In response to Catherine's post regarding the veil of misunderstanding surrounding God and scripture Excellent line of reasoning Catherine! I do think there is a veil between us and clear understanding of God and the Word. I think that you hit the nail on the head with the idea that Christ has come to unveil mystery. I also think that His life added some mystery and confusion to the already jumbled mess. However, I think that the Holy Spirit is here to guide and correct and it is only in relationship with the Word and God (all of Him!) that we can come to see the revealed Creator. How can you understand anything without exposure to it?
name:ednah makori. book:The History of christian Thought. chapter:1 The chapter is about the Church Fathers. These were the earliest theologians who tried to establish the basic doctrines of christianity. They tried to come with what christians believed and why. To me, these people did a great job, and as we are in these times, understanding our history will help us realize where we are, so that we can try and figure out our way forward. It is trough them that we learn what did not work or worked better, hence we can get our way foward.They increase our knowledge for we get to know why and how things happened esspecialy in the christian world. To me, the chapter increased my understanding of the history of christian world.
chapter 1 book-cosmic Christ of Scripture. The first chapter of the book was so interesting to me. I have never imagined that there is a very big connection between the universe(Cosmos), Jesus christ, And the scriptures. The book unveiled me and i was able to see clearly there connections. How funny, that i read the word of God daily, see His creation daily and never imagine the connection. I that God, that through Jesus Christ, we understand Him better, each day through reading the scriptures enjoying the cosmos. Two lights have been presented-greater and teh lesser. The greater light, which is the scriptures, are to guide us daily for it provides principles for us to use. The lesser light, which are the writtings of Ellen G. White, helps us to prepare at for the comming back of our savour. She illustrates to use by her several articles how we should conduct ourselves as christians for us to inherit the kingdom, which is our only hope for living in this world.
This comment is in response to Catherine Parris’ comment where she states “We need to come to the point that what breaks God’s heart breaks ours too and we rejoice over that which God rejoices over. He did not intend our lives to be a sterile blob of blah. The only way I know for this to happen is to ask God to give us the passion or vision He desires us to have.”
I agree with you on this Catherine! In our religious experience we need both reason and emotion/passion. I believe this is why God gave us capacity for both. The Holy Spirit guides us through our seat of reason and once He convicts us our emotions pour forth and He develops in us a passion for what He is calling us to do. I like to think of it as our emotion and passion are responses to the Spirit’s good reasoning within us.
A wholistic understanding of Scriptural principals has helped shed light to how to approach Jesus Christ, the Cosmos/Science and the Bible, which I believe is relevant especially in today’s secular post-modern world. For sometime Christians have been somewhat sheepish to do science since that scientific theory seemed to threaten Scriptural history. Under a wholeistic model the cosmos is not seen as separate from God’s Word but rather it is one of the ways He chooses to reveal His Word. The world believes that Christians have faith however they believe a Christian’s faith is not based on reason, as a result Christianity is perceived as being unreasonable. A wholistic model is able to demonstrate that reason and faith are not incompatible but rather work together in harmony. We worship a God that promotes reason for He says “Come let us reason together” such a model will also help us also seek to reason with one another.
The book also deals with a very interesting point of “secular knowledge” which I believe maybe one of factors that Christian arguments have appeared unreasonable to the secular and post-modern world. Christians can be tempted to think that secular knowledge is irrelevant to the Christians faith, after all “what can the world teach us” is often a saying loosely used. I do believe that we can unwillingly create a false dichotomy at this point. As the book highlights Ellen White says “every grain of knowledge is regarded as of high value”. On the flip side I should also be willing to subject the knowledge I choose to seek according to scripture Phil. 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, let your mind dwell on these things. As we seek to learn we should also ensure that the precious time we spend educating ourselves meets this Biblical criteria. I believe that Satan would love us to spend all our time “chancing rabbits” hoping that we major in the minors and minor in the majors instead of concentrating on the individual mission God has given us.
The book speaks of the three books of God being the scripture, Christ and the cosmos. Dr. Hanna then seeks to understand each of these better. As all three books are valid, the life of Christ and his nature is one that intrigues the most. A question I find myself asking however is “how much should I seek to understand about Christ?” the answer I give myself is “As much as I can”, that then leads to me asking a second question, “how much can I understand about Christ?” the answer I give myself is “as much as I should.” I am sure each of you have asked these same burning questions to yourself, haha. I guess what I seek to understand is at what point does our human ability to seek to understand Christ become fruitless or does a point even exist? The book answered some of my questions on page 78 when it describes the following attributes of Jesus being social in nature, corporate in nature, divine Creator and redeemer and Jesus is also the Restorer. Each of these attributes can be studied to throughout the ceaseless ages but it does help provide a foundation.
I appreciated the distinction that was made in the book between the “natural mind” and the “spiritual mind”. Paul was not against science or philosophy itself in the Greco-Roman world but rather he was against false science and false philosophy, which he calls the “natural mind”. Paul sees Jesus as a foundationally necessary ingredient of true science. Why is Jesus a necessary ingredient? Jesus is the Creator who made all things that consist, as a result He enabled our first parents to see creation as it truly is. Since sin however our knowledge of the cosmos has become partly veiled and hence we need Jesus to unveil our eyes in order to see His creation more clearly John 1:9 There was the true light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.
The book speaks of the mind of Christ as a worldview. This worldview needs to be shared with others in academia. They should not have to feel that it is either Jesus or science, rather they need to be aware that they have the option to choose both Jesus and Science, these to words are not any oxymoron in the mind of Christ worldview.
This is a response to Catherine Parris' comment by Cornelius Osuntade. Catherine raised two pertinent questions which are actually thorns in the flesh of Christianity today, and I make bold to say that these problems also rear their ugly heads among the Seventh-day Adventist. The idea that we use " philosophy ( or anything else for that matter ) to try and explain things in the Bible that we do not understand in an attempt to validate them? " is true to a very large extent. My reaction to this , is that, a lot of us in the Seventh -day Adventist church are too well read that we "philosophise" the word of God, hence, those well read individuals only operate at the periphery of the Bible. The resultant effect is that their educational-know-how, overides the real substance of the power of the word which is given by the Holy Spirit; such people perpetually hold tenaciously to their superficial and shallow interpretation of the Scriptures so much so that they become argumentative about it. Such people are referred to by Apostle Paul in 2nd Corinthians 3:6 as ministers of the letter, and "the letter killeth, but the Spirit gives life." The second question suggests that we have derailed in our method of gospel proclamation; we have gone the way of the world, so that we can have more converts into our church in a very attractive and cheap way. We now use baits to lure people into the Church, because we need to have large number to report to the headquarters;using the exact words of Catherine. we are "incorporating the world into the gospel when we are trying to translate the gospel into ideas the world will undersand." This is what I call "solution gospel," as opposed to "salvation gospel." Put clearly, this is a situation whereby the evangelist put as his priority, a gospel that appeals to the emotions of his congregation by presenting the messages of prosperity, breakthrough, successes, healing, miracles, divine favor, promotions, etc over and above the message of the Cross. Thank you Catherine for these thought provoking questions, this is indeed a food for thought for all gospel workers as we grapple with the issues arising in this post modern era.
(Major) Cornelius Osuntade comments on what Yousseff said about chapter 6 of The Cosmic Christ. We really need to desire to know more about Christ, and to know Him personally. There is a difference between these two statements, Most Christians only know about Christ, they do not know Him personally, Dr. Martins' book seeks to proffer solutions to both. We know about Christ through the word and the cosmos, but we know Him personally when we practically experience the power of his ressurection by allowing the power in that name to be in our hearts rather than on our lips. Jesus must be the garment to be worn as an overall that wil shield you from deception. When people see you, they will see Jesus, and according to Galatians 6:17, no man will trouble you again, because you "bear in your body the marks of the Lord Jesus.Thank you Youssef.
In response to Chap. 3: "Let the Holy Scriptures Speak!" in Dr. Hanna's book, "The Cosmic Christ of Scripture..." The wholistic view of Scripture that Dr. Hanna presents is very exciting, it seems to me that this approach is a major break-through in theological thought. We humans tend to see things that are paradoxical as contradictory, (though there are of course contradictory views...) It reminds me of the newer Star Trek series where they played 3D chess instead of the older, outdated 2D version that is still played in our present era. ( (As preliminary to Chap. 3) In Chap. 2 of Dr. Hanna's book, his statement, "The authority of the divine revelation in the book of Scripture defines the theological authority of the divine revelation in the 'books'of Christ and the Cosmos." I translated that as "The Bible defines the theologica authority of the divine revelations of Jesus Christ and Nature." It is my understanding that because of the coherence and verifiable veracity of the revelation of Christ in the Bible, (and also related teaching about creation and accurate history recorded in the Bible), the Scripture establishes its rightful authority to define the authority of both Christ and Noature, (Cosmos). I think that the historical process of the compilation of Scripture's canon was the way God shows people who search for truth about life, that He is real, faithful, and has a Plan. A Plan that is centered around the Messiah, Jesus Christ. In Chap. 3 of the book Dr. Hanna makes clear the importance of giving the Scriptures their proper place. He writes about the "exclusive" definitions of Script. authority that hold that Script. is the only revelation, actually end up ignoring the very testimony of Script. itself that points to the authority of Christ, (in Special Rev.) and the role of General Rev. of the Cosmos. Other approaches, of "inclusive" definintions of Script. authority can diminish the Bible's authority by taking away its primacy, making it just one of many revelations, not worthy of being the means by which all of God's revelations are defined. In this chapter Daniel 12:4b was discussed, "...many shall run to and fro, and knowlede shall increase," as primarily pertaining to sacred knowledge, that also, secondarily facilitates secular knowledge. I agree that faith and learning should go together, esp. if we believe that we are made in hte image of God, with minds of amazing capacity, (includ. virtually infinite memory capacity, which the theory of evolution cannot explain the need for in a creature that lives only a short few decades!) One idea that came to me as I was reading this chap. is that just as Script. is sola AND prima in its realm of authority, so Christ Himself is both sola AND prima as the Son of God in a way in that He is the UNIQUE Son and also the FIRST of many sons of God, now that He is human. (First fruits) The two, (sola and prima), do not necessarily have to contradict each other in a wholistic model.
How does one come to know God? This is a question which determines how view Scripture, Christ and the world around us.
Karl Barth: Barth believed that God is so transcendent that human beings cannot even have a sense of God without God giving it to them. For Barth God is the supreme subject and we are the objects. I see Barth’s view as emphasising God as the seeking God. We see aspect of God in Scripture when God seeks Adam and Eve after they fell and in the parable of the good shepherd going to find the lost sheep. Here the Supreme God is the emphasised.
Paul Tillich: As opposed to Barth, Tillich emphasis existential thought. He essentially sees man as the subject and God being the object. As a result Tillich says that we as humans find God by the simple fact that we are aware of our need of Him. Here our experience as we interact with the world/cosmos is emphasised.
Seventh-Day Adventists: As Seventh-Day Adventists we emphasis the importance of Scripture as the way to know God.
Hannah in class suggested that non of the emphasis are inherently wrong in themselves but a wholistic understanding which includes God, the Cosmos and Scripture is a more complete way of interacting the three.
As we seek the reach the world in the 20th Century I believe this wholistic understanding will help. Muslims emphasise the transcendence of God in their theology, Jews emphasis the law of God / Torah in their theology and Christians emphasise the imminence of God through personal experience in their theology. Adventists believe that they are a movement raised by God for the end time. Could it be that a wholistic understanding, without comprising Scripture or the Sprit of Prophecy, will help us reach the world that is so divided today?
A Comment on J. Youssef Khabbaz's response to "The History of Christian Thought" (20th c.) I very much appreciate the broader scope of his understanding of who God is trying to reach, and the exciting position that Seventh-day Adventists are called to fill! (Tho' it is also very sobering & humbling at the same time!) In Youssef's discussion of Barth's Transcendant God, and Tillich's Imminent God, I was reminded of Christian Hist. Prof. Reeve's statement, "There are some things that are true, that if pushed too far become false" (He didn't deny that there are some absolutes: There is a Creator-God, I am not Him! and a few others...) But like the Lilliputians in "Gulliver's Travels" with their microscopes and telescopes coming to some pretty authoritative conclusions, our pronouncements can be both true in essential aspects, yet false in that we say that is the only aspect, i.e. "God is ONLY transcendant,(or imminent), in His Presence in relation to His creation." We Seventh-day Adventists have been privilaged to have the blue print for true Peace & Reconciliation through the unique understanding of the message of the Sanctuary System: how God reaches the heart and grows us up. If those aspects of our teaching are included in the wholistic theological model, I would have to answer in the affirmative that we are being equipped to fulfill our calling of really representing the Good News to all nations.
I am reponding to Sonny Oliver's comments about the role of the Holy Spirit in helping us to understand God's three books, I quite agree with the fact that He (Holy Spirit) is the Spirit of truth and a revealer of the mysteries of God. It is obvious that there are so many mysterious things about God that remain hard nuts to be cracked with our carnal minds, it is as the Holy Spirit is allowed into the hearts of men that He progressively opens our eyes of understanding to behold those wondrous things contained in those three books about God.Let me say here that not every mystery about God will be known or unraveled in this world through these three books of God, a lot more will be concealed from humanity until the glorious appearing of our coming king Jesus. For example, how would the three books about God adequately open up the mystery of a couple who just had their colorful wedding ceremony, and as they were coming back from the reception, going to their honeymoon, they both got burnt to death together with the Chief brides maid, the little bride and the ring bearer, having being involved in a motor crash. An explanation of why God allowed that sad incident to happen will have to wait until the ressurrection morning when we will see Christ face to face. Be that as it may, in a mishap like that, the Holy Spirit has a role to play as a comforter bringing consolation and comfort to the bereaved. The Holy Spirit is the one replacing Jesus Christ in our world today, and He also definitely qualifies as a part of the revelation of God. I pray that more people will allow the Holy Spirit to dwell permanently in their hearts for guidance in this trackless arid desert called world. Amen.
Posted by (Major) Cornelius Osuntade this day 09-30-07 at 4.07am
Jenn, I really liked what you had to say about passion and reason. Without passion, we wouldn’t act on the things we know, and without reason/logic, we wouldn’t know what things to act on. It's so true. We need both, in my opinion, but we need to keep each in its proper perspective so we don’t jump to conclusions in either direction - which you are right to say about some churches. It reminds me of what Dr. Doukhan said at the Worship and Church Music conference - that we need both passion and knowledge in order to have a complete worship experience. Those who only tremble in the knowledge they have need to rejoice in the hope that is also there (passion), and vice versa. He likened it to a flower - if you just have the beautiful flower with no roots, it's artificial; if you just have the roots, it's dry.
Response to the first chapter in "The History of Christian Thought" by Jonathan Hill: The verse in Isaiah 42:16 "I will bring the blind by a way they did not know; I will lead them in paths they have not known. I will make darkness light before them, And crooked places straight. These things I will do for them, And not forsake them..." It is very hopeful to me that philosophers such as Socrates, (not mentioned in the book, but who preceded Plato and whose "Socratic Method" of questioning surely influenced Plato...), along with Plato and others who were honesty questioning and trying to understand their world and realities...trying to harmonize beauty with ugliness, love and life with their contradictions of hate and death, which we humans instinctively rebel against...God must have much patience with us all, and I just need to remember that I am naturally blind. God has given me light through His Word, breathed by His Spirit, facilitated by Jesus' work and sacrifice for me, but He is always the Source. I think that the wholistic approach can only really be understood in love, which we get from God. It is the key that needs to be the motivating force behind our search for truth about God, and love is the only "energy" that can allow us to really know truth, and be content when we don't have the understanding we desire, because it is not factual knowledge that satisfies but relational knowledge that brings joy. I hope to see Socrates, Plato, Confuscious, (I may be confused on the spelling of his name!)Sitting Bull, and many others who led their people in the light they had. In spite of some of the surprising views held by revered Church Fathers, God knows their hearts and will decide their fates. One very appropo quote from the author, who then quotes Irenaeus: "An important part of the marturing process for humanity is coming to accept that we are God's creation. Just as Adam and Eve wanted to grow up fefore their time, so we also want to have it all now. We must learn to be patient. Irenaeus uses the image of a clay figure molded by a potter: 'You do not make God, but God makes you. If, then, you are God's workmanship, await the hand of your Maker which creates everything in due time; in due time as far as you are concerned, yoiu whose creation is being carried out...'" We do have to be patient, with ourselves and with others and with the process of understanding what God wants us to understand. Yet, to speak wholistically, I think there are somethings that He is verging on impatience about with us, and that is that His love in us is what will help us understand what we need to about Who He is. Yes we must be patient with the process, but we also need to hurry up and receive Love, (God), so we can understand. (My sermonette for the month :>) !!! S.E.A.Waters
It is true that, like other religious institutions, Adventists have traditions–-some good and some bad. What is important is that we subordinate those traditions to the authority of Scripture. Even the inspired writings of Ellen White are subject to the Bible Rule of faith and practice.
In response to Cornelius Regarding arguments 'against those who say there is no God"
I do think that Dr. Hanna has done a fantastic job of writing about the plurality of ways God can be revealed to each of us. It is a gracious Creator, Teacher and Father who uses many methods to show Himself.
I am hesitant however to think that Dr. Hanna would have written this book as an apologetic for those who say there is no God. It seems to me that this book is not an argument against those people who have yet to see or encounter God, but rather an exploration of the world as experienced by one who acknowledges God's presence.
I think often we think we must argue with people who do not know God. And yet, in an 'argument' one person must win and another lose. Can we not discuss rather than argue?
Kevin, you said it well so I will quote... "I believe now, more than ever, that someone’s theology cannot be separated from his personal life."
We live in times where major players on the public stage have been caught living lives of lies. Everyone from Haggard, to Clinton to Lay has found out that acting one way and saying things are going another have found a sudden and final end to many plans. The sad thing is this...it is not only this person who is affected adversely. The world suffered economically when Lay and co. were caught, the evangelical movement it's followers were hurt when Haggard was exposed and politics and the US form of government were tested and highly ridiculed (I was living abroad when some of this broke...many jokes were passed around)
When I choose to live a lie, I am choosing not only to walk away from God's command of perfection (Be perfect, then as God in Heaven is perfect! Matthew 5:48)I risk harming those around me. My seemingly small action affects the large picture. I cannot say I am a follower of Christ and live like a devil.
Like Mahatma Gandhi said "Be the change you want to see in the world". It starts with me.
In response to Youssef Regarding a holistic spirtual approach.
Great outline of the major religions! Each has a strength and 'angle' on the world we experience. As a Christian I have to be willing to find the strong points and try to build bridges. I also have to know my beliefs in and out so I am building a solid bridge.
The holistic approach seems to be the only manner in which the gospel can reach the whole world. If I say that something is wrong, in my finite wisdom, I may send someone onto a rabbit chase. We are not called to pull theories and ideas and people to pieces. And the quickest way to hurt or close off people is to tell them how wrong their truth is.
This response is from both chapters 5 & 6 of The Cosmic Christ of Scripture. I have been very interested in issues related to the humanity of Christ ever since I was baptized in '98. I liked the teaching that I learned in Dr. Canale's class that God the Son, as He has chosen to describe Himself to us, was always the intermediary between the Godhead and His creation, even if sin had never entered the whole cosmos, the Son would have been at least the first contact to creatures, (Michael to the angels, and so forth). That was just the order God had settled on. It is of course a great mystery how God could somehow become "fused" with humanity in the Incarnation, but that amazing condescention, in order to save humanity and put an end to confusion over Who He is and how He veiws us, sounds like Jesus to me...very surprising, really astounding, and surely incomprehensible! The debate about whether Jesus had the nature of Adam before or after the Fall has been especially difficult for me at times. People who I was listening to soon after my baptism, seemed to think it was of utmost importance to come to the conclusion that He had a post-Fall human nature. I now believe that they were not thinking wholistically. They also tended to question the motives of anyone who did not think like them. I was trying to understand the issues. I think the sanctuary system gives a clue, in that the blood from sacrifices for ritual impurity that pointed to mortality and not to sin, never made it into the Most Holy Place. My theory is that this points to Christ's "innocent infirmities," (i.e. He got tired, hungry, was subject to death...), but the blood of the sin offerings was symbolically put upon Him. He was "that Holy Thing" as Scripture says. Ellen White believed He had "no propensity to sin," unlike myself, but had "innocent infirmities" as I also have, that are a result of sin, but not sin in themselves. The view my friends were trying to get me to agree to, put such a focus on human performance: since Jesus had the nature of Adam after the Fall, then I should be able to be as PERFECT as He was! I feel I have a more balanced view, but will learn much more, and also be content with knowing I cannot ever fully understand the divine-human nature of Christ. Also I wanted to mention from chap. 6 (The Theme of the Bible is Jesus) In Isaiah, the Messiah is referred to as "the everlasting Father..." and Dr. Hanna mentions the fact that both the Father and the Son are referred to as "Savior". I thought on my own, that maybe the reference to Jesus as the "everlasting Father" could in connection to Him being now the Second/Last Adam, that in Him, we now have a Father. I can see how both the Father and the Son could be called "Savior," and even the Holy Spirit included for that matter, even tho' only Jesus actually shed His blood for us, They all were vital participants in our salvation. But for the Isaiah passage to call the Messiah "the Father" as in God the Father is very confusing to me, even when I try to think wholistically. I understand Jesus saying, "If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father." That is in line with Elohim's one essence, but not if He said "I am the Father." Any comments on my dilema would be welcomed... S.E.A.Waters
Just a comment on "Trav'ler Jenn's" response to Kevin Kim's assertion that our theology cannot be separated from our lives, Oh how true! I agree, and I believe that God tries as hard as He can to show us our spritual bankrupcy in the least embarrassing way, if we would only be honest, but that takes believing to a "hopeful degree," at least that He really loves us. Because our sinful ("self-focused") nature is going to come out sooner or later. Just a little clarification: Merle Haggard is a Country singer, not involved with TV evangelism...maybe you meant Jimmy Swaggert, the TV evangelist who was "found out" involved in illicit and extra-marital escapdes. Just for those Country & Western fans out there who may be shocked at hearing their hero was implicated...not that Country singers don't have their scandals! They wouldn't have anything to sing about otherwise!!! But back to the hard lesson of human failings...I know I have in the past, as a new Christian put people on pedistals and then when they fell, I was truly shaken. Just reading about Solomon, his beautiful words of love and steadfast faith in God, and then he fell! I felt, 'what hope is there for me to remain faithful if the wisest man who ever lived couldn't stay true?!'But I am learning to focus on the faithfulness of God as portrayed by Christ's faithfulness, to take Life and faithfulness seriously, esp. as one called to be a leader, but to know that God is not going to give me up easily if I get off track...It is a sobering charge to be a representative of God to people who have not yet learned to base their faith on Christ's performance, and not on professing Christians, esp. leaders. By beholding Him daily, we become strong...Heaven help us all!
I think that you are perfectly right when you say that our theology cannot be separated from our lives. however, I think that if there are confusions about what our theology is, it can cause a problem when it comes to the way we live our lives. It is probable that there are some among us who do not know really our theology. when this takes place, a difference in the way of living is shown. I believe that there are theological issues upon which some do not agree or meet on a common ground. That is, it is possible those issues may reflect on how we live based on how they are understood.
However, your point is vital that our lives should reflect our understanding of scripture regardless.
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture: Ernst Page 35-64 I am amazed to see that Ellen G White has an inclusive definition for the word “Revelation.” At this point, I have to acknowledge that The Cosmic Christ of Scripture for opening new avenues in my thinking. I always wandering what prevent us from preaching the third angel message. I might be wrong; however I strongly believe that without communication there will not be understanding. In addition, false interpretation can not vehement a true message. Therefore, we must come to realize that knowledge is greater than what we possess and understand. The messenger of the Lord describes Christ, Scripture, and the cosmos as channels for the revelation of God. As a result, believers have to appreciate the increasing of knowledge as God’s source of revelation. If Ellen G White could say that, I believe that she had in mind a large view for SDA in term of reaching the secular world. “Revelation is only prophetic in term of spiritual revelation; it is also progressive in term of General revelation. If we want to do a good job in our evangelistic meeting, it becomes an imperative to know that Christ met people at their level. In our post modern world, people are looking for a savior that they can experience in nature, they can live with and they can make really from reading the scripture. A “unique revelation” can not give them that savior. In other words, they are not looking for “sectarian revelation.”
The History of Christian Thought: Ernst Page 75 Pelagius is remarkable figure for the Christian era. He has adopted a theology that one would call “develop our existential power”. It is another way to promote “perfectionism”. Strangely enough, some of our pioneers advocated such theology. They believe that we can work toward our salvation. In the other hand, one could also argue that the Bible teaches perfectionism, Philippians 2:12b-13 "...work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure". The passage explains itself clearly, for it states that God is the one who is at work not you. Pelagius’ belief is against the Biblical concept of salvation. Needless to say that, the principle of his theology will help any believers to work humbly before God. The true is God has given us the power to overcome temptation through the blood of Christ, we just have to claim it not “working for it”. In that sense, claiming will define as maturity. In order to claim something you have to appreciate its value which is a process of learning.
Ernst in response to Dr Hanna I believe that traditions are strongly important for a community of faith. They are “identifier markers”. One can even say that they represent the core of beliefs. However, we must understand that if traditions can be changed, beliefs will have to modify. Now, is there a religion that will accept such modification? People are hard to change; therefore they prefer routine than progress. I believe that we must come to a certain level of understanding where we can create more rooms for flourishing ideas. I am not promoting liberalism but I also suggest a theology of diversity. It is not something that will bring polytheist but rather a rich cultural background to appreciate the “Cosmic Christ in Scripture.” I might not have the correct word to express this extensive thought. However, I would love to see traditions as a way of knowing where we came from not as where we are going. When traditions stop, reality has to step up to bring us to our destination.
"I believe that the concept of the three books of incarnation, inspiration and creation is essential..." Quote #16
You stated that you think the conflict between theology and science is a misunderstanding and that it is not impossible to bring the real aspect of the two together. I agree whole heartily with you.
I come from a science background and I find there is a gross misunderstanding between the two. From my experience, science is studying the Cosmos, as Dr. Hanna likes to call it. Theology is a study of God. I think that science is merely a tool we can use to learn more about nature and the knowledge we gain from it should be part of the theology.
And when I say knowledge, I don't mean the theories they come up with to explain how everything came to be. That is outside the scope of science and is mere speculation.
My name is Cornelius Osuntade, I am responding to Sony Oliver's comments made on 10-15-07 concerning Thomas Aquinas' explanation on knowing God through reason and revelation. He argued that reason is limited as an avenue to knowing God, and that it can cause problems when using it as a channel of discovering who God is. May I say at this point that I will not totally agree to that submission.For a carnal mind, reason will cause some theological controversy about God, because a carnal mind will have a faulty assessment about the personality of God, but for a spiritual mind, reason can be an effective way of knowing God, because God is spiritual, and spiritual things are spiritually discerned. Paul says in Romans chapter 8 verses 5-8 that," for they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the spirit the things of the spirit.For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh can not please God." The basic point I am making is that, since the carnal mind is enmity to God, such mind can not reason correcly about God, but when a mind is spiritually inclined, its reasoning faculty about God will reveal God more and more on a daily basis. Permit me to asy that Reason and revelation as means of knowing God, according to Thmas Aquinas, are complementary to each other; when you have a spirit filled life, your reasoning will lead you to discover greater revelation about God, and His plan for you will be easily unraveled. Posted by Cornelius Osuntade this day 10-31-07 at 4.09am
This is a response to Ednah Makori's comment on "Reformation," posted on 10-01-07. The roles played by reformers like Martin Luther, John Calvin and John Wesley, to mention a few, in the history of Christianity are far reaching. These Reformers went through thick and thin to make a pathway in the thick forest of Christianity for us to follow to a conclusive and happy end. My concern now is: Can we find the likes of such reformers among the Christians today? There are still more challenges to face in the Christian world, and it will take the boldness of the three Hebrew boys of Daniel chapter 3, and the commitment of prophet Daniel himself to be able to weather the storm and pass a worthwhile legacy to the coming generation. I look through the church today, and I see a whole bunch of "cosmetic Christians" who wish to identify with God only when the going gets good, when the going gets tough, such Christians are ready to back out to go and cut corners outside the Christain world. In the words of E.G. White, which I will paraphrase, what the world needs now, especially the Christian world are men who will not be bought or sold, men who have consciences that are through to duty as the needle to the pole, men who will call sin by its right name, men who will stand for the truth though the heavens fall. As we approach the close of this world's history, the Christian world needs men who will be receptive to a revival of primitive Godliness as of old, Such will be able to wear the shoes of the patriarchs and prophets of the bible and also wear the garments of the reformers; making a difference for God in the Christian world. Through the commitment of such men, we will hasten the second coming of Jesus Christ. We really need to exit this trouble- infested world and go to heaven, a place of permanent peace and tranquility, where we will live for a thousand years before coming to a world made new and live forever and ever. I appreciate the courage of these Reformers, and I thank God for using them to open doors of Christianity for us.
Posted by Cornelius Osuntade this day,10-31-07 at 5.01am
Catherine has good points. I agree with her that we need passion for God. Infact when one day i was readinga book on Youth Leardership, the author pointed out clearly that we need passion and commitment if we want to succed in the vineyard of our Lord. According to this author, many people come to ministry from different angles, and with different goals in their minds. The difference is seen in how one perfoms and it was clear that those who came to ministry becouse of money or fame, get worn out easily due to burnout. But those who have a passion for God and His miistry, will work even when unpaid. The compassion and Love for God will keep then in service. God will renew them day by day as He unvails them to see Him more clearly. How wonderfulcould it be it we submit to Him for unvailing, as we guide his sheep.
Cornelius said: “It is very sad to say that the legacy passed down to us by these committed early Christians is being daily trivialized by our non- challant attitudes towards Christianity.” This is well said and so true. What did these people die for if we don’t appreciate the sacrifice they made on behalf of the faith and God? There is going to come a day when we can no longer be non-challant about our faith. And if we aren’t truly on fire for God and all He has to offer now, we best stoke the embers before it’s too late. And I’m speaking to myself too! How will we be able to stand against Sunday laws or persecution if we are wishy washy in what believe and stand for? How can we spark others to have a saving faith?
This is a comment on Bryan's post on November 6th. I agree that sometimes to the layperson in hearing sermons beyong their understanding it might sound like dirt. I think we have to be careful when we are doing the digging and keep our audience in mind; and also be mindful to not make showing off our theological ken as a goal. I also think that jumping from text to text in the bible - ie too much intertextual reference (which is common) leaves the congregation tired sometimes, and lost at others. So while I agree that it is a very good method I think it must be used wisely and carefully.
Good job Catherine, you are raising an important issue with regards to the use of philosophy to explain things in scripture. Whereas theology in itself may not be wrong and is sometimes needful one must be mindful of the temptation to use philosophical rational to interpret scripture to fit one’s theology. The early church fathers did not always philosophized correctly the first time but their philosophy laid the foundation on which others build on, while gaining better understanding along the way. If time last, someone will look at our current philosophy and while appreciating it would make improvements.
Sony, you were able to catch an important point in Aquinas’s theology. Thank you for bringing this to the surface. You wrote about the two major sources of knowing God; “reason and revelation.” He also said that these two do not contradict each other. It is true that reason has its limit but can’t we also say that revelation has it limits as well? No single mode of revelation is able to give a complete revelation. I think it takes reason to make full sense of revelation in nature, in scripture and in Christ as having the same purpose and that is to reveal God. I love the phrase that says “we need a faithful reason and a reasonable faith”. I think faithful reasoning and revelation can complement each other.
Makpri, thanks for your insights on the reformation period, I appreciate your take on the effect that the enlightenment brought to the world and to the Christian community in particular. The printing press that made reading material more readily available to the masses was probably one of the most important catalysts in speeding up the reformation. The point on standing for one belief is also poignant to effect change. I believe that our understanding of theology is progressive; therefore there is still need for men like Luther in our time. Luther and other to the reformation this far, but as history has revealed there is still more distance to cover.
Ednah, I appreciate how you apply the concept of the unveiling to the work of ministry fro it is true that we cannot teach unless we understand. Your mentioning of the place of scripture in revelation is also note worthy. You state that scripture is first, I just want to add that scripture is first epistemologically; in other words it is the source of doctrine, reproof etc, it keeps theology Christ centered. We should bear in mind that Christ has primacy as well but it is ontological and the Cosmos has primacy but it is contextual.
To comment on what Dr. Hanna said, it is true that we should measure all by the use of the Bible, but how do we handle those people who do not agree with that? You see it as white and black, it if it is not for God, it is against God, but what abot those who still have a vail? Those who are not yet there? those who are still gumbling? Great contaversy is not yet over, how do we make all see thing the God wants us to see them? Ofcourse no man is perfect. It will be wrong if we say adventist are perfect, it will be wrong if we say their doctrines are perfect. But how do we take the fact that like adventist who are not perfect, catholics are also believers who are not perfect. Adventist say they read the Bible more than catholics, but how come they are sinners in need of grace, just like catholics? We are ready to judge, but are we done with our own journey? As we wellcome other to join us in the advent movement are ourselves asured of heaven? or we are securing places for them? Matters to with salvation, are so complex, and sometimes i feel we are no better than those we preach to.Nowonder Ellen white says we will be surprised not to see those we expected to be in heaven. This is beyond my understanding the a muslim may go to heaven, while a pastor in the adventist church mau fail it. It is amazing to me. Any way, WHAT EVER IS IMPOSSIBLE WITH MAN, IS POSSIBLE WITH GOD. WHAT DO YOU THINK?
I believe that you make a good point when you say that Advenstism is not perfect. you raised many questions about your concern for others who have different views than us and how our imperfections can lead us astray, if I am not mistaken.
I do agree with you and I believe that we must not rely on our understanding so much so that we become so pride. I also believe that God, as Jeus declared, has many out there who are not in the fold yet. I think that God may keep them where they are for now and when the time comes, he will bring them to fold. The idea of the invisible church in that way is very useful in order to understand that one must not necessarily be part of our church in order to be saved.
I believe that we must continue the work for which we were called and leave it up to God. No one is perfect and no one should make any judgment about other's salvation and you are right by quoting Mrs. White about the surprise that will be when we get to heaven. I believe that it is a matter of letting God take control of our life and allow Him to guide us and lead us in the truth and to the truth.
In response to Kevin Kim’s post: Cosmic Christ of Scripture Chapter 6 – The Theme of the Bible is Jesus Kevin, you pointed out that the church rarely declares the significance of the human relationship between Adam and Christ. I have been thinking about it and I think I have an idea as to why that is. I think our mission as a church has been focused on proclaiming the good news of Salvation through Christ. It seems it is our mission to get that news out to everyone so that they can believe in Christ and be saved. It isn’t until later, when the converts are firmly grounded, no longer babies in Christ, that we go into such details as the relation between humanity, Adam and Christ. I don’t know if teaching them that from the beginning would change anything but I agree with you that it is definitely something that is important for them to understand and is very good news for all. It adds a depth to their understanding and hopefully also to their faith.
I tend to agree with your positive assessment of Moltmann's contributions. Specifically, I appreciate how you answered Hill's criticism of Moltmann's answers being ineffectual for suffering people. I concur that not only does God suffer and sympathize, He offers us His presence.
This is absolutely essential because "us" is insufficient, but "we" are more than enough when "we" = He + me. You could almost spell the "we" with a middle-case "w." This intimate bond that all Christians have with the Holy Spirit can answer the longing of our hearts. How did Jesus make it through this life? How else can we make it?
I agree with you that Daniel 12:4 has a primary spiritual application with a secondary scientific application. We may be in good company (Professor Hanna) with our holistic reading. I appreciate how you pointed out the reciprocal relationship of Scripture and science shedding light on each other.
We all know the Bible verses that state this truth, but it is nice to be reminded by our fellow students. Thanks Rudolph, consider yourself in good company (EGW). "Nature and revelation alike testify of God's love."
Response to Kevin’s Comment: “Without Christ, Scripture would have no meaning, and without the cosmos, Scripture would have no application. These ideas seem basic, but they are profound. These foundational concepts must become guiding hermeneutics in the proper study of Scripture.”
First, Kevin, I just want you to know that I always appreciate your thoughtful comments in class(es) – so thanks! But you’re right about how these ideas are both basic and profound at the same time. Now that they have been pointed out to me in Dr. Hanna’s book, I can see much more clearly how each relates to the other – especially how without the cosmos, Scripture would have no application. That is so obvious and so elusive at the same time. We must put into action what it is we learn from Scripture and allow Scripture to inform what it is we know about the cosmos.
I was encouraged by your statement, "It will be wrong if we say adventist are perfect, it will be wrong if we say their doctrines are perfect."
Throughout the semester, I have been firming in the belief that even doctrines are not perfect. I always knew they weren't, but in the face of conflict, sometimes I would want them to be. I knew that people weren't perfect, but I hoped that the doctrines we believed in could be. I tended to criticize Adventists who believed in absolute definitiveness, but sometimes I wanted to do the same. Therefore, more than ever, I have to hold up Scripture as my "apriori."
I also appreciated how your post showed some real emotion behind it. You raised good rhetorical questions to make the point that only God knows our salvation, and yet in Him we are secure. Thank you for continuing to seek truth and love.
The BRI document on the topic "Analysis of Universal 'legal' Justifaication" was so interesting to me.According to this document, the death of Christ on the cross accomplishes a legal justification which is universaly and unconditionally applied to all men. Even if the death of Jesus on the cross was universal, salvation is not universal. Salvtion is given to those who are willing and devoted to the saving faith of Jesus christ
The second chapter of Romans warns us against jugding others. We judge others yet do the same things. We are warned to leave all the judgmemt to God, who has all the truth. Chapter three of the book "Salvation," talks about The decade before 1888. During this period, Ellen white continued to express her understanding of perfection in a way the clearly differentiated her teachings from othersShe emphasised justification by faith alone. All this, with the discussion in class with the teacher, helps us understand that we cannot earn saltion, it is a gift that we get from God. Though Christ died for us all, we also need to cooperate with Him. Only those who are willing will see God.
45 comments:
In response to Catherine's post regarding the veil of misunderstanding surrounding God and scripture
Excellent line of reasoning Catherine! I do think there is a veil between us and clear understanding of God and the Word. I think that you hit the nail on the head with the idea that Christ has come to unveil mystery. I also think that His life added some mystery and confusion to the already jumbled mess. However, I think that the Holy Spirit is here to guide and correct and it is only in relationship with the Word and God (all of Him!) that we can come to see the revealed Creator. How can you understand anything without exposure to it?
name:ednah makori.
book:The History of christian Thought.
chapter:1
The chapter is about the Church Fathers. These were the earliest theologians who tried to establish the basic doctrines of christianity. They tried to come with what christians believed and why. To me, these people did a great job, and as we are in these times, understanding our history will help us realize where we are, so that we can try and figure out our way forward. It is trough them that we learn what did not work or worked better, hence we can get our way foward.They increase our knowledge for we get to know why and how things happened esspecialy in the christian world. To me, the chapter increased my understanding of the history of christian world.
chapter 1
book-cosmic Christ of Scripture.
The first chapter of the book was so interesting to me. I have never imagined that there is a very big connection between the universe(Cosmos), Jesus christ, And the scriptures. The book unveiled me and i was able to see clearly there connections. How funny, that i read the word of God daily, see His creation daily and never imagine the connection. I that God, that through Jesus Christ, we understand Him better, each day through reading the scriptures enjoying the cosmos.
Two lights have been presented-greater and teh lesser.
The greater light, which is the scriptures, are to guide us daily for it provides principles for us to use. The lesser light, which are the writtings of Ellen G. White, helps us to prepare at for the comming back of our savour. She illustrates to use by her several articles how we should conduct ourselves as christians for us to inherit the kingdom, which is our only hope for living in this world.
This comment is in response to Catherine Parris’ comment where she states “We need to come to the point that what breaks God’s heart breaks ours too and we rejoice over that which God rejoices over. He did not intend our lives to be a sterile blob of blah. The only way I know for this to happen is to ask God to give us the passion or vision He desires us to have.”
I agree with you on this Catherine! In our religious experience we need both reason and emotion/passion. I believe this is why God gave us capacity for both. The Holy Spirit guides us through our seat of reason and once He convicts us our emotions pour forth and He develops in us a passion for what He is calling us to do. I like to think of it as our emotion and passion are responses to the Spirit’s good reasoning within us.
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture
A wholistic understanding of Scriptural principals has helped shed light to how to approach Jesus Christ, the Cosmos/Science and the Bible, which I believe is relevant especially in today’s secular post-modern world. For sometime Christians have been somewhat sheepish to do science since that scientific theory seemed to threaten Scriptural history. Under a wholeistic model the cosmos is not seen as separate from God’s Word but rather it is one of the ways He chooses to reveal His Word. The world believes that Christians have faith however they believe a Christian’s faith is not based on reason, as a result Christianity is perceived as being unreasonable. A wholistic model is able to demonstrate that reason and faith are not incompatible but rather work together in harmony. We worship a God that promotes reason for He says “Come let us reason together” such a model will also help us also seek to reason with one another.
The book also deals with a very interesting point of “secular knowledge” which I believe maybe one of factors that Christian arguments have appeared unreasonable to the secular and post-modern world. Christians can be tempted to think that secular knowledge is irrelevant to the Christians faith, after all “what can the world teach us” is often a saying loosely used. I do believe that we can unwillingly create a false dichotomy at this point. As the book highlights Ellen White says “every grain of knowledge is regarded as of high value”. On the flip side I should also be willing to subject the knowledge I choose to seek according to scripture Phil. 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, let your mind dwell on these things. As we seek to learn we should also ensure that the precious time we spend educating ourselves meets this Biblical criteria. I believe that Satan would love us to spend all our time “chancing rabbits” hoping that we major in the minors and minor in the majors instead of concentrating on the individual mission God has given us.
The Cosmic Christ (Chapter 6)
The book speaks of the three books of God being the scripture, Christ and the cosmos. Dr. Hanna then seeks to understand each of these better. As all three books are valid, the life of Christ and his nature is one that intrigues the most. A question I find myself asking however is “how much should I seek to understand about Christ?” the answer I give myself is “As much as I can”, that then leads to me asking a second question, “how much can I understand about Christ?” the answer I give myself is “as much as I should.” I am sure each of you have asked these same burning questions to yourself, haha. I guess what I seek to understand is at what point does our human ability to seek to understand Christ become fruitless or does a point even exist? The book answered some of my questions on page 78 when it describes the following attributes of Jesus being social in nature, corporate in nature, divine Creator and redeemer and Jesus is also the Restorer. Each of these attributes can be studied to throughout the ceaseless ages but it does help provide a foundation.
The Cosmic Christ (Chapter 9)
I appreciated the distinction that was made in the book between the “natural mind” and the “spiritual mind”. Paul was not against science or philosophy itself in the Greco-Roman world but rather he was against false science and false philosophy, which he calls the “natural mind”. Paul sees Jesus as a foundationally necessary ingredient of true science. Why is Jesus a necessary ingredient? Jesus is the Creator who made all things that consist, as a result He enabled our first parents to see creation as it truly is. Since sin however our knowledge of the cosmos has become partly veiled and hence we need Jesus to unveil our eyes in order to see His creation more clearly John 1:9 There was the true light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.
The book speaks of the mind of Christ as a worldview. This worldview needs to be shared with others in academia. They should not have to feel that it is either Jesus or science, rather they need to be aware that they have the option to choose both Jesus and Science, these to words are not any oxymoron in the mind of Christ worldview.
This is a response to Catherine Parris' comment by Cornelius Osuntade.
Catherine raised two pertinent questions which are actually thorns in the flesh of Christianity today, and I make bold to say that these problems also rear their ugly heads among the Seventh-day Adventist. The idea that we use " philosophy ( or anything else for that matter ) to try and explain things in the Bible that we do not understand in an attempt to validate them? " is true to a very large extent. My reaction to this , is that, a lot of us in the Seventh -day Adventist church are too well read that we "philosophise" the word of God, hence, those well read individuals only operate at the periphery of the Bible. The resultant effect is that their educational-know-how, overides the real substance of the power of the word which is given by the Holy Spirit; such people perpetually hold tenaciously to their superficial and shallow interpretation of the Scriptures so much so that they become argumentative about it. Such people are referred to by Apostle Paul in 2nd Corinthians 3:6 as ministers of the letter, and "the letter killeth, but the Spirit gives life."
The second question suggests that we have derailed in our method of gospel proclamation; we have gone the way of the world, so that we can have more converts into our church in a very attractive and cheap way. We now use baits to lure people into the Church, because we need to have large number to report to the headquarters;using the exact words of Catherine. we are "incorporating the world into the gospel when we are trying to translate the gospel into ideas the world will undersand." This is what I call "solution gospel," as opposed to "salvation gospel." Put clearly, this is a situation whereby the evangelist put as his priority, a gospel that appeals to the emotions of his congregation by presenting the messages of prosperity, breakthrough, successes, healing, miracles, divine favor, promotions, etc over and above the message of the Cross.
Thank you Catherine for these thought provoking questions, this is indeed a food for thought for all gospel workers as we grapple with the issues arising in this post modern era.
(Major) Cornelius Osuntade comments on what Yousseff said about chapter 6 of The Cosmic Christ. We really need to desire to know more about Christ, and to know Him personally. There is a difference between these two statements, Most Christians only know about Christ, they do not know Him personally, Dr. Martins' book seeks to proffer solutions to both. We know about Christ through the word and the cosmos, but we know Him personally when we practically experience the power of his ressurection by allowing the power in that name to be in our hearts rather than on our lips. Jesus must be the garment to be worn as an overall that wil shield you from deception. When people see you, they will see Jesus, and according to Galatians 6:17, no man will trouble you again, because you "bear in your body the marks of the Lord Jesus.Thank you Youssef.
In response to Chap. 3: "Let the Holy Scriptures Speak!" in Dr. Hanna's book, "The Cosmic Christ of Scripture..." The wholistic view of Scripture that Dr. Hanna presents is very exciting, it seems to me that this approach is a major break-through in theological thought. We humans tend to see things that are paradoxical as contradictory, (though there are of course contradictory views...) It reminds me of the newer Star Trek series where they played 3D chess instead of the older, outdated 2D version that is still played in our present era. (
(As preliminary to Chap. 3) In Chap. 2 of Dr. Hanna's book, his statement, "The authority of the divine revelation in the book of Scripture defines the theological authority of the divine revelation in the 'books'of Christ and the Cosmos." I translated that as "The Bible defines the theologica authority of the divine revelations of Jesus Christ and Nature." It is my understanding that because of the coherence and verifiable veracity of the revelation of Christ in the Bible, (and also related teaching about creation and accurate history recorded in the Bible), the Scripture establishes its rightful authority to define the authority of both Christ and Noature, (Cosmos). I think that the historical process of the compilation of Scripture's canon was the way God shows people who search for truth about life, that He is real, faithful, and has a Plan. A Plan that is centered around the Messiah, Jesus Christ.
In Chap. 3 of the book Dr. Hanna makes clear the importance of giving the Scriptures their proper place. He writes about the "exclusive" definitions of Script. authority that hold that Script. is the only revelation, actually end up ignoring the very testimony of Script. itself that points to the authority of Christ, (in Special Rev.) and the role of General Rev. of the Cosmos. Other approaches, of "inclusive" definintions of Script. authority can diminish the Bible's authority by taking away its primacy, making it just one of many revelations, not worthy of being the means by which all of God's revelations are defined. In this chapter Daniel 12:4b was discussed, "...many shall run to and fro, and knowlede shall increase," as primarily pertaining to sacred knowledge, that also, secondarily facilitates secular knowledge. I agree that faith and learning should go together, esp. if we believe that we are made in hte image of God, with minds of amazing capacity, (includ. virtually infinite memory capacity, which the theory of evolution cannot explain the need for in a creature that lives only a short few decades!)
One idea that came to me as I was reading this chap. is that just as Script. is sola AND prima in its realm of authority, so Christ Himself is both sola AND prima as the Son of God in a way in that He is the UNIQUE Son and also the FIRST of many sons of God, now that He is human. (First fruits) The two, (sola and prima), do not necessarily have to contradict each other in a wholistic model.
The History of Christian Thought (20th Cent)
How does one come to know God? This is a question which determines how view Scripture, Christ and the world around us.
Karl Barth: Barth believed that God is so transcendent that human beings cannot even have a sense of God without God giving it to them. For Barth God is the supreme subject and we are the objects. I see Barth’s view as emphasising God as the seeking God. We see aspect of God in Scripture when God seeks Adam and Eve after they fell and in the parable of the good shepherd going to find the lost sheep. Here the Supreme God is the emphasised.
Paul Tillich: As opposed to Barth, Tillich emphasis existential thought. He essentially sees man as the subject and God being the object. As a result Tillich says that we as humans find God by the simple fact that we are aware of our need of Him. Here our experience as we interact with the world/cosmos is emphasised.
Seventh-Day Adventists: As Seventh-Day Adventists we emphasis the importance of Scripture as the way to know God.
Hannah in class suggested that non of the emphasis are inherently wrong in themselves but a wholistic understanding which includes God, the Cosmos and Scripture is a more complete way of interacting the three.
As we seek the reach the world in the 20th Century I believe this wholistic understanding will help. Muslims emphasise the transcendence of God in their theology, Jews emphasis the law of God / Torah in their theology and Christians emphasise the imminence of God through personal experience in their theology. Adventists believe that they are a movement raised by God for the end time. Could it be that a wholistic understanding, without comprising Scripture or the Sprit of Prophecy, will help us reach the world that is so divided today?
A Comment on J. Youssef Khabbaz's response to "The History of Christian Thought" (20th c.) I very much appreciate the broader scope of his understanding of who God is trying to reach, and the exciting position that Seventh-day Adventists are called to fill! (Tho' it is also very sobering & humbling at the same time!) In Youssef's discussion of Barth's Transcendant God, and Tillich's Imminent God, I was reminded of Christian Hist. Prof. Reeve's statement, "There are some things that are true, that if pushed too far become false" (He didn't deny that there are some absolutes: There is a Creator-God, I am not Him! and a few others...) But like the Lilliputians in "Gulliver's Travels" with their microscopes and telescopes coming to some pretty authoritative conclusions, our pronouncements can be both true in essential aspects, yet false in that we say that is the only aspect, i.e. "God is ONLY transcendant,(or imminent), in His Presence in relation to His creation." We Seventh-day Adventists have been privilaged to have the blue print for true Peace & Reconciliation through the unique understanding of the message of the Sanctuary System: how God reaches the heart and grows us up. If those aspects of our teaching are included in the wholistic theological model, I would have to answer in the affirmative that we are being equipped to fulfill our calling of really representing the Good News to all nations.
I am reponding to Sonny Oliver's comments about the role of the Holy Spirit in helping us to understand God's three books, I quite agree with the fact that He (Holy Spirit) is the Spirit of truth and a revealer of the mysteries of God. It is obvious that there are so many mysterious things about God that remain hard nuts to be cracked with our carnal minds, it is as the Holy Spirit is allowed into the hearts of men that He progressively opens our eyes of understanding to behold those wondrous things contained in those three books about God.Let me say here that not every mystery about God will be known or unraveled in this world through these three books of God, a lot more will be concealed from humanity until the glorious appearing of our coming king Jesus. For example, how would the three books about God adequately open up the mystery of a couple who just had their colorful wedding ceremony, and as they were coming back from the reception, going to their honeymoon, they both got burnt to death together with the Chief brides maid, the little bride and the ring bearer, having being involved in a motor crash. An explanation of why God allowed that sad incident to happen will have to wait until the ressurrection morning when we will see Christ face to face. Be that as it may, in a mishap like that, the Holy Spirit has a role to play as a comforter bringing consolation and comfort to the bereaved. The Holy Spirit is the one replacing Jesus Christ in our world today, and He also definitely qualifies as a part of the revelation of God. I pray that more people will allow the Holy Spirit to dwell permanently in their hearts for guidance in this trackless arid desert called world. Amen.
Posted by (Major) Cornelius Osuntade this day 09-30-07 at 4.07am
Response to Jenn's comment
Jenn, I really liked what you had to say about passion and reason. Without passion, we wouldn’t act on the things we know, and without reason/logic, we wouldn’t know what things to act on. It's so true. We need both, in my opinion, but we need to keep each in its proper perspective so we don’t jump to conclusions in either direction - which you are right to say about some churches. It reminds me of what Dr. Doukhan said at the Worship and Church Music conference - that we need both passion and knowledge in order to have a complete worship experience. Those who only tremble in the knowledge they have need to rejoice in the hope that is also there (passion), and vice versa. He likened it to a flower - if you just have the beautiful flower with no roots, it's artificial; if you just have the roots, it's dry.
Response to the first chapter in "The History of Christian Thought" by Jonathan Hill: The verse in Isaiah 42:16 "I will bring the blind by a way they did not know; I will lead them in paths they have not known. I will make darkness light before them, And crooked places straight. These things I will do for them, And not forsake them..." It is very hopeful to me that philosophers such as Socrates, (not mentioned in the book, but who preceded Plato and whose "Socratic Method" of questioning surely influenced Plato...), along with Plato and others who were honesty questioning and trying to understand their world and realities...trying to harmonize beauty with ugliness, love and life with their contradictions of hate and death, which we humans instinctively rebel against...God must have much patience with us all, and I just need to remember that I am naturally blind. God has given me light through His Word, breathed by His Spirit, facilitated by Jesus' work and sacrifice for me, but He is always the Source. I think that the wholistic approach can only really be understood in love, which we get from God. It is the key that needs to be the motivating force behind our search for truth about God, and love is the only "energy" that can allow us to really know truth, and be content when we don't have the understanding we desire, because it is not factual knowledge that satisfies but relational knowledge that brings joy. I hope to see Socrates, Plato, Confuscious, (I may be confused on the spelling of his name!)Sitting Bull, and many others who led their people in the light they had. In spite of some of the surprising views held by revered Church Fathers, God knows their hearts and will decide their fates. One very appropo quote from the author, who then quotes Irenaeus: "An important part of the marturing process for humanity is coming to accept that we are God's creation. Just as Adam and Eve wanted to grow up fefore their time, so we also want to have it all now. We must learn to be patient. Irenaeus uses the image of a clay figure molded by a potter: 'You do not make God, but God makes you. If, then, you are God's workmanship, await the hand of your Maker which creates everything in due time; in due time as far as you are concerned, yoiu whose creation is being carried out...'"
We do have to be patient, with ourselves and with others and with the process of understanding what God wants us to understand. Yet, to speak wholistically, I think there are somethings that He is verging on impatience about with us, and that is that His love in us is what will help us understand what we need to about Who He is. Yes we must be patient with the process, but we also need to hurry up and receive Love, (God), so we can understand. (My sermonette for the month :>) !!! S.E.A.Waters
It is true that, like other religious institutions, Adventists have traditions–-some good and some bad. What is important is that we subordinate those traditions to the authority of Scripture. Even the inspired writings of Ellen White are subject to the Bible Rule of faith and practice.
Martin Hanna.
In response to Cornelius
Regarding arguments 'against those who say there is no God"
I do think that Dr. Hanna has done a fantastic job of writing about the plurality of ways God can be revealed to each of us. It is a gracious Creator, Teacher and Father who uses many methods to show Himself.
I am hesitant however to think that Dr. Hanna would have written this book as an apologetic for those who say there is no God. It seems to me that this book is not an argument against those people who have yet to see or encounter God, but rather an exploration of the world as experienced by one who acknowledges God's presence.
I think often we think we must argue with people who do not know God. And yet, in an 'argument' one person must win and another lose. Can we not discuss rather than argue?
In response (and affirmation!) to Kevin Kim
Kevin, you said it well so I will quote... "I believe now, more than ever, that someone’s theology cannot be separated from his personal life."
We live in times where major players on the public stage have been caught living lives of lies. Everyone from Haggard, to Clinton to Lay has found out that acting one way and saying things are going another have found a sudden and final end to many plans. The sad thing is this...it is not only this person who is affected adversely. The world suffered economically when Lay and co. were caught, the evangelical movement it's followers were hurt when Haggard was exposed and politics and the US form of government were tested and highly ridiculed (I was living abroad when some of this broke...many jokes were passed around)
When I choose to live a lie, I am choosing not only to walk away from God's command of perfection (Be perfect, then as God in Heaven is perfect! Matthew 5:48)I risk harming those around me. My seemingly small action affects the large picture. I cannot say I am a follower of Christ and live like a devil.
Like Mahatma Gandhi said "Be the change you want to see in the world". It starts with me.
In response to Youssef
Regarding a holistic spirtual approach.
Great outline of the major religions! Each has a strength and 'angle' on the world we experience. As a Christian I have to be willing to find the strong points and try to build bridges. I also have to know my beliefs in and out so I am building a solid bridge.
The holistic approach seems to be the only manner in which the gospel can reach the whole world. If I say that something is wrong, in my finite wisdom, I may send someone onto a rabbit chase. We are not called to pull theories and ideas and people to pieces. And the quickest way to hurt or close off people is to tell them how wrong their truth is.
This response is from both chapters 5 & 6 of The Cosmic Christ of Scripture. I have been very interested in issues related to the humanity of Christ ever since I was baptized in '98. I liked the teaching that I learned in Dr. Canale's class that God the Son, as He has chosen to describe Himself to us, was always the intermediary between the Godhead and His creation, even if sin had never entered the whole cosmos, the Son would have been at least the first contact to creatures, (Michael to the angels, and so forth). That was just the order God had settled on. It is of course a great mystery how God could somehow become "fused" with humanity in the Incarnation, but that amazing condescention, in order to save humanity and put an end to confusion over Who He is and how He veiws us, sounds like Jesus to me...very surprising, really astounding, and surely incomprehensible!
The debate about whether Jesus had the nature of Adam before or after the Fall has been especially difficult for me at times. People who I was listening to soon after my baptism, seemed to think it was of utmost importance to come to the conclusion that He had a post-Fall human nature. I now believe that they were not thinking wholistically. They also tended to question the motives of anyone who did not think like them. I was trying to understand the issues. I think the sanctuary system gives a clue, in that the blood from sacrifices for ritual impurity that pointed to mortality and not to sin, never made it into the Most Holy Place. My theory is that this points to Christ's "innocent infirmities," (i.e. He got tired, hungry, was subject to death...), but the blood of the sin offerings was symbolically put upon Him. He was "that Holy Thing" as Scripture says. Ellen White believed He had "no propensity to sin," unlike myself, but had "innocent infirmities" as I also have, that are a result of sin, but not sin in themselves. The view my friends were trying to get me to agree to, put such a focus on human performance: since Jesus had the nature of Adam after the Fall, then I should be able to be as PERFECT as He was! I feel I have a more balanced view, but will learn much more, and also be content with knowing I cannot ever fully understand the divine-human nature of Christ.
Also I wanted to mention from chap. 6 (The Theme of the Bible is Jesus) In Isaiah, the Messiah is referred to as "the everlasting Father..." and Dr. Hanna mentions the fact that both the Father and the Son are referred to as "Savior". I thought on my own, that maybe the reference to Jesus as the "everlasting Father" could in connection to Him being now the Second/Last Adam, that in Him, we now have a Father. I can see how both the Father and the Son could be called "Savior," and even the Holy Spirit included for that matter, even tho' only Jesus actually shed His blood for us, They all were vital participants in our salvation. But for the Isaiah passage to call the Messiah "the Father" as in God the Father is very confusing to me, even when I try to think wholistically. I understand Jesus saying, "If you have seen Me, you have seen the Father." That is in line with Elohim's one essence, but not if He said "I am the Father." Any comments on my dilema would be welcomed... S.E.A.Waters
Just a comment on "Trav'ler Jenn's" response to Kevin Kim's assertion that our theology cannot be separated from our lives, Oh how true! I agree, and I believe that God tries as hard as He can to show us our spritual bankrupcy in the least embarrassing way, if we would only be honest, but that takes believing to a "hopeful degree," at least that He really loves us. Because our sinful ("self-focused") nature is going to come out sooner or later. Just a little clarification: Merle Haggard is a Country singer, not involved with TV evangelism...maybe you meant Jimmy Swaggert, the TV evangelist who was "found out" involved in illicit and extra-marital escapdes. Just for those Country & Western fans out there who may be shocked at hearing their hero was implicated...not that Country singers don't have their scandals! They wouldn't have anything to sing about otherwise!!! But back to the hard lesson of human failings...I know I have in the past, as a new Christian put people on pedistals and then when they fell, I was truly shaken. Just reading about Solomon, his beautiful words of love and steadfast faith in God, and then he fell! I felt, 'what hope is there for me to remain faithful if the wisest man who ever lived couldn't stay true?!'But I am learning to focus on the faithfulness of God as portrayed by Christ's faithfulness, to take Life and faithfulness seriously, esp. as one called to be a leader, but to know that God is not going to give me up easily if I get off track...It is a sobering charge to be a representative of God to people who have not yet learned to base their faith on Christ's performance, and not on professing Christians, esp. leaders. By beholding Him daily, we become strong...Heaven help us all!
Response to Kevin...
I think that you are perfectly right when you say that our theology cannot be separated from our lives. however, I think that if there are confusions about what our theology is, it can cause a problem when it comes to the way we live our lives. It is probable that there are some among us who do not know really our theology. when this takes place, a difference in the way of living is shown. I believe that there are theological issues upon which some do not agree or meet on a common ground. That is, it is possible those issues may reflect on how we live based on how they are understood.
However, your point is vital that our lives should reflect our understanding of scripture regardless.
The Cosmic Christ of Scripture: Ernst
Page 35-64
I am amazed to see that Ellen G White has an inclusive definition for the word “Revelation.” At this point, I have to acknowledge that The Cosmic Christ of Scripture for opening new avenues in my thinking. I always wandering what prevent us from preaching the third angel message. I might be wrong; however I strongly believe that without communication there will not be understanding. In addition, false interpretation can not vehement a true message. Therefore, we must come to realize that knowledge is greater than what we possess and understand. The messenger of the Lord describes Christ, Scripture, and the cosmos as channels for the revelation of God. As a result, believers have to appreciate the increasing of knowledge as God’s source of revelation.
If Ellen G White could say that, I believe that she had in mind a large view for SDA in term of reaching the secular world. “Revelation is only prophetic in term of spiritual revelation; it is also progressive in term of General revelation. If we want to do a good job in our evangelistic meeting, it becomes an imperative to know that Christ met people at their level. In our post modern world, people are looking for a savior that they can experience in nature, they can live with and they can make really from reading the scripture. A “unique revelation” can not give them that savior. In other words, they are not looking for “sectarian revelation.”
The History of Christian Thought: Ernst
Page 75
Pelagius is remarkable figure for the Christian era. He has adopted a theology that one would call “develop our existential power”. It is another way to promote “perfectionism”. Strangely enough, some of our pioneers advocated such theology. They believe that we can work toward our salvation. In the other hand, one could also argue that the Bible teaches perfectionism, Philippians 2:12b-13 "...work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure". The passage explains itself clearly, for it states that God is the one who is at work not you. Pelagius’ belief is against the Biblical concept of salvation. Needless to say that, the principle of his theology will help any believers to work humbly before God. The true is God has given us the power to overcome temptation through the blood of Christ, we just have to claim it not “working for it”. In that sense, claiming will define as maturity. In order to claim something you have to appreciate its value which is a process of learning.
Ernst in response to Dr Hanna
I believe that traditions are strongly important for a community of faith. They are “identifier markers”. One can even say that they represent the core of beliefs. However, we must understand that if traditions can be changed, beliefs will have to modify. Now, is there a religion that will accept such modification? People are hard to change; therefore they prefer routine than progress. I believe that we must come to a certain level of understanding where we can create more rooms for flourishing ideas. I am not promoting liberalism but I also suggest a theology of diversity. It is not something that will bring polytheist but rather a rich cultural background to appreciate the “Cosmic Christ in Scripture.” I might not have the correct word to express this extensive thought. However, I would love to see traditions as a way of knowing where we came from not as where we are going. When traditions stop, reality has to step up to bring us to our destination.
In response to Sony Olivier said...
"I believe that the concept of the three books of incarnation, inspiration and creation is essential..." Quote #16
You stated that you think the conflict between theology and science is a misunderstanding and that it is not impossible to bring the real aspect of the two together. I agree whole heartily with you.
I come from a science background and I find there is a gross misunderstanding between the two. From my experience, science is studying the Cosmos, as Dr. Hanna likes to call it. Theology is a study of God. I think that science is merely a tool we can use to learn more about nature and the knowledge we gain from it should be part of the theology.
And when I say knowledge, I don't mean the theories they come up with to explain how everything came to be. That is outside the scope of science and is mere speculation.
My name is Cornelius Osuntade, I am responding to Sony Oliver's comments made on 10-15-07 concerning Thomas Aquinas' explanation on knowing God through reason and revelation. He argued that reason is limited as an avenue to knowing God, and that it can cause problems when using it as a channel of discovering who God is. May I say at this point that I will not totally agree to that submission.For a carnal mind, reason will cause some theological controversy about God, because a carnal mind will have a faulty assessment about the personality of God, but for a spiritual mind, reason can be an effective way of knowing God, because God is spiritual, and spiritual things are spiritually discerned. Paul says in Romans chapter 8 verses 5-8 that," for they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the spirit the things of the spirit.For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh can not please God." The basic point I am making is that, since the carnal mind is enmity to God, such mind can not reason correcly about God, but when a mind is spiritually inclined, its reasoning faculty about God will reveal God more and more on a daily basis. Permit me to asy that Reason and revelation as means of knowing God, according to Thmas Aquinas, are complementary to each other; when you have a spirit filled life, your reasoning will lead you to discover greater revelation about God, and His plan for you will be easily unraveled. Posted by Cornelius Osuntade this day 10-31-07 at 4.09am
This is a response to Ednah Makori's comment on "Reformation," posted on 10-01-07. The roles played by reformers like Martin Luther, John Calvin and John Wesley, to mention a few, in the history of Christianity are far reaching. These Reformers went through thick and thin to make a pathway in the thick forest of Christianity for us to follow to a conclusive and happy end. My concern now is: Can we find the likes of such reformers among the Christians today? There are still more challenges to face in the Christian world, and it will take the boldness of the three Hebrew boys of Daniel chapter 3, and the commitment of prophet Daniel himself to be able to weather the storm and pass a worthwhile legacy to the coming generation. I look through the church today, and I see a whole bunch of "cosmetic Christians" who wish to identify with God only when the going gets good, when the going gets tough, such Christians are ready to back out to go and cut corners outside the Christain world. In the words of E.G. White, which I will paraphrase, what the world needs now, especially the Christian world are men who will not be bought or sold, men who have consciences that are through to duty as the needle to the pole, men who will call sin by its right name, men who will stand for the truth though the heavens fall. As we approach the close of this world's history, the Christian world needs men who will be receptive to a revival of primitive Godliness as of old, Such will be able to wear the shoes of the patriarchs and prophets of the bible and also wear the garments of the reformers; making a difference for God in the Christian world. Through the commitment of such men, we will hasten the second coming of Jesus Christ. We really need to exit this trouble- infested world and go to heaven, a place of permanent peace and tranquility, where we will live for a thousand years before coming to a world made new and live forever and ever. I appreciate the courage of these Reformers, and I thank God for using them to open doors of Christianity for us.
Posted by Cornelius Osuntade this day,10-31-07 at 5.01am
Catherine has good points.
I agree with her that we need passion for God. Infact when one day i was readinga book on Youth Leardership, the author pointed out clearly that we need passion and commitment if we want to succed in the vineyard of our Lord. According to this author, many people come to ministry from different angles, and with different goals in their minds. The difference is seen in how one perfoms and it was clear that those who came to ministry becouse of money or fame, get worn out easily due to burnout. But those who have a passion for God and His miistry, will work even when unpaid. The compassion and Love for God will keep then in service. God will renew them day by day as He unvails them to see Him more clearly. How wonderfulcould it be it we submit to Him for unvailing, as we guide his sheep.
Comment on Cornelius’ 10/31 entry:
Cornelius said: “It is very sad to say that the legacy passed down to us by these committed early Christians is being daily trivialized by our non- challant attitudes towards Christianity.” This is well said and so true. What did these people die for if we don’t appreciate the sacrifice they made on behalf of the faith and God? There is going to come a day when we can no longer be non-challant about our faith. And if we aren’t truly on fire for God and all He has to offer now, we best stoke the embers before it’s too late. And I’m speaking to myself too! How will we be able to stand against Sunday laws or persecution if we are wishy washy in what believe and stand for? How can we spark others to have a saving faith?
This is a comment on Bryan's post on November 6th. I agree that sometimes to the layperson in hearing sermons beyong their understanding it might sound like dirt. I think we have to be careful when we are doing the digging and keep our audience in mind; and also be mindful to not make showing off our theological ken as a goal. I also think that jumping from text to text in the bible - ie too much intertextual reference (which is common) leaves the congregation tired sometimes, and lost at others. So while I agree that it is a very good method I think it must be used wisely and carefully.
Good job Catherine, you are raising an important issue with regards to the use of philosophy to explain things in scripture. Whereas theology in itself may not be wrong and is sometimes needful one must be mindful of the temptation to use philosophical rational to interpret scripture to fit one’s theology. The early church fathers did not always philosophized correctly the first time but their philosophy laid the foundation on which others build on, while gaining better understanding along the way. If time last, someone will look at our current philosophy and while appreciating it would make improvements.
Rudolph Sterling
Sony, you were able to catch an important point in Aquinas’s theology. Thank you for bringing this to the surface. You wrote about the two major sources of knowing God; “reason and revelation.” He also said that these two do not contradict each other.
It is true that reason has its limit but can’t we also say that revelation has it limits as well? No single mode of revelation is able to give a complete revelation. I think it takes reason to make full sense of revelation in nature, in scripture and in Christ as having the same purpose and that is to reveal God. I love the phrase that says “we need a faithful reason and a reasonable faith”. I think faithful reasoning and revelation can complement each other.
Rudolph Sterling
Makpri, thanks for your insights on the reformation period, I appreciate your take on the effect that the enlightenment brought to the world and to the Christian community in particular. The printing press that made reading material more readily available to the masses was probably one of the most important catalysts in speeding up the reformation. The point on standing for one belief is also poignant to effect change. I believe that our understanding of theology is progressive; therefore there is still need for men like Luther in our time. Luther and other to the reformation this far, but as history has revealed there is still more distance to cover.
Rudolph Sterling
Ednah, I appreciate how you apply the concept of the unveiling to the work of ministry fro it is true that we cannot teach unless we understand. Your mentioning of the place of scripture in revelation is also note worthy. You state that scripture is first, I just want to add that scripture is first epistemologically; in other words it is the source of doctrine, reproof etc, it keeps theology Christ centered. We should bear in mind that Christ has primacy as well but it is ontological and the Cosmos has primacy but it is contextual.
Rudolph Sterling
To comment on what Dr. Hanna said, it is true that we should measure all by the use of the Bible, but how do we handle those people who do not agree with that?
You see it as white and black, it if it is not for God, it is against God, but what abot those who still have a vail? Those who are not yet there? those who are still gumbling? Great contaversy is not yet over, how do we make all see thing the God wants us to see them?
Ofcourse no man is perfect. It will be wrong if we say adventist are perfect, it will be wrong if we say their doctrines are perfect.
But how do we take the fact that like adventist who are not perfect, catholics are also believers who are not perfect.
Adventist say they read the Bible more than catholics, but how come they are sinners in need of grace, just like catholics? We are ready to judge, but are we done with our own journey?
As we wellcome other to join us in the advent movement are ourselves asured of heaven? or we are securing places for them?
Matters to with salvation, are so complex, and sometimes i feel we are no better than those we preach to.Nowonder Ellen white says we will be surprised not to see those we expected to be in heaven. This is beyond my understanding the a muslim may go to heaven, while a pastor in the adventist church mau fail it.
It is amazing to me.
Any way, WHAT EVER IS IMPOSSIBLE WITH MAN, IS POSSIBLE WITH GOD.
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Comments on Makori's comment...
I believe that you make a good point when you say that Advenstism is not perfect. you raised many questions about your concern for others who have different views than us and how our imperfections can lead us astray, if I am not mistaken.
I do agree with you and I believe that we must not rely on our understanding so much so that we become so pride. I also believe that God, as Jeus declared, has many out there who are not in the fold yet. I think that God may keep them where they are for now and when the time comes, he will bring them to fold. The idea of the invisible church in that way is very useful in order to understand that one must not necessarily be part of our church in order to be saved.
I believe that we must continue the work for which we were called and leave it up to God. No one is perfect and no one should make any judgment about other's salvation and you are right by quoting Mrs. White about the surprise that will be when we get to heaven. I believe that it is a matter of letting God take control of our life and allow Him to guide us and lead us in the truth and to the truth.
In response to Kevin Kim’s post:
Cosmic Christ of Scripture
Chapter 6 – The Theme of the Bible is Jesus
Kevin, you pointed out that the church rarely declares the significance of the human relationship between Adam and Christ. I have been thinking about it and I think I have an idea as to why that is. I think our mission as a church has been focused on proclaiming the good news of Salvation through Christ. It seems it is our mission to get that news out to everyone so that they can believe in Christ and be saved. It isn’t until later, when the converts are firmly grounded, no longer babies in Christ, that we go into such details as the relation between humanity, Adam and Christ. I don’t know if teaching them that from the beginning would change anything but I agree with you that it is definitely something that is important for them to understand and is very good news for all. It adds a depth to their understanding and hopefully also to their faith.
In response to Seana Water's post:
I tend to agree with your positive assessment of Moltmann's contributions. Specifically, I appreciate how you answered Hill's criticism of Moltmann's answers being ineffectual for suffering people. I concur that not only does God suffer and sympathize, He offers us His presence.
This is absolutely essential because "us" is insufficient, but "we" are more than enough when "we" = He + me. You could almost spell the "we" with a middle-case "w." This intimate bond that all Christians have with the Holy Spirit can answer the longing of our hearts. How did Jesus make it through this life? How else can we make it?
In response to Rudolph Sterling's post:
I agree with you that Daniel 12:4 has a primary spiritual application with a secondary scientific application. We may be in good company (Professor Hanna) with our holistic reading. I appreciate how you pointed out the reciprocal relationship of Scripture and science shedding light on each other.
We all know the Bible verses that state this truth, but it is nice to be reminded by our fellow students. Thanks Rudolph, consider yourself in good company (EGW). "Nature and revelation alike testify of God's love."
Response to Kevin’s Comment: “Without Christ, Scripture would have no meaning, and without the cosmos, Scripture would have no application. These ideas seem basic, but they are profound. These foundational concepts must become guiding hermeneutics in the proper study of Scripture.”
First, Kevin, I just want you to know that I always appreciate your thoughtful comments in class(es) – so thanks! But you’re right about how these ideas are both basic and profound at the same time. Now that they have been pointed out to me in Dr. Hanna’s book, I can see much more clearly how each relates to the other – especially how without the cosmos, Scripture would have no application. That is so obvious and so elusive at the same time. We must put into action what it is we learn from Scripture and allow Scripture to inform what it is we know about the cosmos.
In response to Makori Ednah's post:
I was encouraged by your statement, "It will be wrong if we say adventist are perfect, it will be wrong if we say their doctrines are perfect."
Throughout the semester, I have been firming in the belief that even doctrines are not perfect. I always knew they weren't, but in the face of conflict, sometimes I would want them to be. I knew that people weren't perfect, but I hoped that the doctrines we believed in could be. I tended to criticize Adventists who believed in absolute definitiveness, but sometimes I wanted to do the same. Therefore, more than ever, I have to hold up Scripture as my "apriori."
I also appreciated how your post showed some real emotion behind it. You raised good rhetorical questions to make the point that only God knows our salvation, and yet in Him we are secure. Thank you for continuing to seek truth and love.
The BRI document on the topic "Analysis of Universal 'legal' Justifaication"
was so interesting to me.According to this document, the death of Christ on the cross accomplishes a legal justification which is universaly and unconditionally applied to all men. Even if the death of Jesus on the cross was universal, salvation is not universal. Salvtion is given to those who are willing and devoted to the saving faith of Jesus christ
The second chapter of Romans warns us against jugding others. We judge others yet do the same things. We are warned to leave all the judgmemt to God, who has all the truth.
Chapter three of the book "Salvation," talks about The decade before 1888. During this period, Ellen white continued to express her understanding of perfection in a way the clearly differentiated her teachings from othersShe emphasised justification by faith alone.
All this, with the discussion in class with the teacher, helps us understand that we cannot earn saltion, it is a gift that we get from God. Though Christ died for us all, we also need to cooperate with Him. Only those who are willing will see God.
Post a Comment