|
Okay, okay, you are right, it was unnecessary and I
shouldn't have done it. I guess what comes around doesn't have to go around. I
will try to be better.
bill
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 6:48 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Smithson, Taylor
and the Canucks ... especially for y'all
I enjoyed reading this application of
Kruger thought. I enjoyed it because I agreed with it's
conclusions. The parenthetical remark concerning JudyT caused some
concern, however.
John
In a message
dated 7/23/2004 8:23:13 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not offended in the least, Chris, just a bit slow. Thanks for the
clarification -- it makes great sense now. The Trinitarian doctrine
of God does not, as I see it, exclude from the Faith once delivered people
as yourself who do not ascribe to it, not as long as you are not denying the
full deity of Jesus in the process. The concern I have about your view of
God is a relational one and not one that necessarily throws you out of
Christian fellowship (and I hope that is not offensive to you
either).
I once heard a sermon, the
theme being "Everything God does, he does for himself." I would be glad to
go into the details if you wish but that should not be necessary to make my
point. When we as people do things only for ourselves, we think of it in
terms of psychosis, a unhealthy self-preoccupation: selfish, self-centered,
self-serving, egotistical, the list is long. We are not whole and complete
and healthy unless we are other-centered in our thoughts and service. In
other words, Christians believe we (humans) must be relational in our
activities or we cannot love God with all our being and our neighbors as
ourselves.
When we say that everything
God does he does for himself, we must interject into that statement some
sort of relational element within the Godhead or, it seems to me, we have
projected onto God what we consider sick about ourselves; either that, or we
have no basis to think poorly of those around us who do live for and love
only themselves. Having been created in the image of God, they are the
healthy ones. We call the excessive love and admiration of oneself
narcissism and hardly think of it as a godly attribute. How wrong we are! It
is we who sadly suffer low self-esteem. The empathy we feel for others is
but a symptom of our own deep psychosis.
I know you have never thought
of it in these terms (or at least I suspect you have not). But it seems to
me we cannot call God a relational being unless he is relational within the
properties of his own being (I would say essence but Judy wouldn't
understand). If he is one in terms of a singularity instead of unity (as I
understand the Hebrew to mean) then he had to create in order to
relate; for with whom was there to relate when all there was was God? Yet we
are taught in Scripture that God's desire is for relationship with us.
On the other hand, the heart of God, as I see it, is the
other-centered love the Father has for the Son and the Son for the
Father both in and through the Holy Spirit. The early church called this
relationship perichoresis, likening the give and take between the Three to a
dance. Here we have a God whose heart it is to share his love with others
and to bring his creation into that dance. This does not change the nature
of God or make him dependant upon his creation; for he is relational in his
own essence (I know, I know, but I just couldn't help myself) and the nature
of love, being healthy, is always and still other-preoccupied.
Anyway, I didn't mean to
ramble, but thought you may be interested in any thoughts sparked by your
comments.
Blessings,
Bill
|
