I see the point you're making about the "apparent irrationality" of God. There's no clean lines of separation between these "cornerstones," as you pointed out when you wrote that to your eye my #2 is a subset of my #1. In the same manner, I see your "7th stone" as a subset of my #3 -- the things we can't understand must be held within the context of a belief, a faith, that God is indeed Holy, as revealed to us in Scripture. If God were arbitrary and capricious -- that is, possessing characteristics more like us than different from us -- or truly "irrational" then the nature of our response would dramatically change. Rather than a grateful surrender, as I allude to in my 6th cornerstone, we would assume a posture of fearful appeasement. In that sense God would become less a trancendent and perfect Spirit and more like the gods of ancient Greece or Rome.
That said, reconciling a belief in a perfect and Holy God with what we see around us is perhaps the most difficult theological issue we face. I entertain no notion of my understanding it. Rather, I cling tightly to my #3 because the alternatives as seen in my mind are so awful.
I separated #2 from #1 simply because I think the divine nature of God's revelation through Scripture is of paramount importance. Truth is, as you say, it could have been included under #1. And perhaps after I expand on this a bit, I'll see the value in doing so.
* * *
I hope you have a wonderful time playing hooky with your daughter!
* * *
Thank you for your prayers for Eric and Joyce.
* * *
I look forward to your posts. There's no such thing as an "inconsequential" post.
Saturday, March 12, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment