Herbie and Mus- here is my attempt:
Just assume for a minute that there is some kind of immaterial being responsible for creating the universe. I know you don't believe it, but for the sake of our communication barriers... This being, spirit, whatever we can consider it, is a multi-faceted being. Spirit, creative force, and sustaining/connecting force. (Father, Son, Holy Spirit.)
-
So this being weaves into existence the fabric of the universe in ever-increasing complexity, from the beginnings of galxies, to stars, solar systems, individual planets, etc… then move the focus to earth (because that is where we live, and I know nothing of life on other planets) where first was just molten, then solid, then water, atmosphere, then bacteria, plant life, then animals, then man. Man is described as being flesh and spirit. Formed from ‘dust,’ and ‘breathed into’ by the Spirit of G-d. So in that, we are unique among the created life-forms, separate from angels and such on the spiritual side as we have a physical body, and separate from plants/animals on the physical side as we have this (initially) continuous connection to G-d. We are told in John that this creating force is the Word, Logos in Greek, aka… Jesus.
-
Keeping in mind that ‘spiritual’ doesn’t automatically mean ‘benign’, picture too one of these spiritual beings (angels), perhaps the most ‘powerful’ as they can be, as developing a sense of pride in it’s place between men and G-d, seeing itself as far greater than man. G-d has created man with such Love and potential as having the best of both worlds, or rather, just being a part of both worlds. This angel eventually becomes jealous, or spiteful, of the grace given to humanity, developing the beginnings of hatred through this envy and vanity. It decides that it is an injustice, that G-d would hold these mortal beings in such Love, and this leads to it doubting G-d’s power, and begins brooding for a spiritual rebellion in an attempt to gain G-d’s power for itself.
-
Isaiah 14:13+14
“You said in your heart, "I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High."
-
This being, generally referred to as Satan, attempted to imitate G-d, therefore creating his own perversion of the Trinity.
-
Anyway… mankind was deceived by this fallen angel, though now knowing it could not overthrow G-d, will try it’s damnedest to bring as many away from Him as it can. I kind of agree with the ideas that in man’s fall, we disrupted the natural flow of the world as G-d created it, as He set us to be in tune with it, but as we no longer were innocent in our connection with G-d, all aspects of our relation to the world we live in were affected.
-
So what we call ‘sin’ has become a barrier between the human soul and G-d. Not because it is a punishment for not ‘obeying the rules’ but because nothing impure can stand to be in the presence of G-d. Even filtered through our hearts, Love can seem to cause more pain in our world than joy.
-
In order for the human soul to reconnect with G-d in the way we were created, the damaged link between us would need to be repaired, and only the force which created it could do so. So G-d’s creative force entered into the physical realm. Think 'sphere in flatland' mentality. Or, that which is far beyond our mere three perceived dimensions of space and half dimension of time forcing itself into a physical body in our world within time. That in itself is an unimaginable sacrifice. This part of G-d that brought everything into existence became in itself contained within one human being. But Jesus' purpose in doing so would be the necessity to overcome the stranglehold that Satan had on the human soul through sin. The physical manifestation of perfection and Love taking on all the sins of mankind as if He Himself had committed them.
-
Jesus’ sufferings were just beginning with the physical pain. In taking on the sin of humanity, He had to experience what it would be like to be separate from G-d for all time. It has been said that He suffered an eternity of this. The dimension of time is a product of the physical world, so we cannot fully comprehend what this means. But G-d essentially ‘disowned’ Jesus in order to achieve this. How could it be assumed that Jesus did not suffer? The fact that He knew that He would be resurrected would not remove the physical, emotional, and spiritual pain and emptiness He felt from in hell.
-
In reading the message the way it was written, there is no room for the belief that doing what you consider good works can ‘get you in’ to heaven. It is a posture of the heart before over the mind.
In accepting the suffering Jesus endured by taking our sin into Him, we are accepting the redemption through Christ that is perfection in G-d’s eyes. Only through faith do we receive this grace, no one human can earn it over another.
This is a response to the discussion that followed in "The Ultimate Sacrifice" topic.
March 23, 2009 | In Belief
Discuss
Luke Allen on March 23, 2009, 3:58 AM
Is the premises Herbie and Musycks work from and the premise you and I work from. They conclude nothing above or beyond their selves and we conceive of a being far beyond our own understanding.
We can’t communicate effectively in a belief manner until this premise issue is dealt with.
HerbieP on March 23, 2009, 9:31 AM
I’m quite happy to work on pokoj’s premise even though I don’t understand or accept it Luke.
Could you clarify a couple of points pokoj?
Did god make angels with ‘free will’? If so how are we essentially different from them? i.e. What is the point of him making two types of being?
Why has god made a spiritual realm and a physical one? What is the point of this dichotomy?
The creatures of the spirit realm, angels, satan and god seem to be able to act freely on the physical realm but we can’t act as easily on the spiritual realm is that correct?
HerbieP on March 23, 2009, 2:51 PM
Mind posting that in English Sally so that I know what you’re saying?
Adam DeHass on March 23, 2009, 3:17 PM
Well pokoj, I think you have done a wonderful job of narrowing down what it is that you believe! For my degree, I have to write a doctrinal statement on just about all of the doctrines of the church and then back it up with Scripture and why I believe it. I give you major brownie points for taking the time to nail that down for all of us. I also want to compliment you on putting it out there for all to read, I think that it is so awesome that you take the time to put it all out there, open for anyone to comment on. I thank you for your openness, and for the encouragement. Also it is encouraging to know that it can be done! When I write my doctrinal statement, I will remember your diligence!
Musycks on March 23, 2009, 10:31 PM
burning the midnight oil my friend?
thanks for making the effort.
Now the infidel responds.. I think you and I have agreed previously that we are in effect speaking a different language? but I still think there is value in the dialogue.
I would say we both antropomorphise our concepts (how can we not?) but once you do so, as with the jealous/evil angel stuff, you then claim an exemption which puts your god beyond that model of understanding… ie. god is not jealous or evil, because it doesn’t square with your desired outcome, that god is only good.
My model is consistent at least.. if I anthropomorhise god as jealous, I follow through that logic regardless of how I want it to turn out. You just say even though your texts describe him as just that, it’s not what they really meant, according to you.
My advice is for you to revert to the ancient esoteric line of thinking where many philosophers understood the dangers of your model and put god beyond knowing, variously describing ‘him’ as the ‘void’ or ‘silence’ and decrying any attempts to ascribe human values to ‘him’ at all. Read Karen Armstrongs excellent ‘A History of God’… it lays out many interesting ancient interpretations. That way you won’t need trouble yourself on having to constantly square the circle.
nice rippling potpie!
pokój! on March 24, 2009, 12:08 AM
Herbie… I’m not fully sure of the nature of angels, but I don’t agree with the theory that they are merely extensions of G-d, that would leave no room for their having free will… Actually the image of angels that I have most identified with are the oyarsa in CS Lewis’ Space Trilogy… they are set to interact in a more direct way with the physical world through the Spirit because their presence would not destroy us…
—————-
“Did god make angels with ‘free will’? If so how are we essentially different from them? i.e. What is the point of him making two types of being?”
—
As far as the ‘point’ of different types of beings… I couldn’t say for sure, and going down that road you could have just asked what was the ‘point’ of creating at all… territory that begs to know the mind of G-d, something that we are not fully capable of… but Mus said something interesting a while back… “An artist creates because he can’t not…” (sorry for hijacking that Mus :) maybe it’s something along those lines? I’ve also attributed it to Love… But I can’t say anything definite, I will have to get back to you if I receive any more insights into this…
——————
“Why has god made a spiritual realm and a physical one? What is the point of this dichotomy?”
-
In my opinion they are not separate realms… we as humans are not fully aware of the spiritual aspect of reality because of our ‘fallen’ nature but that doesn’t make it a ‘different place’. There have been whisperings of something ‘more’ for as long as man can remember, though, and as long as you don’t choose to instantly chalk that up to the need to define things we don’t understand with abstractions, you can accept that we are slowly receiving more and more glimpses into what living as our true nature would encompass…
-
So short answer to that is that there are no separate realms, we just assume they are separate because we are separate.
——————
“The creatures of the spirit realm, angels, satan and god seem to be able to act freely on the physical realm but we can’t act as easily on the spiritual realm is that correct?”
Well… ‘angels’ act as G-d moves them to, just as humans sometimes are able to if they reach that level… but Satan acts on his own accord… and his actions are more of the physical manifestations that we see, but not limited to, as the human psyche is a fanciful playground for him as well…
I would postulate that G-d can act at will in the physical realm, but only as He sees fit to bring humanity into the full awareness of salvation, but His primary means of doing this, I believe, are through His followers… this follows from ‘the fall’ that we are responsible for the way things are, and until we realise that we cannot live to the fullest without returning to the constant state of grace, then our world will suffer for our hardheartedness and close-mindedness.
—
So in that, there is no real separation from the physical and spiritual, only our perceived separation and subsequent acceptance of this. That G-d and angels and satan can ‘act’, as we would call it, on the physical world is no less an act in the spiritual.
pokój! on March 24, 2009, 12:23 AM
Hey buddy… :P
“I think you and I have agreed previously that we are in effect speaking a different language? but I still think there is value in the dialogue.”
Of course, unless there is a prideful push for justification behind it…
————-
“I would say we both antropomorphise our concepts (how can we not?)”
-
I do to the extent that it is necessary to try to put into words things that are indescribable… That is the way G-d has brought us here so far…
————————
“…but once you do so, as with the jealous/evil angel stuff, you then claim an exemption which puts your god beyond that model of understanding… ie. god is not jealous or evil, because it doesn’t square with your desired outcome, that god is only good.”
-
What I have said about describing G-d as being ‘jealous’ or ‘angry’ has always been that this is how humanity has needed to view G-d in order to continue on the path of coming fully into relationship with Him. But at some point all of these means of describing Him need to be let go, because they do not, in the long run, describe Him, they only further us in our path to understanding what He wants for us.
——————
“My model is consistent at least.. if I anthropomorhise god as jealous, I follow through that logic regardless of how I want it to turn out.”
-
I wouldn’t say this model is less consistent, apart from the human spiritual growth aspect. Though I tend to shy away from the parent/sibling relationship (as this is harmful to many who have had detrimental experiences in their paternal relationships), there is something to it in this sense… G-d is leading us as good parents lead their children in learning. I don’t change my ‘model’, I just am in a constant state of learning new things about it, so in these cases, yes, I have to rearrange due to the ripple effects…
—————
“You just say even though your texts describe him as just that, it’s not what they really meant, according to you.”
-
Not just according to me… and I say this taking the cue from how G-d teaches His people as it is viewed throughout the scriptures… most of the lessons are symbolic representations of what the main point He is really trying to get across.
———————-
“My advice is for you to revert to the ancient esoteric line of thinking where many philosophers understood the dangers of your model and put god beyond knowing, variously describing ‘him’ as the ‘void’ or ‘silence’ and decrying any attempts to ascribe human values to ‘him’ at all.”
-
Or maybe think of it as trying to ascribe G-dly values to humans…
————————
“Read Karen Armstrongs excellent ‘A History of God’… it lays out many interesting ancient interpretations.”
-
I’ve heard about her… she’s the ex-nun, right? I’ll look her up at some point, I’m sure… And I’ll point you to Rob Bell’s method of describing the history of humanity’s spiritual/religious associations in “The God’s Aren’t Angry”… it fits well with what I believe… not the same lecture/sermon we talked about ages ago that you disliked, this one focuses more on what we are talking about here…
———————-
Shalom, rippleaesthetically
pokój! on March 24, 2009, 12:34 AM
PS yes, all, I have been having trouble sleeping… but there’s many less productive things I could be doing that spending my time thinking about all this and sharing my thoughts… so…
HerbieP on March 24, 2009, 3:37 AM
I regard your model much as I do string theory. You’ve extrapolated a whole theology from what feels right to you. You don’t seem to have any justification for any of your assertions and seem quite content to understand how some things are in detail but to back off others and say that we can’t know the mind of god.
When I talk to string theorists they say ‘it can’t be wrong the maths is so beautiful’ and then they add another layer of exceptions to make it work. At least in their case it is all based on something other than subjective experience and they can point to experimental results that they were trying to explain in the first place.
Your theology is trying to make sense of a world that I just don’t experience or have any reason for thinking is anything other that mythological in origin.
Sorry pokoj, but thanks for trying.
pokój! on March 24, 2009, 12:43 PM
You were asking good questions, I never expected you to believe it anyway…
———
“You don’t seem to have any justification for any of your assertions”
-
Well I wouldn’t to anyone else, because the justification for me is in my heart, and through prayer and reading the scriptures, and also many other sources that I feel speak from the Spirit.
—————
“…and seem quite content to understand how some things are in detail but to back off others and say that we can’t know the mind of god.”
-
Not fully content in my lack of completion, but just accepting that G-d hasn’t led me to understand everything. I’m not hiding behind anything, I’m just young in my faith, and still searching. I’m soon to be 24, and I’ve only been a Christian for about 5 years, (discounting the years raised as a Catholic because I didn’t get much from that), and in those years I’ve been quite easily distracted, as I only recently got connected to a good church. Ultimately it’s up to G-d to decide what to reveal to humanity, if we start making too many conjectures based just from ourselves and not from G-d than we can be easily led astray. I’m sorry I can’t provide answers for everything you ask, but that shouldn’t mean you should stop asking! I was enjoying that…
—————————
“Your theology is trying to make sense of a world that I just don’t experience or have any reason for thinking is anything other that mythological in origin.”
-
Well I guess you wouldn’t… but if you ever start feeling there might be a reason, try letting It in for a while! :P
———
Thanks for trying as well
HerbieP on March 24, 2009, 3:56 PM
It’s your whole description of angelic existence that I have a particular problem with. You seculate and interpret so far on what little information you can get from the bible but then seem to stop in an arbitrary place. ‘Angels have free will’ has all sorts of implications that you don’t pursue. How are they different from us? what was god’s need to create us as well? Satan appears to have behaved in exactly the same way that a petulant human would, he just has more power than us.
pokój! on March 26, 2009, 2:09 AM
“It’s your whole description of angelic existence that I have a particular problem with. You seculate and interpret so far on what little information you can get from the bible but then seem to stop in an arbitrary place.”
-
For one thing, I need sleep. As I am writing this now, I’ve been online for 3 hours at the end of a 11 hour day in 2 different kitchens… Give me some time, maybe I’ll be able to type more, maybe not… but does it really matter? I’m just trying to put it into terms I can understand, but we are completely different people… Ask God yourself if you want more clarification :)
——
‘Angels have free will’ has all sorts of implications that you don’t pursue. How are they different from us? what was god’s need to create us as well? Satan appears to have behaved in exactly the same way that a petulant human would, he just has more power than us.
-
I’m not going to have another day off for about 2 weeks, so I will, hopefully, keep going… but for now… sleepy time… maybe I’ll dream about angels and demons for you… or just the usual dystopian, time traveling, oddly familiar dreams I’ve been having lately… Shalom…
HerbieP on March 26, 2009, 4:13 AM
Nite, nite.
pokój! on October 22, 2009, 2:58 PM
I forgot that I left this topic in such an uninspired state…
So Herbie if you ever check back in here…
Considering that we are all, in essence, extensions of God (through Him all things were made) perhaps it wouldn’t be too much of a stretch of my belief system to postulate that in this sense God created (in His image) the phyiscal image of His spiritual grandeur… that what was created was an expression of His multi-faceted existence. As this being would be pure existence, every aspect of that which was created would inherently connected to His existence, but that which was given consciousness would also inherently have the ability to partake in this connection or not.
—————————-
“It’s your whole description of angelic existence that I have a particular problem with."
I haven’t really described angelic existence insofar as I have only acknowledged that I believe they exist. But in what capacity they exist I am not sure of, and “why?” is a question I do not think I will ever be able to fully answer. But…
I do believe there is a spiritual “spectrum”, if you will, with God not at one end, but as the prism as well as the source.
I believe that the physical and spiritual are inherently connected, it is our perception that “separates” them, so it is not in the sense that angels are “somewhere else”. They just don’t have physicality in the sense that we look for it.
—————————-
“‘Angels have free will’ has all sorts of implications that you don’t pursue. How are they different from us? what was god’s need to create us as well?”
They are different in that they are spirit, not made up of phyiscal matter. We are phyiscal beings imbibed with spirit. Though in our present state we are almost completely tied to the physical, we are on our way to remembering our true state in constant connection and oneness with God.
—————————-
“Satan appears to have behaved in exactly the same way that a petulant human would, he just has more power than us.”
Exactly! It is about power, domination, for that being. He is too often seen as God’s adversary, but he is not really worthy of being considered an opponent of God. I am opposed to any idea that referrs to the possibility that God could be “overthrown” by satan, and satan knows this is not possible. He is, however, very worthy of being considered an opponent of humanity. All he can do is decieve, throw into confusion, coerce, and distract us from realising that our connection with God is the only way to realise our full existence as humans. His is to be regarded as the threat, but not feared if we allow God into our lives. Satan’s power holds no sway in our spiritual lives if we do not fear him and trust in God. But as humanity has fallen from our connection with God due to satan’s deception, we have wholeheartedly givin him reign over our existence. The dissolution of this connection with satan is essential in reconnecting with God.
—————————-
“You seculate and interpret so far on what little information you can get from the bible but then seem to stop in an arbitrary place.”
My belief system may be rooted in the bible but it is sustained by God. What insights He gives me come from a myriad of sources, and most importantly from the time I am able to keep my heart in His presence. This does not happen often enough, for sure, because I am human a member of the human race and am subjected to all the same barriers as everyone else. But through the connection with the Holy Spirit that Jesus provides, God speaks constantly through all things, all situations. I just need to know how to listen.
——————————-
HerbieP on November 4, 2009, 2:33 AM
Pokoj! previously I haven’t given you enough credit for how well and honsetly you have articulated your beliefs – thank you.
I really have nothing to say. For me your position comes down to – ‘I feel these things to have a truth’. Well I don’t. I don’t even have a point of contact with them. I don’t rely on feelings much but if I were to I have personal experience that seems to deny some of the fundamental basis of what you say. I live with a number of animals and it the middle of the countryside. When I look into an animal’s eyes or see wild or domestic animals’ behaviour I know that they are exactly like me. All that separates us is the capacity for language and tool making. I don’t have a special ‘soul’ or place in ‘creation’. I am exactly like them. If I were to rely on feelings then this is a fundamental one for me. There can be no spiritual realms, I am wholly physical and wholly animal, there is no more to me than that. Your whole mythology has no resonance with my reality.
Add a Comment
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register