RE: A "proper" theology

From: Rasmussen, Ryan J. (Ryan.Rasmussen@mcnamee.com)
Date: Fri Apr 14 2000 - 10:26:13 EDT

  • Next message: George Murphy: "Re: A "proper" theology"

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: dfsiemensjr@juno.com [mailto:dfsiemensjr@juno.com]
    > Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 3:50 PM
    > To: gmurphy@raex.com
    > Cc: tdavis@messiah.edu; Asa@calvin.edu
    > Subject: Re: A "proper" theology
    >
    > A proper theism requires a Creator who is outside of creation. Only in
    > this way can there be _creatio ex nihilo_. To differentiate this view
    > from deism, the Creator must also be Providence, in charge of "day to
    > day" operations. This may involve strict determinism, as in Islam, or
    > human freedom, as in most Judeo-Christian views.
    >
    > If God is outside his creation, he is outside of the space-time
    > requirement imposed on creatures. Since our best scientific
    > understanding
    > requires a beginning to space-time, we clearly cannot impose that
    > beginning on the Creator. Could he have his own time, if not space? If
    > so, how can we characterize it? It seems to be that infinite, linearly
    > finite and circularly finite exhaust the possibilities. The
    > last requires
    > infinite recurrences of creation, which fit Hinduism and
    > pantheism, but
    > hardly theism. If linearly finite, then the question must be
    > what got God
    > started, with infinite regress the apparently necessary
    > consequence. If
    > divine time is infinite, the immediate question is what God was doing
    > before the creation, along with why he waited so long, for
    > the past must
    > be infinite unless we return to finite divine time. Only if all time
    > began with creation, which excludes temporality to the deity,
    > can we have
    > a reasonable understanding of the matter.
    >
    > Switching to Christian theism, in addition to these problems,
    > the notions
    > of divine time do not meet the requirements George places on
    > the deity so
    > that he can be changed by the crucifixion. To be changed by the
    > crucifixion requires more than a connection or involvement in
    > creation,
    > for the Godhead must be within time, and hence space-time, for this
    > temporal change to occur. I note that the Word became flesh,
    > entering his
    > creation. It does not claim that the Father or the Spirit became
    > incarnate. Men have tried to meet the complications of this
    > by claiming
    > that God entered the being of a purely human Jesus, or that
    > an aspect of
    > God functioned within a human body, or that Jesus was not fully human
    > (monotheletism, e.g.). But a careful analysis of scripture seems to
    > demand that Jesus Christ is true God and true man simultaneously and
    > inextricably. This cannot be explained, though its consequences can be
    > brought out.
    >

    Would it help to look at this from a different point of view? We know that
    energy/matter is simply the power of God governed by His will. Everything
    around us is a construct of His power. Each atom, each quark, everything is
    made up of some type of raw power of God. We know through revelation that
    God is eternal, the I Am, and it is supported by the fact that we know that
    energy/matter is indestructible. This raises a few questions in my mind.

    What does that say about the material/human? form of Jesus... an indwelling
    of the Son of God within a construct of His own power. His flesh was made
    of His own power. He controlled it... literally. And His will can control
    that power no matter what form it is currently residing in (ie water to
    wine, loaves of bread, walking on water, the casting of the lot).

    Why do we perceive the human form to be some type of complete change in form
    for Him ie "...entered the being of a purely human Jesus." Is there
    anything that is "purely human"? What is "purely human"? Right now I'm
    looking at my hand type this and I'm well aware that it is merely a
    construct of atoms that I am able to govern by my will to a certain extent
    to do my bidding. However, I know the subatomic particles in these atoms
    were once part of the raw power that God used to create this universe. Does
    the fact that these atoms reside in the construct that is my human form
    somehow make them different or special in comparison to the other particles
    in this universe? I think not.

    What I'm trying to get at here is that it seems as no big deal for the
    Almighty to take on a form which is ultimately constructed of His power in a
    universe made completely of His power. It seems even more unlikely that by
    doing so He is somehow being completely changed or confined by it.

    So if it is not the form that sets us apart as "human" is it our
    consciousness? What changed in Jesus that made him "human"?

    Regards,
    Ryan



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 14 2000 - 10:26:36 EDT