2nd Teaching - God
1 view
Skip to first unread message
JLine...@gmail.com
Feb 26, 2008, 9:14:55 AM2/26/08
to Anglican Christian Basics
I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth,
and of all things visible and invisible.
There is more than one way to believe in one God. For most of
their history the ancient Greeks had a god or goddess for just about
everything. A few philosophers, however, thought it would be easier
to assume one god was responsible for everything. Among these
philosophers there was basically two ways to talk about this one god.
First, a group known as the Epicureans (yes, the ones that loved
having fun!) thought that this one god was real enough; he ("it" might
be better) created everything, but having set things in motion he has
since become a distant observer. This god might be powerful, but he
certainly isn't interested. In other words, this god created the
world but he isn't particularly worried about the current mess it's
in. He may have made people but he is too far away to hear human
tears and too disinterested to do anything about them if he did.
The second group was known as the Stoics. It's true to say that
these philosophers believed in one god, but confusingly, this god was,
well, everything. This view is commonly known as "pantheism" (pan =
all + theism = god; hence "all is god"). According to this vision of
god, everything is divine. Stars, trees, rivers, people,
toothbrushes; you name it, it's part of this one god. This
understanding, however, has its own set of problems. If the Epicurean
god was too far away to care about this world, the Stoic god was too
close. This god cannot listen to human tears because, however strange
this sounds, human tears are part of god. It wouldn't make much sense
to try to talk about this god being nailed to a cross because the wood
and nails are themselves god. This god can't love something other
than itself because there is nothing other than itself.
So the problem with the god of the philosophers, whether he is
too far away or too close, is that he can't love and he can't save.
The first line of the Nicene Creed expresses belief in a very
different sort of god. Like the god of the Epicureans, the god of the
Nicene Creed created "all things visible and invisible," but he also
cares about what he made. This god is not just creator; he is also
"father." Here's the difference: unlike the Stoic god, the god of the
Nicene Creed isn't distant from the created order; but unlike the
Epicurean god he remains in loving relationship with it. This means
that whereas the Epicurean and Stoic god were either unable or
uninterested in sorting out the mess the world is in, the god of the
Nicene Creed is both interested and able, he both loves and saves.
This god hears human tears and acts with divine, saving love to wipe
them away. The history of this loving redemption is really what the
rest of the Creed is about. God, the Father and Creator of
everything, has come to the world he created because he loves it.
That, however, is a topic for next week. The first sentence of the
Nicene Creed introduces the one God whom Christians worship. This God
created "heaven and earth, and all things visible and invisible;" but
he is also Father, a god who loves what he has made and, as the rest
of the Creed confesses, has acted to redeem it.
and of all things visible and invisible.
There is more than one way to believe in one God. For most of
their history the ancient Greeks had a god or goddess for just about
everything. A few philosophers, however, thought it would be easier
to assume one god was responsible for everything. Among these
philosophers there was basically two ways to talk about this one god.
First, a group known as the Epicureans (yes, the ones that loved
having fun!) thought that this one god was real enough; he ("it" might
be better) created everything, but having set things in motion he has
since become a distant observer. This god might be powerful, but he
certainly isn't interested. In other words, this god created the
world but he isn't particularly worried about the current mess it's
in. He may have made people but he is too far away to hear human
tears and too disinterested to do anything about them if he did.
The second group was known as the Stoics. It's true to say that
these philosophers believed in one god, but confusingly, this god was,
well, everything. This view is commonly known as "pantheism" (pan =
all + theism = god; hence "all is god"). According to this vision of
god, everything is divine. Stars, trees, rivers, people,
toothbrushes; you name it, it's part of this one god. This
understanding, however, has its own set of problems. If the Epicurean
god was too far away to care about this world, the Stoic god was too
close. This god cannot listen to human tears because, however strange
this sounds, human tears are part of god. It wouldn't make much sense
to try to talk about this god being nailed to a cross because the wood
and nails are themselves god. This god can't love something other
than itself because there is nothing other than itself.
So the problem with the god of the philosophers, whether he is
too far away or too close, is that he can't love and he can't save.
The first line of the Nicene Creed expresses belief in a very
different sort of god. Like the god of the Epicureans, the god of the
Nicene Creed created "all things visible and invisible," but he also
cares about what he made. This god is not just creator; he is also
"father." Here's the difference: unlike the Stoic god, the god of the
Nicene Creed isn't distant from the created order; but unlike the
Epicurean god he remains in loving relationship with it. This means
that whereas the Epicurean and Stoic god were either unable or
uninterested in sorting out the mess the world is in, the god of the
Nicene Creed is both interested and able, he both loves and saves.
This god hears human tears and acts with divine, saving love to wipe
them away. The history of this loving redemption is really what the
rest of the Creed is about. God, the Father and Creator of
everything, has come to the world he created because he loves it.
That, however, is a topic for next week. The first sentence of the
Nicene Creed introduces the one God whom Christians worship. This God
created "heaven and earth, and all things visible and invisible;" but
he is also Father, a god who loves what he has made and, as the rest
of the Creed confesses, has acted to redeem it.
joseph
Feb 27, 2008, 11:13:53 AM2/27/08
to Anglican Christian Basics
Great post Jono. You identify some of the philosophical understandings
about god that fostered the Nicene debates. How could god be up close
and personal (human), and the creator of the universe at the same
time. Not an easy concept for the 4th century mind to comprehend.
Actually, it's still a hard concept for the human brain to grasp.
Maybe that's why we still have in our culture today the same two
concepts of god ie. "the man upstairs" who is impersonal and distant,
and the "god within" who is inside everybody and everything if we
would only just get in touch with himmmmmmmmmm. In the end though,
most people would concede that there is only one god, we just have a
hard time agreeing who he is. But that's a subject for next week.
Thanks jono.
about god that fostered the Nicene debates. How could god be up close
and personal (human), and the creator of the universe at the same
time. Not an easy concept for the 4th century mind to comprehend.
Actually, it's still a hard concept for the human brain to grasp.
Maybe that's why we still have in our culture today the same two
concepts of god ie. "the man upstairs" who is impersonal and distant,
and the "god within" who is inside everybody and everything if we
would only just get in touch with himmmmmmmmmm. In the end though,
most people would concede that there is only one god, we just have a
hard time agreeing who he is. But that's a subject for next week.
Thanks jono.
kathy....@pnc.com
Feb 28, 2008, 2:47:06 PM2/28/08
to anglicanchr...@googlegroups.com
What struck me was that the OT people of God and NT Christians took such
pains to establish that this God was not just some tribal deity, but the
omnipotent and omnipresent God of the universe to whom all created beings
are accountable, and yet, here we are in the 21st century with the liberal
wing of the Church wanting to back away from those claims and relegate our
God as one option among many paths to "the divine". In effect, there are
some in the Church who are claiming that our God is the tribal God of the
Christians. It is this accomodation to the culture of "just getting along"
which the prophets of the OT and the apostles of the NT so vehemently
rejected as incompatible to the "faith once delivered to the saints".
pains to establish that this God was not just some tribal deity, but the
omnipotent and omnipresent God of the universe to whom all created beings
are accountable, and yet, here we are in the 21st century with the liberal
wing of the Church wanting to back away from those claims and relegate our
God as one option among many paths to "the divine". In effect, there are
some in the Church who are claiming that our God is the tribal God of the
Christians. It is this accomodation to the culture of "just getting along"
which the prophets of the OT and the apostles of the NT so vehemently
rejected as incompatible to the "faith once delivered to the saints".
Kathy
The contents of this email are the property of PNC. If it was not addressed to you, you have no legal right to read it. If you think you received it in error, please notify the sender. Do not forward or copy without permission of the sender. This message may contain an advertisement of a product or service and thus may constitute a commercial electronic mail message under US Law. PNC’s postal address is 249 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15222. If you do not wish to receive any additional advertising or promotional messages from PNC at this e-mail address, click here to Unsubscribe. https://pnc.p.delivery.net/m/u/pnc/uni/p.asp By unsubscribing to this message, you will be unsubscribed from all advertising or promotional messages from PNC. Removing your e-mail address from this mailing list will not affect your subscription to alerts, e-newsletters or account servicing e-mails.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
joseph
Mar 5, 2008, 4:17:10 PM3/5/08
to Anglican Christian Basics
From Nick Lannon
I think that the interesting thing about the Stoic view is that their
ethical thinking had to get really complicated. God must be in murder
in the same way that he is in love. It's related to natural theology
in a way, I guess, which I never really got into. The world is such a
hurting (and hurtful) place that I have a hard time seeing the natural
world as God. It seems like the Epicureans were at least a little
more honest about our situation, even though their solution (eat,
drink, and be merry) was a pretty surface remedy. The Stoics couldn't
really see humanity as needing to be rescued from anything, as God was
in everything. Actually, THAT'S really interesting, because it's
almost Pauline. God is the rescuer (in Christ) and the thing from
which we need to be rescued (in his just wrath). But clearly that's
not the sort of thing the Stoics were saying...
Hi to everyone in Glenshaw, by the way!
Nick
I think that the interesting thing about the Stoic view is that their
ethical thinking had to get really complicated. God must be in murder
in the same way that he is in love. It's related to natural theology
in a way, I guess, which I never really got into. The world is such a
hurting (and hurtful) place that I have a hard time seeing the natural
world as God. It seems like the Epicureans were at least a little
more honest about our situation, even though their solution (eat,
drink, and be merry) was a pretty surface remedy. The Stoics couldn't
really see humanity as needing to be rescued from anything, as God was
in everything. Actually, THAT'S really interesting, because it's
almost Pauline. God is the rescuer (in Christ) and the thing from
which we need to be rescued (in his just wrath). But clearly that's
not the sort of thing the Stoics were saying...
Hi to everyone in Glenshaw, by the way!
Nick
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages