I've been away from this blog for a little while - wrestling with some seemingly relentless "demons" of doubt and skepticism. There's a wonderful song by Bruce Cockburn that sums up my feelings these days:
"Pacing the Cage"
Sunset is an angel weeping
Holding out a bloody sword
No matter how I squint I cannot
Make out what it's pointing toward
Sometimes you feel like you live too long
Days drip slowly on the page
You catch yourself
Pacing the cage
I've proven who I am so many times
The magnetic strip's worn thin
And each time I was someone else
And every one was taken in
Powers chatter in high places
Stir up eddies in the dust of rage
Set me to pacing the cage
I never knew what you all wanted
So I gave you everything
All that I could pillage
All the spells that I could sing
It's as if the thing were written
In the constitution of the age
Sooner or later you'll wind up
Pacing the cage
Sometimes the best map will not guide you
You can't see what's round the bend
Sometimes the road leads through dark places
Sometimes the darkness is your friend
Today these eyes scan bleached-out land
For the coming of the outbound stage
Pacing the cage
Pacing the cage
- Bruce Cockburn, "Pacing the Cage" from the Album "The Charity of Night"
Here's some thoughts, questions and dilemmas that I've been wrestling with lately.
Random Thoughts
Based on a couple of recent visits to the cinema, it appears that the guaranteed way to contact someone these days is to call them on their mobile phone while they're at a movie!!! They will respond to their obnoxious ring-tone without hesitation and hold a lengthy discussion without restraint!!
I've observed that advanced technology has given us the ability to have phones that will interrupt us while we're at a movie, and movies that will interrupt us while we are on the phone!!
A common scene these days is to see a group of teenagers sitting together, each with separate headphones and I-Pods, communicating silently through text-messages.
Random Thoughts
Based on a couple of recent visits to the cinema, it appears that the guaranteed way to contact someone these days is to call them on their mobile phone while they're at a movie!!! They will respond to their obnoxious ring-tone without hesitation and hold a lengthy discussion without restraint!!
____________
I've observed that advanced technology has given us the ability to have phones that will interrupt us while we're at a movie, and movies that will interrupt us while we are on the phone!!
_____________
A common scene these days is to see a group of teenagers sitting together, each with separate headphones and I-Pods, communicating silently through text-messages.
____________
Doubts and Skeptical Notions
Fallen Angels?
According to commonly understood Biblical theology - Angels are messengers of God that do His will. Jesus prays "(May) Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven." The implication being that God's will is always done in heaven. However, also according to commonly understood Biblical theology, Satan was originally an Angel (Lucifer), that fell due to disobedience to God. If Angels have free will, then how is it possible that God's will is always done?
If Satan disobeyed God so easily, why does he have to ask permission to "test" Job?
Omniscient or not?
If God is omniscient - why did He have to test Abraham to know if he trusted Him??
Salvation is a choice?
According to the teachings of the church, the gift of salvation is something that we can choose to accept or reject. However, when you look deeply at this you see that really there is no choice - it's rather like defusing a bomb - cut the green wire and you live, cut the red wire and you die. The better choice would be not to have to deal with the bomb in the first place!!
Jesus said that a loving parent would never give a child a stone instead of bread. I'd say that He meant that a loving parent would never propose a stone as an alternative to bread. How much more likely is it that the God who loves would ever offer death as a choice?? A loving parent would remove the threat of death from the equation - which I'd say is what Jesus did. So there is no choice - the choice perhaps isn't even an issue.
According to the Christian confession of faith Jesus' death and resurrection repaired humanity's broken relationship with God and restored the divine nature within us. Now, this was an actual event that occurred in history at a point in time - now, are we to believe, as it implied by the idea of choice, that the historical event only happened and has its impact if we know about it?? This logic would lead us to believe that reality is conditional on our perception of it, which, although being a useful adage - "perception is reality" - surely cannot be ultimately true!!!??
Events in history are not true or untrue based on our knowledge of them. The only thing we can debate is "how" they might have happened and the level of their impact on the world. When Jesus died on the cross, something happened - if it really happened then it makes no difference whether we believe it or not.
Go and........
The church seems to teach that in order to grow in our relationship with God it is necessary to believe and do certain things, i.e. Baptism, sacraments etc. with emphasis on "joining" a church. However, when I read what Jesus spoke to those that He healed or those to whom He offered forgiveness, He simple said: "Go and sin no more." He didn't hand out information about joining a church. His emphasis was more on transformation and less on institution.
Love your enemies
Jesus said that we are to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us. Why would He tell us to do something that, according to traditional church teaching, God is unwilling to do? i.e. if we don't accept the gift of salvation we are under the wrath! My thinking is that if Jesus told us to be holy as God is holy, then God loves His enemies - that's the nature of unconditional love. To ask forgiveness for those who hurt you. Besides, if Jesus is very willing to forgive completely those who killed Him, wouldn't He also forgive those who simply don't understand Him or know Him?
Gospel "according to"
I've stopped reading versions of the bible that leave out these key words from the gospels. i.e. many bibles today just list the title of gospel accounts by the name of their author - omitting a very important part of the original manuscript - the original titles of the four gospels were:
Biblical Infallibility
The Bible is considered by many to be completely trustworthy and, some might say, infallible. However, in the book of Galatians Chapter 2, verse 15, the Apostle Paul recounts how he opposed Peter "to his face" because he was clearly "in the wrong," in his hypocritical treatment of Gentile believers. If Paul can accuse Peter of being "in the wrong" - we cannot reasonably claim that the written words of these men are infallible. We can however, praise the incredible honesty and transparency of these writers to willingly share their weaknesses and doubts. Personally I think that being honest and infallible vessels for Jesus is a much better foundation for faith than one that declares truth to be final and closed within the closed ends of a book.
Fallen Angels?
According to commonly understood Biblical theology - Angels are messengers of God that do His will. Jesus prays "(May) Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven." The implication being that God's will is always done in heaven. However, also according to commonly understood Biblical theology, Satan was originally an Angel (Lucifer), that fell due to disobedience to God. If Angels have free will, then how is it possible that God's will is always done?
If Satan disobeyed God so easily, why does he have to ask permission to "test" Job?
Omniscient or not?
If God is omniscient - why did He have to test Abraham to know if he trusted Him??
Salvation is a choice?
According to the teachings of the church, the gift of salvation is something that we can choose to accept or reject. However, when you look deeply at this you see that really there is no choice - it's rather like defusing a bomb - cut the green wire and you live, cut the red wire and you die. The better choice would be not to have to deal with the bomb in the first place!!
Jesus said that a loving parent would never give a child a stone instead of bread. I'd say that He meant that a loving parent would never propose a stone as an alternative to bread. How much more likely is it that the God who loves would ever offer death as a choice?? A loving parent would remove the threat of death from the equation - which I'd say is what Jesus did. So there is no choice - the choice perhaps isn't even an issue.
According to the Christian confession of faith Jesus' death and resurrection repaired humanity's broken relationship with God and restored the divine nature within us. Now, this was an actual event that occurred in history at a point in time - now, are we to believe, as it implied by the idea of choice, that the historical event only happened and has its impact if we know about it?? This logic would lead us to believe that reality is conditional on our perception of it, which, although being a useful adage - "perception is reality" - surely cannot be ultimately true!!!??
Events in history are not true or untrue based on our knowledge of them. The only thing we can debate is "how" they might have happened and the level of their impact on the world. When Jesus died on the cross, something happened - if it really happened then it makes no difference whether we believe it or not.
Go and........
The church seems to teach that in order to grow in our relationship with God it is necessary to believe and do certain things, i.e. Baptism, sacraments etc. with emphasis on "joining" a church. However, when I read what Jesus spoke to those that He healed or those to whom He offered forgiveness, He simple said: "Go and sin no more." He didn't hand out information about joining a church. His emphasis was more on transformation and less on institution.
Love your enemies
Jesus said that we are to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us. Why would He tell us to do something that, according to traditional church teaching, God is unwilling to do? i.e. if we don't accept the gift of salvation we are under the wrath! My thinking is that if Jesus told us to be holy as God is holy, then God loves His enemies - that's the nature of unconditional love. To ask forgiveness for those who hurt you. Besides, if Jesus is very willing to forgive completely those who killed Him, wouldn't He also forgive those who simply don't understand Him or know Him?
Gospel "according to"
I've stopped reading versions of the bible that leave out these key words from the gospels. i.e. many bibles today just list the title of gospel accounts by the name of their author - omitting a very important part of the original manuscript - the original titles of the four gospels were:
- The gospel according to Matthew
- The gospel according to Mark
- The gospel according to Luke
- The gospel according to John
Biblical Infallibility
The Bible is considered by many to be completely trustworthy and, some might say, infallible. However, in the book of Galatians Chapter 2, verse 15, the Apostle Paul recounts how he opposed Peter "to his face" because he was clearly "in the wrong," in his hypocritical treatment of Gentile believers. If Paul can accuse Peter of being "in the wrong" - we cannot reasonably claim that the written words of these men are infallible. We can however, praise the incredible honesty and transparency of these writers to willingly share their weaknesses and doubts. Personally I think that being honest and infallible vessels for Jesus is a much better foundation for faith than one that declares truth to be final and closed within the closed ends of a book.
________
So, I begin the year "pacing the cage" of my beliefs and convictions. Toss me a bone once in a while will you??
2 comments:
As someone who's spent a long time with more questions than answers, I can certainly sympathize with your doubts. On the other hand, I guess we differ in that I found in Orthodoxy the only satisfying answer to my skepticism. I spent years acquiring the tools that, according to Evangelicalism, are supposed to provide the answers, but it only led me to more and worse doubt. Orthodoxy was for me a place of rest, where I didn't have to find my own truth. Not that it has all the answers spelled out perfectly, but you can approach the questions as part of a community that has been wrestling with them for centuries.
I'm not going to respond point-by-point to everything you've written here, but simply attempt a response to the section on salvation and choice (and along the way say something about God loving his enemies).
As I understand it, the teaching of the Church is that death was more gift than punishment. In fact, it was not even something that God did to us. He did not say, when you eat from the tree, I will kill you; he simply stated the consequence--you will die. It was a warning, not a threat. Now, this argument only goes so far, because God is sovereign, and we can't exactly explain away his responsibility in the situation, as if he were just some bystander warning that if you ride around backwards on a unicycle you just might break your neck.
So back to the idea that death is a gift. What does it say in Genesis? They are thrown out of the garden so they cannot eat from the tree of life and live forever. The point here is that God did not want us confirmed eternally in our sin. If death was not a consequence, and if it was possible to live forever in spite of our sin, we would never change. We need the pain of death and everything that goes with it, both as a disincentive to continued sin, and so that we do not exist forever in our fallen state.
Another angle on this issue, back to the consequence thing. If life comes to us from God--if we became living creatures by his breath--it is in a sense only natural that we would need communion with him to go on living. God did not create us to live apart from him, so when we sin and sever the tie, we naturally (or rather, unnaturally, since it is not how we were meant to exist) start to decay.
But none of this changes the fact that God created us to be free. He does not want to command us as slaves but to love us as children, and he wants us to love him back. Real love cannot be forced--it must be chosen. The question is, would anyone realistically choose the other way? Scripture and the Church say, unfortunately yes. Some will ultimately choose against God. It is their right to do so, but it also means that they will suffer the consequences. And keep in mind that everyone exists forever. For that matter, everyone exists forever in God's presence. The only difference is, will they experience his glory as light and peace, or as a consuming fire?
It is our choice. For those who hate God, eternity under his light can only be torture. At the same time, it is only fair of God to allow them their choice, and to let them spend eternity outside a relationship that they don't want.
So what did God do about our sin and death? He sent Jesus, who did everything that needed to be done, so that the relationship could be restored. Everything, that is, except change our will. If we do not respond, he has still done everything. Our refusal of the offer does not undo anything; it only confirms us in hatred toward God, and that is how we end up with an eternity of suffering.
If you have never read it, I would commend to you C. S. Lewis's little book, the Great Divorce. It can probably be read in one evening, but it's a great story about all of this.
Hi Marty,
Interesting doubts and questions.
In heaven? Is heaven a "realm" or is it a state of relationship?
Did God test Abraham or did Abraham test God? The Jewish take on it is the latter.
Choice? Sure, there has to be: Life or "not life". God or "not God". Otherwise what is love? If love is life, then to live is God, to not live is to not love. It is God who loves, it is we who don't love.
Yes, something DID happen regardless of perception: the resurrection of ALL and human nature freed from corruption.
Tranformation vs. institution? Being in "The body of Christ" IS a transformation. We HAVE to live in a society/in relationships. ALL relationships have "institutional aspects". We are transformed BY relationships, salvation IS relational. False dichotomy.
Accept or die? I think the Church's attitude is more like "don't reject and don't die". BIG difference.
Biblical infallibility? Not in the protestant sense. The Faith does not stand or fall on the jot and tittles of the Bible, but on Christ, the only infallible witness to the Father.
Sorry for the short, terse answers...the brevity does not mean impatience etc., just lack of blog-time. :)
Post a Comment