Satanic deception is a reality in the Church Age, which is why Paul admonishes Christians to “Be strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might. Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil… In all circumstances take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming darts of the evil one…”
Satanic deception and scheming is specifically said to go on during this period of time, meaning that though he is bound and kept from deceiving the nations, his deceptive influence is not rendered completely impotent. Again, it is the specific goal of his deception that he is prevented from accomplishing during the Church Age. That specific goal is revealed in Revelation 20:8 as his primary agenda once he is released; “And he will come out to deceive the nations that are at the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them for battle…” In other words, in putting these scriptures together, we learn that Satan is active in the Church Age – scheming, deceiving, persecuting, tempting, etc… But he is kept from being able to accomplish his ultimate goal in all of that. He is kept from being able to engender such global rebellion against God and His Church that the nations would band together in an all-out effort to utterly overthrow the Kingdom of God and His Church, and build a counterfeit, Satanic Kingdom. That is the nature of his "binding". It is not an absolute divesting of his power. It is a sovereign limitation of Satan's power in fulfillment of Christ’s promise in Matthew 16:18, “I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” And that binding will remain until God sovereignly releases Satan, allowing him to gather the nations in outright war against God and His Kingdom - the result of which will be Satan's utter, final, eternal destruction when Christ returns (Revelation 19-20).
So, in this present age, even though God has bound Satan, limiting his power, he is none the less prowling about like a roaring lion, seeking whom to devour. He is active in deception and persecution and plaguing even Christians with his scheming and his flaming arrows. I don’t believe that Peter can be said to be speaking of the flesh as the "roaring lion", because he specifically makes reference to the “devil”, and not the “flesh”. (Grammatically, "The Devil" is the subject of the verb, "To Prowl". He - the Adversary - the Devil, is the one prowling. Not us, prowling around like the Devil, or devilishly). The English word "Devil" is a translation of the Greek, "diabolos", used 37 times in the New Testament, 34 of which are masculine nouns which refer to the Devil as a person, Satan. (The other 3 are used in the pastoral epistles with respect to human beings who are described as "malicious gossips", because of the character of their speech. Cf., 1 Timothy 3:11, 2 Timothy 3:3, and Titus 2:3). Elsewhere, Satan’s name is used specifically to speak of his influence in today’s world – he is a “tempter” in 1 Corinthians 7:5, who has designs for our defeat, 2 Corinthians 2:11. He sends messengers to “harass” Christians, 2 Corinthians 12:7, and hinders the ministry of the gospel when he can, 1 Thessalonians 2:18. When the Antichrist comes, it will be because of the “Activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders”, 2 Thessalonians 2:9, again giving context to Jesus’ warnings of Satanic influence in this present age, in Matthew 24. He wields the power to blind the eyes of unbelievers 2 Corinthians 4:4, and keep them in darkness, Acts 26:18.
He is bound, but he is still the powerful "Prince of the power of the air", Ephesians 2:2; the "god of this age", 2 Corinthians 4:4; and the "ruler of this world", John 14:30. He is not omnipotent, but his armies are strong, and we must stand "Against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places" - not just those fleshly rebels here on earth. Jesus' own binding of the Strong Man in Matthew 12 did not consist of a complete divesting of Satan's power and influence, but in the casting out of demons so that the proclamation of the Kingdom would be effective. It was a sovereign limiting of Satan's influence, not yet his utter destruction which is still to come (Revelation 20:10). Yes, Satan has been defeated (Hebrews 2:14, Colossians 2:15). But like the flesh which has been crucified (Galatians 2:20), and yet still wages war against God's Spirit within me (Galatians 5:16, Romans 7); So Satan's defeat at the Cross 2,000 years ago doesn't mean that he is no longer at war with God prior to Christ's Second Coming, when his defeat will be consummated in everlasting perdition.
Over and over, God speaks in the New Testament scriptures of Satan having this type of influence now, in this present age, even though he is “bound”. So, his binding is real – and he is kept from accomplishing such rebellion and deception that he would destroy the Church – but his binding is not so absolute as to prevent him from doing anything by way of temptation, deception, persecution, etc… All of these verses refer to him either by name (Satan) or by title (the Devil). If the Apostles wanted to attribute the wickedness of those verses to the flesh only or primarily, they would have said that specifically and clearly. Yes, in Ephesians 4:26 Paul does say to us "Not to let the sun go down on our anger", so as not to "Give opportunity to the devil" in verse 27. This doesn’t mean that it is only our flesh that is responsible for evil – but that the devil actively takes opportunity to propound wickedness on the earth primarily through our flesh. Through tempting our weak, sinful, rebellious hearts. That is the avenue that presents him with the greatest opportunity to rebel against God and His Kingdom in attempting to do what he tried to do the day that he fell from heaven – dethrone the King of Kings and enthrone himself. But he is bound from being able to do it. For all his deceptive, scheming efforts, his purposes will fail and he will eventually be utterly vanquished when, at that climactic battle of Gog and Magog, “The devil who had deceived them [is] thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever”, Revelation 20:10.
Does he know my name? He knows enough about me to tempt me strategically, according to the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of my flesh – targeting them precisely with his flaming arrows, Ephesians 6:10-18. In Acts 19:15, the demons know Paul’s name – why not mine? Does Satan know my thoughts? Surely not as God does – but Satan was capable of filling Ananias’ heart with lies against the Holy Spirit, Acts 5:3, and he was able to “enter into” Judas, influencing him to betray Jesus (Luke 22:3). In John 13:2, John says that "The devil had already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot... to betray Him". So even if he can't be said to make us sin, Satan does have access to our thoughts and desires in some way, so as to tempt us to do his evil will. At the same time, Satan's estimation of the condition of Job's heart, and of how Job would respond to tribulation proved to be inaccurate (Job 1:9-11) - proving that Satan is not omniscient, and that he does not have comprehensive knowledge of our thoughts.
There is prolific demonic activity recorded throughout the book of Acts – subsequent to Jesus’ ascension, and those demons are clearly personal, intelligent beings who know things about the people they possess or oppress. Satan is not omnipotent, but it is a mistake to argue that he is impotent. He is clearly a powerful, active, intelligent being. Not even Michael the Archangel would speak personally against him, but pronounced the Lord’s rebuke on him in Jude 1:9. Satan's demonic emissaries are manifold – and though they are not omniscient (as only God is), they know a great deal about us and work through Satan’s influence to tempt and pester us regularly. I don’t believe that Satan is capable of knowing my thoughts as God does – but he is extremely crafty and understands the basic roots of evil and the nature of sin far better than I do (he's been at it longer), so as to be able to exploit my flesh through temptation in a highly efficient and effective manner. And we mustn't forget that Satan is a (fallen) angelic, spiritual being. His knowledge and understanding of the spiritual realm, where the true battle is fought, is far superior to our own, and we shouldn't underestimate it. And all of that means that I must be aware of his desire to tempt and deceive me. I must be acquainted with his strategies. I must realize that not only is my flesh wicked, but that I live in a wicked world in which Satan, the Devil, the god of this age and the ruler of this world, is presently active.
But of course the good news is that he was defeated at the cross, rendering his eventual and final destruction an absolute certainty. And, God’s wisdom and knowledge are boundless, and He is sovereign. Sovereign enough to guarantee that all of the resources that we need to resist the schemes of the devil are at our disposal through faith in Christ. Sovereign enough to guarantee that Satan cannot succeed in destroying Christ’s Church, or the life of any soul for which Christ shed His blood. Sovereign enough to promise that if we, "Resist the Devil," He will "Flee from us" (James 4:7) God is even Sovereign enough to utilize Satan’s purposes of deception, temptation, and persecution for His own glorious purposes – to sanctify His people through fiery trials, 1 Peter 4:12. To discipline His people through divine love, Hebrews 12:6. The violence of Satan is even used against him in God’s purposes of judgment, which is – I believe – one of the central themes of the whole book of Revelation. It is one of the primary reasons why evil continues to exist by Satan's agency – because it is inherently self-defeating. By continuing to rebel, Satan is ensuring his own eternal doom, and that of all those who will sinfully cooperate with his rebellious agenda. And that doom will accomplish God's Glory in the demonstration of His justice. In short, even though Satan is active and capable of great spiritual harm, the Christian need not fear - for our comfort is that even though Satan does roams as a ravenous, roaring lion – “We know that for those who love God, all things work together for good, for those who are called according to His purpose.” Romans 8:28 The biblical doctrine of Satan is not the Persian doctrine of dualistic deities - one good, and the other evil. He is a lion, but he is leashed by the sovereign hand of God.
Through the strength of God's Spirit within us, if we remain faithful - even through the worst that the Devil can throw at us - if we remain faithful even unto death, He will give us the crown of life (Revelation 2:10).
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
A New Cosmology
So what about the bad guy? As a disclaimer, these are the thoughts of a layman. My study on this does not reflect years of training, and tomes of reading. These are simply thoughts, though spoken with confidence, sparking discussion and further clarification of my own personal questions.
Lucifer began as an angel, created in the Garden as an archangel, much like Gabriel and Michael. Ezekiel 28 (if we can understand this passage this way) describes him as "full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty... blameless in all [his] ways till unrighteousness was found in [him]." But his "heart was proud because if [his] beauty." Therefore, because he attempted to set his throne on high (Is 14), "above the stars of God," he was cast to the earth, with all his minions. Michael and his angels (Rev 12) defeated the Accuser, and there was no longer any room left in heaven for him. "Woe to you O earth and sea, for the devil has come down to you in great wrath, because he knows his time is short."
In the old times, nations were governed by powers and principalities. Each nation had an angel, sometimes called gods, who guarded, governed them. Michael was the angel for Israel (Dan 10:21). Satan had been given real authority on earth, and had accumulated nations. Daniel 10 describes Michael and the linen clad man (Jesus) fighting against the prince of Persia for 21 days. The Lord's army of fire was very active in the days of the kings (2 Kings 6). The world was full of what moderns call "supernatural" activity, as if anything that we can't see under a microscope isn't natural.
So the world was governed, in a finite sense, by these created, angelic principalities. The Daystar, and the false "Bright star of Morning" was the leader of all these powers, excepting Michael, who was true to his Creator. This is why Satan could tempt Jesus, with some legitimacy, with the kingdoms of the earth, if He would simply bow down and worship him. But Jesus knew that He was receiving the kingdoms anyway, and so remained faithful to His Father. On the Cross, Satan was conquered (Heb 2:14). The strongman was bound, and his goods were plundered. He was cast into the abyss, and the door was shut and sealed. This is for a time, until the thousand years are ended. During this time the Church reigns with Christ as a holy priesthood. The dominions and powers have been cast down, and Christ sits on His thrown, making the nations a footstool for His feet.
So what of evil and the devil now? Satan is bound and "cannot deceive the nations any longer," (Rev 20). Why then are there still evil men? Well that's because there are still men. Our unhindered, unredeemed flesh is one of death and rebellion. Our flesh still wages war against the Spirit. Our flesh still desires power and thrones above the "stars of God." To put it tritely, in an oft used cliche, we are our own worst enemy.
Could not passages such as Ephesians 4:27, James 4:7, and 1 Peter 5:8 be understood this way? Ephesians 4:26 says to not let the sun go down on our anger, and then in 28, to not give any opportunity to the devil. In Galatians 5:13, Paul tells us to not give opportunity to our flesh. Could not the flesh be understood as the one who seeks to devour us, prowling like a lion? Our flesh craves the "schemes of the devil," and it is against the "schemes of the devil" for which we gird ourselves with the armor of God.
What is making me think all this? I am doubtful that Scripture teaches a theology of Satan which says that he knows my name. Why does he know my name? If he knows my name, what is to prevent him from knowing everyone in the world, from every age. Do angels have that kind knowledge, that kind of capacity. Does Satan know the thoughts of my heart? Can angels see into the heart of man? Does Scripture uphold that, and if so, where?
Would it not be wiser to locate our enemy in the old man which Christ bought, and is renewing by the Spirit? Is Satan really not bound and sealed up like Hebrews and Revelation say? Christ says "how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house," (Matt 12:29). Which is true? To me, Scripture seems to reiterate that Satan has been vanquished, and bound, though his servants still roam the earth, wrecking havoc. If what I have said is true, which I would not go to the wall for, the current Christian notion of Satan might be causing unnecessary fear and anxiety. If we believe that Satan has the power to know my inward thoughts, and affect them for his own design if we are not careful, there is no end to what oppression that could cause. Now if it is true that he does, our answer is obviously Christ, and the sovereign power of God. In Him alone rests ultimate power and authority. But if it is not true, why do we allow ourselves to think that way? Why would we ascribe to him knowledge that, we thought, God alone had, if he does not really have that knowledge? Again, it is obvious that if it is true, only God could have given him that knowledge. That is not the discussion. The discussion is if our beliefs about Satan are not true, why do we believe it?
Lucifer began as an angel, created in the Garden as an archangel, much like Gabriel and Michael. Ezekiel 28 (if we can understand this passage this way) describes him as "full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty... blameless in all [his] ways till unrighteousness was found in [him]." But his "heart was proud because if [his] beauty." Therefore, because he attempted to set his throne on high (Is 14), "above the stars of God," he was cast to the earth, with all his minions. Michael and his angels (Rev 12) defeated the Accuser, and there was no longer any room left in heaven for him. "Woe to you O earth and sea, for the devil has come down to you in great wrath, because he knows his time is short."
In the old times, nations were governed by powers and principalities. Each nation had an angel, sometimes called gods, who guarded, governed them. Michael was the angel for Israel (Dan 10:21). Satan had been given real authority on earth, and had accumulated nations. Daniel 10 describes Michael and the linen clad man (Jesus) fighting against the prince of Persia for 21 days. The Lord's army of fire was very active in the days of the kings (2 Kings 6). The world was full of what moderns call "supernatural" activity, as if anything that we can't see under a microscope isn't natural.
So the world was governed, in a finite sense, by these created, angelic principalities. The Daystar, and the false "Bright star of Morning" was the leader of all these powers, excepting Michael, who was true to his Creator. This is why Satan could tempt Jesus, with some legitimacy, with the kingdoms of the earth, if He would simply bow down and worship him. But Jesus knew that He was receiving the kingdoms anyway, and so remained faithful to His Father. On the Cross, Satan was conquered (Heb 2:14). The strongman was bound, and his goods were plundered. He was cast into the abyss, and the door was shut and sealed. This is for a time, until the thousand years are ended. During this time the Church reigns with Christ as a holy priesthood. The dominions and powers have been cast down, and Christ sits on His thrown, making the nations a footstool for His feet.
So what of evil and the devil now? Satan is bound and "cannot deceive the nations any longer," (Rev 20). Why then are there still evil men? Well that's because there are still men. Our unhindered, unredeemed flesh is one of death and rebellion. Our flesh still wages war against the Spirit. Our flesh still desires power and thrones above the "stars of God." To put it tritely, in an oft used cliche, we are our own worst enemy.
Could not passages such as Ephesians 4:27, James 4:7, and 1 Peter 5:8 be understood this way? Ephesians 4:26 says to not let the sun go down on our anger, and then in 28, to not give any opportunity to the devil. In Galatians 5:13, Paul tells us to not give opportunity to our flesh. Could not the flesh be understood as the one who seeks to devour us, prowling like a lion? Our flesh craves the "schemes of the devil," and it is against the "schemes of the devil" for which we gird ourselves with the armor of God.
What is making me think all this? I am doubtful that Scripture teaches a theology of Satan which says that he knows my name. Why does he know my name? If he knows my name, what is to prevent him from knowing everyone in the world, from every age. Do angels have that kind knowledge, that kind of capacity. Does Satan know the thoughts of my heart? Can angels see into the heart of man? Does Scripture uphold that, and if so, where?
Would it not be wiser to locate our enemy in the old man which Christ bought, and is renewing by the Spirit? Is Satan really not bound and sealed up like Hebrews and Revelation say? Christ says "how can someone enter a strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? Then indeed he may plunder his house," (Matt 12:29). Which is true? To me, Scripture seems to reiterate that Satan has been vanquished, and bound, though his servants still roam the earth, wrecking havoc. If what I have said is true, which I would not go to the wall for, the current Christian notion of Satan might be causing unnecessary fear and anxiety. If we believe that Satan has the power to know my inward thoughts, and affect them for his own design if we are not careful, there is no end to what oppression that could cause. Now if it is true that he does, our answer is obviously Christ, and the sovereign power of God. In Him alone rests ultimate power and authority. But if it is not true, why do we allow ourselves to think that way? Why would we ascribe to him knowledge that, we thought, God alone had, if he does not really have that knowledge? Again, it is obvious that if it is true, only God could have given him that knowledge. That is not the discussion. The discussion is if our beliefs about Satan are not true, why do we believe it?
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Answer me this my pretty...
Alrighty. Just to break the non-posting streak, I have a topic I would like my fellow ponderers to chime in on with their two or three cents.
Challenge: In 500 words or less, give a description of an orthodox theology of Satan, touching on the following points: What were his origins? What was his status in the Old world? What is his status in the New world? Is he omniscient? Does he know everyone's names, fears, temptations, etc.?
The gauntlet has been verifiably thrown down.
Challenge: In 500 words or less, give a description of an orthodox theology of Satan, touching on the following points: What were his origins? What was his status in the Old world? What is his status in the New world? Is he omniscient? Does he know everyone's names, fears, temptations, etc.?
The gauntlet has been verifiably thrown down.
Thursday, May 3, 2007
The Divine Abundance: Part Three
Following our discussion of Christian Aesthetics, we began with the unnecessary nature of creation. We then talked about the divine fellowship within the unity of the Godhead, and the nature of their love for one another, and what implications that had on our lives. This installment will address the divine difference within the Trinity. Hart continues discussing the Trinity, for it is the foundation of our understanding of all of life, and therefore our appreciation of life: beauty. Lets begin with two quotes.
Theology can speak of being as rhetoric and see in the surface of being a kind of intelligible discourse – not one concerning the scale of bare substances, but a doxological discourse, an open declaration of God’s glory, by which the God who differentiates speaks his beauty in the groundless play of form and action, the free movement of diversity, artistry, and unnecessary grace. The occurrence of difference as difference, as the reverberation of the variation in the very event of difference expresses – not dialectically, but aesthetically – the superabounding joy, delight, regard, and response that is God’s life.
[On our journey called life, we are continually] discovering and entering into greater dimensions of His beauty. This is so because God is always beyond, and still above the beyond, but also because God abides in absolute intimacy with creation as the infinite of surpassing fullness, whose beauty embraces and exceeds all that is.
In that first quote, Hart is basically saying that we can understand God as a form of divine dialogue. In Himself is drama. There is assertion and sacrifice, give and take, love and surrender. This dialogue defines the nature of the Triune relationship (if I may be so bold to say ‘define’). The three persons glorify one another, love one another, and are satisfied completely in one another. Their dialogue comes to us as distinct difference. The Father speaks to us (loves us) differently than the Son speaks to us (loves us). The Spirit relates to us (loves us) differently than the Father and the Son. And yet, in their difference, the mutually indwell one another (perichoresis) and are one. This essential difference that lies at the heart of their unity, gives creation the abundant difference it enjoys. God imparts His attributes to creation. Hence male and female. Hence sun and moon. Hence lions, tigers, and bears.
This difference is the foundation for beauty and our appreciation of that beauty. Beauty comes in the interplay of difference, and again, reflects the interplay of the Godhead. It can either reflect well (say in a Bach Cantata) or not so well (pick a Picasso, any Picasso). There is a reason Picasso’s later works are just plain ugly. He (intentionally) distorts the natural interplay of difference within creation. Take the face. The difference that lies in the human face between the eyes, nose, cheeks, mouth, and so on, gives the face a beauty. Some faces are more beautiful than others, because the interplay of the differences are such that they are more pleasing. This distortion of Picasso’s is a direct attack against the God of creation, and the beauty that He built in. It is interesting to think that the degrees of beauty are also built in. They are not just a result of the fall. For example take a male lion in full maturity. There is a cross-cultural agreement that that image inspires awe, and is, frankly, beautiful. Compare that to a hyena. Just as much God’s creation as the lion. Cries in affirmation of God’s glory just as much, but the difference is very noticeable. This difference is built in to creation, and gives testimony to the ‘groundless play of form and action, the free movement of diversity and artistry’ in which we witness our God bestow on His creatures, an aspect of Himself. This leads to that third clause of the quote, the unnecessary grace. This unnecessary grace is what calls us to a ‘divine playfulness.’ If we were made in the image of God, and are recreated in the image of Christ, and indwelt by the Holy Spirit, made partakers in the very life of the divine, then how can we not join in “the superabounding joy, delight, regard, and response that is God’s life.” This response to God’s life is defined by the love the Father shows the Son shows the Spirit shows the Father and the Son. It is again, the selfless love, a love that is eternally bestowing to another.
Bringing us to the second quote. As our hearts, minds, souls, and bodies are enlightened more and more by the Spirit, we will see clearer and clearer the Divine Abundance that covers everything, enfolds everything, encompasses everything, upholds everything, breathing everything into life. The God of true diversity, a unified diversity, this God who is eternally beyond everything, purposefully stoops into human history. The completely Transcendent One has become flesh and blood in Jesus, thus introducing intimacy with His creation. Through this intimacy with the Holy God of all, we, His beloved, join in His beauty, which pervades all of life.
Makes getting mad at the guy who cut you off on the freeway this morning, look kind of petty.
Theology can speak of being as rhetoric and see in the surface of being a kind of intelligible discourse – not one concerning the scale of bare substances, but a doxological discourse, an open declaration of God’s glory, by which the God who differentiates speaks his beauty in the groundless play of form and action, the free movement of diversity, artistry, and unnecessary grace. The occurrence of difference as difference, as the reverberation of the variation in the very event of difference expresses – not dialectically, but aesthetically – the superabounding joy, delight, regard, and response that is God’s life.
[On our journey called life, we are continually] discovering and entering into greater dimensions of His beauty. This is so because God is always beyond, and still above the beyond, but also because God abides in absolute intimacy with creation as the infinite of surpassing fullness, whose beauty embraces and exceeds all that is.
In that first quote, Hart is basically saying that we can understand God as a form of divine dialogue. In Himself is drama. There is assertion and sacrifice, give and take, love and surrender. This dialogue defines the nature of the Triune relationship (if I may be so bold to say ‘define’). The three persons glorify one another, love one another, and are satisfied completely in one another. Their dialogue comes to us as distinct difference. The Father speaks to us (loves us) differently than the Son speaks to us (loves us). The Spirit relates to us (loves us) differently than the Father and the Son. And yet, in their difference, the mutually indwell one another (perichoresis) and are one. This essential difference that lies at the heart of their unity, gives creation the abundant difference it enjoys. God imparts His attributes to creation. Hence male and female. Hence sun and moon. Hence lions, tigers, and bears.
This difference is the foundation for beauty and our appreciation of that beauty. Beauty comes in the interplay of difference, and again, reflects the interplay of the Godhead. It can either reflect well (say in a Bach Cantata) or not so well (pick a Picasso, any Picasso). There is a reason Picasso’s later works are just plain ugly. He (intentionally) distorts the natural interplay of difference within creation. Take the face. The difference that lies in the human face between the eyes, nose, cheeks, mouth, and so on, gives the face a beauty. Some faces are more beautiful than others, because the interplay of the differences are such that they are more pleasing. This distortion of Picasso’s is a direct attack against the God of creation, and the beauty that He built in. It is interesting to think that the degrees of beauty are also built in. They are not just a result of the fall. For example take a male lion in full maturity. There is a cross-cultural agreement that that image inspires awe, and is, frankly, beautiful. Compare that to a hyena. Just as much God’s creation as the lion. Cries in affirmation of God’s glory just as much, but the difference is very noticeable. This difference is built in to creation, and gives testimony to the ‘groundless play of form and action, the free movement of diversity and artistry’ in which we witness our God bestow on His creatures, an aspect of Himself. This leads to that third clause of the quote, the unnecessary grace. This unnecessary grace is what calls us to a ‘divine playfulness.’ If we were made in the image of God, and are recreated in the image of Christ, and indwelt by the Holy Spirit, made partakers in the very life of the divine, then how can we not join in “the superabounding joy, delight, regard, and response that is God’s life.” This response to God’s life is defined by the love the Father shows the Son shows the Spirit shows the Father and the Son. It is again, the selfless love, a love that is eternally bestowing to another.
Bringing us to the second quote. As our hearts, minds, souls, and bodies are enlightened more and more by the Spirit, we will see clearer and clearer the Divine Abundance that covers everything, enfolds everything, encompasses everything, upholds everything, breathing everything into life. The God of true diversity, a unified diversity, this God who is eternally beyond everything, purposefully stoops into human history. The completely Transcendent One has become flesh and blood in Jesus, thus introducing intimacy with His creation. Through this intimacy with the Holy God of all, we, His beloved, join in His beauty, which pervades all of life.
Makes getting mad at the guy who cut you off on the freeway this morning, look kind of petty.
Oh No...
This is bouncing around the Internet today:
NEW YORK, May 3 (UPI) -- Actor Kirk Cameron and author Ray Comfort will square off in New York with two atheists to debate the existence of God live on ABC.com.
The debate will be Wednesday after the network rescheduled it from Saturday to capture a larger audience, Comfort said in a news release.
Comfort, who says he can prove God exists scientifically, said ABC originally offered him four minutes to present his case. After conferring with Cameron and the atheists, the time was raised to 13 minutes.
"I'm ecstatic. I can prove the existence of God in that amount of time," Comfort said.
Now, here at the Abbey we are, of course, always enthusiastic when people take a stand for the truth of God and His Word and Gospel. We're not fond of atheism, and believe it to be an arrogant, dishonest and silly thing. We're all for the enterprise of apologetics and think it's important that all Christians be "Prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks [them] for a reason for the hope that is in [them]." (1 Peter 3:15)
But when we hear of apologists who say that they "Can prove God exists scientifically" (emphasis added) and claim to be able to do so in 13 minutes flat, some deep misgivings begin to rumble within our collective gut. This is because we've seen and heard quite a lot of indisputable nonsense get passed off as Christian apologetics. Like, for example, this charming but frankly embarrassing attempt to prove the existence of God from the shape of a banana.
The thing is that apologists have been using cosmological arguments and arguments from design for centuries, and not too many atheists have been persuaded. First off, to reduce all that down to 13 minutes seems sort of cocky. If only Aquinas knew of the simple splendor of the humble banana. He could've saved a lot of ink on the whole five-arguments deal. The contemporary 'ID' (Intelligent Design) movement has been making a lot of great arguments which show that the irreducible complexity of interdependent systems that undergird all of creation points to a creator more reasonably than it does a blind, naturalistic process. And those arguments are, frankly, much more elegant than Mr. Comfort's banana. I really feel kind of silly for even having to say that.
The point is that the enterprise of apologetics cannot be simply evidentiary demonstration for two reasons. First, because the nature of unbelief is not primarily rational - it is ethical. The unbeliever is not ignorant of the truth such that when you show him the irreducibly complex interdependent systems of, say, the human body or the magnificent and highly sophisticated symmetry of the cosmos, or even the admittedly convenient, ergonomic design of the banana, his eyes will pop open in shock and he will exclaim, "By Jove, old boy! You've really got something there!" Nope. That's not what they do. Instead they write books like this and this.
They do this because in their sin, they are so ethically committed to "Suppressing the truth in unrighteousness" (Romans 1:18) that their response to every evidentiary "proof" in the universe of God's existence is, "Hogwash." Secondly, then, apologetics needs to transcend the rationalistic, evidentiary realm because in their unbelief, unbelievers have built their own philosophical foundation on their own set of epistemological rules. For the Christian apologist to try to prove the existence of God empirically, see, is to concede to the empiricist that his rules - his foundation - his epistemology - is the best one. The final one. The only one trustworthy enough to build a belief-system on. And at that point, we've given away the game and might as well just go home and console ourselves by watching strange Christian films conceived out of the same sort of biblical erudition.
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
How To Make an American Layer Cake
I recently happened upon a book that was lying around the abbey. The title was "How To Make an American Layer Cake." Now, this isn't the sort of thing we read around here, but one of the introductory paragraphs was quite interesting, here's the text:
"These days, cake making has become something of a dying art. Too many home cooks rely on boxed mixes, which are not much less work than a good from-scratch recipe, or cakes purchased at local stores. But nothing matches the joy and taste of a good homemade layer cake. It is an honest, forthright expression of the American kitchen, a delicious celebration of simple ingredients with universal appeal."
Not so long ago, I was speaking to a brother about the finer points of the Council of Chalcedon, and his remark to me was "If you’ve got the time to ponder these things, more power to you. I think most people have trouble just managing their lives with the daily demands of work, family, etc., let alone completing the daily devotionals." Now what else is there to do at the abbey but ponder "these things"? There's an argument to be made that not every layman needs to understand the distinctives of the pronouncements of Church Councils, but the brothers comments do point to a growing problem in Christendom that seems to be affecting, or should I say infecting, more and more people. People don't have time for God. I find that very, very strange, not to mention disturbing.
I do not see or understand how it is possible for creatures, made in the image of God, who are chiefly here to mirror and reflect God's holy character, can possibly do that without an ever increasing knowledge and awareness of that character. More and more, people are spending lots of time doing "things" or keeping themselves busy, and their devotion to God is like the cake mix from a box. The ingredients are inferior and they don't really save much time, but by taking short-cuts, they miss out on the rich, authentic experience with God.
Nothing matches the joy of spending time with our Lord. To have an honest, forthright expression of the devotion and love for God, a "delicious celebration of truths," is what we were created for. Throw out the "cake-mix" Christian mentality and spend the time to pursue the things of God. Your spiritual taste-buds will come alive like never before, and once you taste the sweetness of the true and living God, you'll never want to return to the "cake-mix" again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)