The soul's value as an ever-present, ever-living reality
Men will still hear of the soul if it be a true soul that speaks — no smatterer, and no self-seeker. They will still hear of the great value of the soul. They will even hear of its absolute value, its pearl of price for whose sake all other pearls are but a currency, and all other ends but means… This is the Christian, the New Testament faith.
The Hebrew idea was different [than the Hellenstic]. The Jews thought of the soul as immortal not in itself but in a destiny conferred on it. They thought of its immortality and perfection as given by God. Its destiny was there as the result of the will and choice of God. That destiny was due to the divine purpose, and it existed there, not in the soul’s fibre, so to say. It was written not in the soul’s creation but in its Creator, not in its germ but in its Maker. Accordingly what was said to pre-exist was not the soul in its independent nature, as a sort of fiery particle forming an exception from the great universe of inert existence, but the will of God for the soul, its destiny as a purpose and choice of God. And as the purpose is that of God, to whom all things future are present, therefore in Him our destiny is an ever-present and ever-living reality. Thus the soul’s absolute and final value was found in Christ, in the pre-existent Christ, eternally chosen, God’s personal purpose, eternal and unbegotten, in whom we were and are created.
Selah
P.T. Forsyth, "The Preacher and the Age," Positive Preaching and the Modern Mind (Independent Press LTD: London, 1953), 94-95.
Showing posts with label theology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label theology. Show all posts
Friday, June 19, 2009
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
The potential idolatry of postmodern intuition
A diseased and wasted church
Such views of theology as postpone experience to belief, practice to creed, conscience to assent, or regeneration to impression… are among the chief reasons why the Church has such a weak moral impact on the world, and why its theological foundations seem irrelevant to righteousness and impotent for crisis in history and society. They do not coincide with the foundations of the moral world. Therefore they are regarded as themes instead of being felt as powers. They are treated as academic principles instead of life-giving spirits.
Such considerations help to explain why the Gospel of God’s Kingdom… does not come home to the rations, why it does not take charge of the pubic conscience on a universal scale either to inspire courage or to sustain fortitude.
Selah.
P.T. Forsyth, “Salvation Theological But Not Systematic,” The Justification of God: Lectures for War-Time on a Christian Theodicy (Independent Press LTD: London, 1957), 95-96.
Such views of theology as postpone experience to belief, practice to creed, conscience to assent, or regeneration to impression… are among the chief reasons why the Church has such a weak moral impact on the world, and why its theological foundations seem irrelevant to righteousness and impotent for crisis in history and society. They do not coincide with the foundations of the moral world. Therefore they are regarded as themes instead of being felt as powers. They are treated as academic principles instead of life-giving spirits.
Such considerations help to explain why the Gospel of God’s Kingdom… does not come home to the rations, why it does not take charge of the pubic conscience on a universal scale either to inspire courage or to sustain fortitude.
Selah.
P.T. Forsyth, “Salvation Theological But Not Systematic,” The Justification of God: Lectures for War-Time on a Christian Theodicy (Independent Press LTD: London, 1957), 95-96.
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
If hell is God's then hell is not evil
Serving heaven by learning to hate evil more than hell
The mission of Jesus was from the same source and with the same object as the punishment of our sins. He came to work along with our punishment. He came to side with it, and set us free from our sins. No man is safe from hell until he is free from his sins; but a man to whom his sins, that is the evil things in him, are a burden, while he may indeed sometimes feel as if he were in hell, will soon have forgotten that ever he had any other hell to think of than that of his sinful condition. For to him his sins are hell; he would go to the other hell to be free of them; free of them, hell itself would be endurable to him. For hell is God's and not the devil's. Hell is on the side of God and man, to free the child of God from the corruption of death. Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him. If hell be needful to save him, hell will blaze, and the worm will writhe and bite, until he takes refuge in the will of the Father. 'Salvation from hell, is salvation as conceived by such to whom hell and not evil is the terror.' But if even for dread of hell a poor soul seek the Father, he will be heard of him in his terror, and, taught of him to seek the immeasurably greater gift, will in the greater receive the less.
Selah.
George MacDonald, "Salvation from Sin," The Hope of the Gospel.
The mission of Jesus was from the same source and with the same object as the punishment of our sins. He came to work along with our punishment. He came to side with it, and set us free from our sins. No man is safe from hell until he is free from his sins; but a man to whom his sins, that is the evil things in him, are a burden, while he may indeed sometimes feel as if he were in hell, will soon have forgotten that ever he had any other hell to think of than that of his sinful condition. For to him his sins are hell; he would go to the other hell to be free of them; free of them, hell itself would be endurable to him. For hell is God's and not the devil's. Hell is on the side of God and man, to free the child of God from the corruption of death. Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him. If hell be needful to save him, hell will blaze, and the worm will writhe and bite, until he takes refuge in the will of the Father. 'Salvation from hell, is salvation as conceived by such to whom hell and not evil is the terror.' But if even for dread of hell a poor soul seek the Father, he will be heard of him in his terror, and, taught of him to seek the immeasurably greater gift, will in the greater receive the less.
Selah.
George MacDonald, "Salvation from Sin," The Hope of the Gospel.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Dalai Lama: Non-violence cannot answer terror
A stunning admission
This week, the Dalai Lama frankly admitted that the principle of ahimsa [or non-violence] cannot be properly applied to terrorism. Prevention is the only way to handle terror, he said.
This surprised a lot of people, but it is very wise counsel that recognizes the nature of terrorism as well as the true nature of peace. It also begs the question: if the Dalai Lama, whose entire life is predicated on peace, fully recognizes the limits of peace in reference to terror and strongly appreciates the attempts of President Bush to deal with world terror, then why has Bush been so despised by those who use peace as their pretext of dislike?
The answer lies in metaphysics, of course. And, to lesser degree, politics.
Interesting, no?
The pretext of peace
Several powerful lessons in this presentation of the Dalai Lama:
These are ground-shaking claims for some people. But the logic is intense and accurate. Leaving aside claim three [which follows from claims one and two], it's easy to see that the Lama well understands the limits of education. The lesson also speaks to the limits of non-violence, the potentially counterproductive nature of peace claims. Here the Dalai Lama is very consistent with the teaching of the Hebrew prophets: they showed that peace claim can [and will] be used to destroy God's people. The Apostles later followed this out, revealing that the Antichrist comes as a man of peace -- and the spirit of Antichrist gains its power on peace claim.
Mere education does not change the heart. And it is the heart that decides the issues of life. It is the heart that causes many who currently use the word peace to make common cause with modern terror.
Selah.
This week, the Dalai Lama frankly admitted that the principle of ahimsa [or non-violence] cannot be properly applied to terrorism. Prevention is the only way to handle terror, he said.
NEW DELHI: The Dalai Lama, a lifelong champion of non-violence on Saturday candidly stated that terrorism cannot be tackled by applying the principle of ahimsa because the minds of terrorists are closed.
"It is difficult to deal with terrorism through non-violence," the Tibetan spiritual leader said delivering the Madhavrao Scindia Memorial Lecture here.
He also termed terrorism as the worst kind of violence which is not carried by a few mad people but by those who are very brilliant and educated.
"They (terrorists) are very brilliant and educated... but a strong ill feeling is bred in them. Their minds are closed," the Dalai Lama said.
He said that the only way to tackle terrorism is through prevention. The head of the Tibetan government-in-exile left the audience stunned when he said "I love President George W Bush." He went on to add how he and the US President instantly struck a chord in their first meeting unlike politicians who take a while to develop close ties.
This surprised a lot of people, but it is very wise counsel that recognizes the nature of terrorism as well as the true nature of peace. It also begs the question: if the Dalai Lama, whose entire life is predicated on peace, fully recognizes the limits of peace in reference to terror and strongly appreciates the attempts of President Bush to deal with world terror, then why has Bush been so despised by those who use peace as their pretext of dislike?
The answer lies in metaphysics, of course. And, to lesser degree, politics.
Interesting, no?
The pretext of peace
Several powerful lessons in this presentation of the Dalai Lama:
- Education is not the answer to terrorism. It's only the well educated who are allowing terror to continue in our world, not the unwashed masses of popular thought.
- Non-violence is not the answer to terrorism [i.e. the limits of peace and the destructive nature of pseudo-peace].
- President Bush was right in his general approach to terror.
These are ground-shaking claims for some people. But the logic is intense and accurate. Leaving aside claim three [which follows from claims one and two], it's easy to see that the Lama well understands the limits of education. The lesson also speaks to the limits of non-violence, the potentially counterproductive nature of peace claims. Here the Dalai Lama is very consistent with the teaching of the Hebrew prophets: they showed that peace claim can [and will] be used to destroy God's people. The Apostles later followed this out, revealing that the Antichrist comes as a man of peace -- and the spirit of Antichrist gains its power on peace claim.
Mere education does not change the heart. And it is the heart that decides the issues of life. It is the heart that causes many who currently use the word peace to make common cause with modern terror.
Selah.
Friday, July 04, 2008
Paragraph Farmer: Standing strong on the ramparts
While I was jetting coast to coast and then driving everywhere in between [slight hyperbole, but truth in there somewhere, lol] Patrick O'Hannigan over at Paragraph Farmer was busy, penning a a gentle critique of Obama's operative hermeneutic.
If you are of an intellectual bent, and are so inclined, jump over to his blog and read the article. It won't waste your time! And definitely a patriotic thing to do today, in case you're short of ideas... :-)
Happy Fourth!
If you are of an intellectual bent, and are so inclined, jump over to his blog and read the article. It won't waste your time! And definitely a patriotic thing to do today, in case you're short of ideas... :-)
Happy Fourth!
Thursday, May 08, 2008
To be a Christian...
Patrick O'Hannigan at Paragraph Farmer quotes Jennifer from Et Tu, in a post about waiting for a tow truck driver:
Rich. Apt. Counter-intuitive for postmoderns. Definitely counter-zeitgeist. Truly prophetic.
Thanks, Jennifer! And Patrick!
Selah.
"To be a Christian is not to make God part of your story, but to realize that you are part of God's story."
Rich. Apt. Counter-intuitive for postmoderns. Definitely counter-zeitgeist. Truly prophetic.
Thanks, Jennifer! And Patrick!
Selah.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
The divine nature of love
Love emerges from God for others
Love does not inquire into the character of the recipient but it asks what the beloved needs. It does not love the other because that one is such-and-such a person but because s/he exists. In all this it is quite the opposite of natural love: it “does not seek its own.” It does not perform the characteristic natural impulse of love and life. Therefore it is basically independent of the conduct of the other person; it is not conditional but absolute. It wants nothing for itself but only for others. Therefore it is also not vulnerable. It never “reacts” but is always “spontaneous,” emerging by its own strength – rather, from the power of God. Love is the real God-likeness of man for which he has been created. In so far as love is in man he really resembles God and shows himself to be the child of God.
Selah.
A quote from Emil Brunner
Love does not inquire into the character of the recipient but it asks what the beloved needs. It does not love the other because that one is such-and-such a person but because s/he exists. In all this it is quite the opposite of natural love: it “does not seek its own.” It does not perform the characteristic natural impulse of love and life. Therefore it is basically independent of the conduct of the other person; it is not conditional but absolute. It wants nothing for itself but only for others. Therefore it is also not vulnerable. It never “reacts” but is always “spontaneous,” emerging by its own strength – rather, from the power of God. Love is the real God-likeness of man for which he has been created. In so far as love is in man he really resembles God and shows himself to be the child of God.
Selah.
A quote from Emil Brunner
Monday, October 29, 2007
A healthy look at the five points of Calvinism
A view of grace and freedom
[The] so-called five points of Calvinism were defined in controversy, and the titles are not an accurate indication of their meaning. Total depravity did not mean that human beings are totally evil; it meant that human beings are corrupt in every dimension of their existence and at the critical point of existence – namely, turning to God – they were totally unable to do so. Irresistible grace did not mean that grace could not be resisted, for grace is frequently, if not always, resisted. It did mean that God’s grace cannot be thwarted. Limited atonement did not mean for the majority of Calvinists that Christ died only for a select few people; the atonement is adequate for all people. It did mean that it was efficacious only for the elect or for believers. Unconditional election did not mean that salvation is by an arbitrary decree; it meant that God redeems us not because we deserve to be redeemed or because of anything we do but only out of His free love. The perseverance of the saints meant not so much that the saints persevere, as that God’s grace perseveres and brings the work of salvation to its completion.
The theological controversies of the medieval church as well as subsequent theological efforts have demonstrated that the problems of God’s grace and human freedom cannot be resolved by dividing up the work. Salvation is not partly the work of God and partly the work of human beings. It is not that God begins what humans may complete, or completes what human beings have already begun. The best solution seems to be to affirm that salvation from one perspective is completely the work of God. From another perspective – that is, the historical and psychological – it is completely the work of human beings.
John H. Leith, “The Prevenience of Grace,” Basic Christian Doctrine, 233.
[The] so-called five points of Calvinism were defined in controversy, and the titles are not an accurate indication of their meaning. Total depravity did not mean that human beings are totally evil; it meant that human beings are corrupt in every dimension of their existence and at the critical point of existence – namely, turning to God – they were totally unable to do so. Irresistible grace did not mean that grace could not be resisted, for grace is frequently, if not always, resisted. It did mean that God’s grace cannot be thwarted. Limited atonement did not mean for the majority of Calvinists that Christ died only for a select few people; the atonement is adequate for all people. It did mean that it was efficacious only for the elect or for believers. Unconditional election did not mean that salvation is by an arbitrary decree; it meant that God redeems us not because we deserve to be redeemed or because of anything we do but only out of His free love. The perseverance of the saints meant not so much that the saints persevere, as that God’s grace perseveres and brings the work of salvation to its completion.
The theological controversies of the medieval church as well as subsequent theological efforts have demonstrated that the problems of God’s grace and human freedom cannot be resolved by dividing up the work. Salvation is not partly the work of God and partly the work of human beings. It is not that God begins what humans may complete, or completes what human beings have already begun. The best solution seems to be to affirm that salvation from one perspective is completely the work of God. From another perspective – that is, the historical and psychological – it is completely the work of human beings.
John H. Leith, “The Prevenience of Grace,” Basic Christian Doctrine, 233.