|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The terror of the Incarnation
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
The shooting in Denver has me thinking about the Incarnation. And when I think about the Incarnation for too long, I start to think that we've got it all wrong. In December, we'll sing carols, and children will dress up for pageants, and we'll give gifts to our friends, and feast, and have a wonderful time celebrating the Incarnation.
But I think instead of celebrating it, perhaps we should be terrified by it.
Because Christ chose to become one of us, to share our human nature, joining it to his divine nature in his singular Person, everything that we do to another human being, and everything we say about them, is also being said and done to Him.
In the Orthodox Church, we understand that the veneration we give to the icons passes through the image to the Prototype. Our Lord told us that any good we do to another human being -- a cup of cold water given to a thirsty person -- is received by Him. In exactly the same way, any evil we do to or say about another person is received by Christ.
And it's so easy, when someone commits an unfathomable evil, to say that they're trash, that they're a monster, that they're subhuman. But they are, and remain, an icon of the Most High. When we say that another human is trash, we are saying that of Christ.
When we pass by a homeless man holding a cardboard sign, and look the other way, it is Christ that we're looking away from.
When we revile our political opponents, when we call them thugs or thieves or assholes or fools, we are in danger of judgment. We know that from the Scriptures. And the reason is clear: when we revile a human being, that contempt is received by Christ.
If we understood this, in our heart of hearts, the Incarnation would be a source of terror for us. It would change everything.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulBC
Shipmate
# 13712
|
Posted
Anyone who did shooting, and I mean anyone from John Wilkes Booth to the man who did the deed last night can not be a monster. Just disturbed .
And maybe a broader undersdtanding of the Incarnation would get us to damp down how we discribe our fellow beings. ![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif) ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif) ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
"He has told you O mortal,what is good;and what does the Lord require of youbut to do justice and to love kindness ,and to walk humbly with your God."Micah 6:8
Posts: 873 | From: Victoria B.C. Canada | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
But you can't stay terrified forever. At least I can't. Sooner or later you make peace (or have peace made upon you) with the fact that you're (Okay, I'm] a radical screw-up who is basically spitting in God's face and stepping on his toes every minute of the day, and not able to stop that no matter how I try--and he STILL loves me--and then I relax. Not that it doesn't matter, it does; but tying myself into knots about it isn't doing anything but hurting me and probably frustrating the Lord.
Which is all a longwinded way of saying that I think you have to come to terms with the fact of being a sinner, end.stop.period. And accept grace. And THEN get on with life, and loving your neighbor.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
Thanks Josephine, everything you said is true, as I'm beginning to realise.
I think it all boils down to judgement. We are all to quick to think we understand people (even other christians) and try to catagorise them into "types." I guess we have Freud to thank for that (in the west), but it is never-the-less judging them and avoiding the effort of finding out where they are really coming from.
The Incarnation was an act of Love on God's part, not just for Orthodox (or southern baptists) but for the Whole World! Whilst I think it is right we should be eternally joyful and thankful for this Gift, we will become better icons of God if we reflect this Gift in our attitudes to ALL other people.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine
And it's so easy, when someone commits an unfathomable evil, to say that they're trash, that they're a monster, that they're subhuman. But they are, and remain, an icon of the Most High. When we say that another human is trash, we are saying that of Christ.
A certain man, with his accomplice, lured an innocent young woman onto the moors near Manchester and then slit her throat. I am referring to the mass murderer Ian Brady. This man - now in his 70's and serving a life sentence - has shown no remorse for his crimes, and it is likely that if he were released he would kill again. Do I consider this man a monster? Absolutely I do. I think he is a devil. This is a term Jesus himself used of Judas.
Do I feel guilty at thinking like this? No. Do I feel that I am "hurting Jesus" by thinking this? No. Why? Because this is what God thinks of those who are totally, wilfully and unrepentantly evil.
Brady may be loved by God - the God who demands that he repent. But I would suggest that this is the greatest terror for him. But it cannot be a terror to anyone to call evil by its proper name, and to regard those who reject all that is good in their proper light. He is, of course, a human being, but he has chosen to reject humanity, so therefore he has made himself "sub-human". That is why he should be caged like an animal for the rest of his life.
Sorry, but this approach is called "truth and reality", and I'll be blown if anyone is going to make me feel "terrified" for thinking like this!
If it's a choice between giving a damn about people like Brady or protecting innocent people, then it's a no brainer - "icon of the Most High" or not!
[ 21. July 2012, 09:00: Message edited by: EtymologicalEvangelical ]
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
'Twas grace that taught my heart to fear,
and grace my fears relieved...
Yes, maybe we should fear God more. It is after all, a terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
Or, as was said about Aslan (the Christlike lion in the Lion, the witch and the wardrobe) - 'He's good but he's not safe.'
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Very interesting OP. Yes, I think seeing the other as the Christ, or at least, partly, is quite an amazing exercise. I think Bonhoeffer somewhere says that the next person you meet is Christ. I would say a very uncomfortable idea, as we often want to wall God off in churches and so forth!
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
Another 'terror' of the Incarnation is the risk that God took in giving his Son to us. Had it happened now, Jesus could be one of those who was shot.
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
In his book 'Letters to Malcolm - Chiefly on Prayer' C.S. Lewis writes that he once met a 'continental pastor' who had once met Hitler 'and had small cause to love him'. 'What did he look like?' Lewis asked. 'Like all men,' was the reply. 'That is, like Christ.'
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Brady did a lot more than that one murder, EE, as you well know ... (shudders) ...
I think Josephine's onto something and it makes me feel bad for the way I can diss people on these Boards at times. She's right. The Incarnation should be a 'terrible' thing to contemplate.
Mudfrog is right too, coming at it from a slightly different angle.
'Wretch that I am! Who shall save me from the body of this death?'
The Incarnation is terrible, but it is also our only hope (yes, Mudfrog, along with Christ's death and resurrection of course, which is included within the whole 'Christ-event').
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
If we understood this, in our heart of hearts, the Incarnation would be a source of terror for us. It would change everything.
Not in the terms you are describing.
Because Jesus didn't go around killing people.
If everbody was Christ, then we could all do whatever we wanted.
And the Kingdom of God would certainly not ensue.
I'm with EE on this one.
The incarnation redeems the idea that humans and all of creation is bad.
It does not, however, ignore that some parts are still bad.
Erstwhile Jesus would have had nothing to say.
If you want to express the incarnation to this bloke in Denver, you put him in jail and attempt restorative justice.
Wise as serpents, gentle as doves.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
I think that we should both celebrate and be humbled by the Incarnation. I'm not convinced that we should be terrified of God unless we are deliberately embracing and enjoying what is evil, in which case of course we must be confined if we're not safe to live near other people.
I've never met anyone who was completely evil or completely good. Everyone has their flaws and their gifts. Some have progressed to be able to control harmful tendencies more than others, but we all have them.
Jesus washed the feet of Judas, knowing the evil in his heart. If we follow Jesus, we must be ready to do the same, to love all other people as ourselves. Tough teaching, but it's no more than we're asking of God.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I've met 2 people in which nothing about them suggested even a least spark of good. Such cold evil exists that can swallow of all warmth. Trust me. If you haven't met anyone like this, it is hard to know that it is true and that they exist. Once you do meet such a person, it is inescapable to understand. I was surprised, did not want to believe it. [Personal note, this has nothing to do with recent experience, and it would have been easier if it was the same sort of person.]
This is far different from the all too common motivated acts of violence or deliberate causing of pain. The comparison to any other perception of people is tremendously difficult. I remember consulting my priest about it, and having the discussion that 'now I understand what I didn't before'. It was really through a glass darkly before meeting such a person.
The incarnation is about potential, with choice always present. That is probably why we have clear info about it, and if not verifiably factual, clearly demonstrative of it symbolically in the bible. Like Jesus being offered kingship of the world during the 40 days, and the 'take this cup from me' sequence in the garden.
[ 21. July 2012, 13:40: Message edited by: no_prophet ]
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
There is a creative tension in the Church's anthropology, "understanding of humanity." On the one hand, humanity is created in the image of God, made with the purpose of shepherding and tending creation with care and love.
On the other hand, humans are sinful and are prone to reject God's will.
The Incarnation is God the Son becoming human, dwelling with us, redeeming us in our very material condition. However, until the age to come, the sanctification of humanity continues. In some cases, when we are dealing with people who commit horrific acts of violence, it is our duty to prosecute them and ensure that they are held accountable, because other people are also made in the image of God as well as the perpetrator. We harm THEM if we do not do everything possible to prevent evil. But at the same time, no one is ever irredeemably lost and we do not know how God works in every individual. So, no, we cannot pronounce anyone's eternal fate.
With God's help, we struggle to deal with evil, while at the same time not becoming overwhelmed with hatred and revenge, which itself contributes to the cycle of violence.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Another 'terror' of the Incarnation is the risk that God took in giving his Son to us. Had it happened now, Jesus could be one of those who was shot.
The analogy would have only worked if Jesus had been one of a number in the crowd who were randomly rounded up and crucified. Jesus deliberately placed himself in the firing line, as it were and was more than just being in the wrong place when a senseless killing took place.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Ian Brady. This man - now in his 70's and serving a life sentence - has shown no remorse for his crimes, and it is likely that if he were released he would kill again. Do I consider this man a monster? Absolutely I do. I think he is a devil. This is a term Jesus himself used of Judas.
And he called Peter Satan to his face.
Harsh rhetoric. And not the only time he was harsh.
But I think we have to be careful going there. In church law, as I understand it, back when customary forms of discipline were physical harsh, and superiors could strike their inferiors with absolute impunity, a bishop could be deposed for striking another person. The fact that Jesus made a whip and drove the moneylenders from the temple did not give them license to go and do likewise.
Seeing Christ in a man like Ian Brady in mind is hard. I'm not denying that. I'm not saying that I could do it in fact, even if I think it's important in theory. And I'm not saying that giving him the regard that is his due as a human being, as a living, breathing icon, means that he isn't dangerous, or that people can't or shouldn't be protected from him. He clearly is dangerous, and people must be protected from him.
And he must be protected from himself as well. His evil acts (and the acts truly are evil) harm him as truly as they harm others. Allowing him to continue to do evil would be a sin against everyone he harmed (they, too, are icons, and must be treated as we would treat Christ himself -- protecting their safety seems like the very least we should be doing for them), and it would be a sin against him.
It's what a priest I know has told women in abusive relationships. To stay and allow the abuse to continue is to sin against the abuser by allowing him to continue to damage his own soul. If there is any charity at all towards the one who harms others, allowing the harm to continue isn't part of it. Stopping their behavior is.
quote:
If it's a choice between giving a damn about people like Brady or protecting innocent people, then it's a no brainer - "icon of the Most High" or not!
I think we're required to do both. In the Incarnation, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity chose to share our human nature. That means that each of us, every single one of us, is of one nature with him. So we have to give a damn about them. And we have to protect anyone that they might harm.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
I think that we should both celebrate and be humbled by the Incarnation. I'm not convinced that we should be terrified of God unless we are deliberately embracing and enjoying what is evil, in which case of course we must be confined if we're not safe to live near other people.
I don't so much mean being terrified of God, although that's perhaps part of what I mean.
But imagine for just a moment that you are the king once upon a time in a kingdom far away. At your child's birth, the old witch that you didn't invite to the christening party came anyway, and laid a spell on you and your child, so that any harm you did to another person would be visited on your child.
At first you might not think anything of it. You're a good person, a decent person, you don't hurt other people. But then, as they do in fairy tales, things start happening. You strike a servant, and a bruise appears on your child's cheek. You are in a hurry, speeding to some important event, and because you're the king, you expect everyone to get out of your way. And an old lady is knocked down, and injured, and the wares she was taking to market are broken so that she has nothing to sell, and so nothing to eat. And your daughter, whom you love more than you love life itself, is injured, and cannot eat, and cries from hunger.
Would you not be terrified? Not of your child -- of course not! But of the consequences that your actions are having on the child that you love?
That's the terror that I'm talking about. If you love Christ, then knowing that when you treat someone else badly, it affects him, that if you leave someone else hungry or homeless or sick or in pain, that he is sharing in that hunger and pain -- knowing that has to hurt. You have to want it to stop. It has to frighten you. Or at least, it begins to frighten me.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Another 'terror' of the Incarnation is the risk that God took in giving his Son to us. Had it happened now, Jesus could be one of those who was shot.
The analogy would have only worked if Jesus had been one of a number in the crowd who were randomly rounded up and crucified. Jesus deliberately placed himself in the firing line, as it were and was more than just being in the wrong place when a senseless killing took place.
It is NOT an 'analogy' and i was talking about now, so crucifixion doesn't apply.
God took a risk because we have free will. Jesus could of died at birth, of disease etc.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
This stuff about Ian Brady being the devil is very bizarre. He was diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic quite a while ago; and in fact, this is a point at issue, as he was being force-fed. If he was a normal prisoner, he would not be force-fed, and would be allowed to die on hunger-strike.
Anyway, are people saying that schizophrenia is the devil at work? Gulp. I'm glad I don't go to that church!
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I don't think EE was being literal, Q' ...
I can see the point he's making. On the whole, I don't think it does to demonise people, but neither would I hold that Brady's paranoid schizophrenia absolves him of responsibility for his actions.
It's always a tricky one with debates of this kind. Josephine's point still stands, that all of us are made in the image of God, even if that image becomes so marred as to be almost unrecognisable. Heck, even the 'blackest' TULIP Calvinist wouldn't assert that people are incapable of any good whatsoever - the doctrine of 'total depravity' means that people are incapable of saving themselves without divine grace not that they are all depraved psychos ...
I would suggest that Josephine's point about the Incarnation would hold within any soteriological schema - whether Orthodox, RC, Wesleyan, Calvinist or whatever else there might be.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
A priest once preached this statement:
"Your attitude towards the one you dislike the most reveals your genuine love towards Our Lord."
If this is so, many of us have a terrible time of loving Our Lord.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Another 'terror' of the Incarnation is the risk that God took in giving his Son to us. Had it happened now, Jesus could be one of those who was shot.
I don't agree with this - see Luke 4: 28-30, where the crowd wanted to throw Jesus off a cliff, but he just walked straight through them and went on his way.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
So Jesus was somehow protected until God shafted him at the cross?
You see, how does one argue against this shallow and misinformed (though I'm certain you are, in fact, neither of these things) comment?
God did not 'shaft' Jesus on the cross.
If he did that would suggest adoptionism or that Jesus was merely a puppet of 'God', rather than being the Incarnation of God.
It doesn't take into account Christ's own declarations and decision-making.
It doesn't take into account the truth that God was in Christ reconciling the world or that Jesus said 'no one takes my life from me, I lay it down of my own accord.'
It was a cheap comment that doesn't bear the most cursory of theological glances.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
So Jesus was somehow protected until God shafted him at the cross?
Yes.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
So Jesus was somehow protected until God shafted him at the cross?
Yes.
Correction - ignore this, see Mudfrog's post above.
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
Mudfrog said: [quote]Jesus said 'no one takes my life from me, I lay it down of my own accord.'[quote]
He may have done this (where does he say it?), but if he isn't thus vulnerable, in what sense does he take on humanity?
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
God did not 'shaft' Jesus on the cross.
If he did that would suggest adoptionism or that Jesus was merely a puppet of 'God', rather than being the Incarnation of God.
It doesn't take into account Christ's own declarations and decision-making.It was a cheap comment that doesn't bear the most cursory of theological glances.
Human beings in the 3rd world have very few decision making powers.
The idea that God sent Jesus to die on the cross is the 'puppet' theology.
I did a sermon last Maundy Thursday about God shafting Jesus - as PM gets a copy.
If we take incarnation and risk seriously, then we have to accept that it could all go horribly wrong. That is what God's outrageous gift is al about.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
Or possibly God is sovereign over his creation, Leo, and the whole Cross thing was God's plan the whole time. Instead of calling Jesus a puppet, we could say "And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
God 'shafted' Jesus? Really?
Shaft:
- to defeat someone through trickery or deceit
So you're saying that God tricked him, deceived him, betrayed, abused and 'used' him?
I think your thinking on this one is extremely flawed.
Would the Father who said that he was 'well-pleased' with his 'beloved son' actually shaft him? What a low opinion of the Father you have - I have to say that it verges on the blasphemous; to ascribe such a horrible and devious action to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is just astonishing; and to preach that on Maundy thursday!
Have you not read that Jesus said, 'I come to do the will of my Father'? That he said, 'I am in my Father'? Jesus said that he was 'one with the Father.' So how can you say that God shafted him?
John 10:18 quote:
No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I don't think EE was being literal, Q' ...
I can see the point he's making. On the whole, I don't think it does to demonise people, but neither would I hold that Brady's paranoid schizophrenia absolves him of responsibility for his actions.
It's always a tricky one with debates of this kind. Josephine's point still stands, that all of us are made in the image of God, even if that image becomes so marred as to be almost unrecognisable. Heck, even the 'blackest' TULIP Calvinist wouldn't assert that people are incapable of any good whatsoever - the doctrine of 'total depravity' means that people are incapable of saving themselves without divine grace not that they are all depraved psychos ...
I would suggest that Josephine's point about the Incarnation would hold within any soteriological schema - whether Orthodox, RC, Wesleyan, Calvinist or whatever else there might be.
Seriously, you are saying that a severe mental illness still leaves someone responsible for their actions? So you must think the law is wrong then?
More gulping.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
Mudfrog said: [quote]Jesus said 'no one takes my life from me, I lay it down of my own accord.'[quote]
He may have done this (where does he say it?), but if he isn't thus vulnerable, in what sense does he take on humanity?
John 10: 17 & 18
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
luvanddaisies
the'fun'in'fundie'™
# 5761
|
Posted
Josephine, if you ever write a book of theological reflections, or become a preacher (i think the Orthodox don't have women preach, if I understand correctly), please let me know. You seem to have a knack of making me think and rethink and reflect upon God, which is somethinfg I haven't been doing lately.
Your OP gives me something to repent of and strive for without making me think you're setting yourself above it.
Thank you.
--------------------
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines, sail away from the safe harbour. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." (Mark Twain)
Posts: 3711 | From: all at sea. | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
WearyPilgrim
Shipmate
# 14593
|
Posted
I can see Christ in another person who is a grievous sinner only in that Christ, in the Incarnation, assumed the humanity of both of us and the fact that as a fallen human being I am equally capable of committing grievous sin myself. Yes, there are people who show no remorse for the deeds they have done. I prefer to leave their destiny up to God; there's not much else that I or anyone else can do with or for them. There are others who have committed horrible deeds because, to put it tersely, they're badly screwed up. These people I can work at forgiving, in the recognition that to some degree I'm in the same boat they're in. As are most of us.
Posts: 383 | From: Sedgwick, Maine USA | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
Or possibly God is sovereign over his creation, Leo, and the whole Cross thing was God's plan the whole time. Instead of calling Jesus a puppet, we could say "And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."
Philippians was written AFTER the event.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
God 'shafted' Jesus? Really?
Shaft:
- to defeat someone through trickery or deceit
So you're saying that God tricked him, deceived him, betrayed, abused and 'used' him?
I think your thinking on this one is extremely flawed.
Would the Father who said that he was 'well-pleased' with his 'beloved son' actually shaft him? What a low opinion of the Father you have - I have to say that it verges on the blasphemous; to ascribe such a horrible and devious action to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is just astonishing; and to preach that on Maundy thursday!
Have you not read that Jesus said, 'I come to do the will of my Father'? That he said, 'I am in my Father'? Jesus said that he was 'one with the Father.' So how can you say that God shafted him?
John 10:18 quote:
No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again.
John's writings are generally thought to be a theological reflection rather than the actual words of Jesus.
Jesus seems to have felt deserted by God in mark's gospel.
My Maundy Thursday sermon was one of best, according to two of the clergy who were there.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
God 'shafted' Jesus? Really?
Shaft:
- to defeat someone through trickery or deceit
So you're saying that God tricked him, deceived him, betrayed, abused and 'used' him?
I think your thinking on this one is extremely flawed.
Would the Father who said that he was 'well-pleased' with his 'beloved son' actually shaft him? What a low opinion of the Father you have - I have to say that it verges on the blasphemous; to ascribe such a horrible and devious action to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is just astonishing; and to preach that on Maundy thursday!
Have you not read that Jesus said, 'I come to do the will of my Father'? That he said, 'I am in my Father'? Jesus said that he was 'one with the Father.' So how can you say that God shafted him?
John 10:18 quote:
No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again.
John's writings are generally thought to be a theological reflection rather than the actual words of Jesus.
Jesus seems to have felt deserted by God in mark's gospel.
My Maundy Thursday sermon was one of best, according to two of the clergy who were there.
Yes indeed John's gospel is a theological reflection but it's not 'generally' thought to be a work of fiction!
The words of Jesus are not made up, composed or invented an d put into the mouth of 'Jesus'. If they are, then maybe John was the one we should be putting our faith in as the word who has 'the words of eternal life'!
Many scholars believe that much of John's gospel is in fact eyewitness accounts placed and commented on, to make make the truth of the Gospel known.
The Father may well have turned away from the Son upon the cross but that is not Jesus being 'shafted' - especially when the Father also suffered the loss of his only Son in those moments.
Jesus bec=ing shafted suggests strongly that he was duped, tricked and deceived by God. That is not true.
Your friends who congratulated you on a good sermon evidently had their 'itching ears' scratched. They obviously didn't hear the Gospel and couldn't recognise that fact so i doubt their credibility in passing favourable judgment on a sermon so evidently not rooted in scripture.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
"The judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether." You are maintaining your narrative by simply ignoring those parts that have inconvenient information, Leo. You don't get to choose what parts are in the bible and which ones aren't.
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
quote:
Many scholars believe that much of John's gospel is in fact eyewitness accounts placed and commented on, to make make the truth of the Gospel known
Who are these "many scholars"? From my cursory view of New Testament scholars, it seem that most, trained in the historical-critical method, are skeptical of the historicity of John, especially since it is so different from the Synoptic Gospels. This doesn't mean that John is not rooted in some history, but its primary motive is theological, not historical.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Many scholars believe that much of John's gospel is in fact eyewitness accounts placed and commented on, to make make the truth of the Gospel known......
Jesus bec=ing shafted suggests strongly that he was duped, tricked and deceived by God. That is not true.
So why so different from the synoptics?
Only conservative scholars (plus J A T Robinson) regard the 4th gospel as eye-witness stuff.
'Shafted' down south obviously means something different from up north - mainly to do with sex but also about being 'let down'.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
windsofchange
Shipmate
# 13000
|
Posted
With dozens of people still in the hospital, their lives still in the balance, and hundreds of people still grieving, I think it is WAYYYY too soon to start expressing any kind of compassion for the killer in Aurora, Colorado.
--------------------
"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on." (owner of Coney Island Freak Show, upon learning someone outbid him for a 5-legged puppy)
Posts: 153 | From: Reseda, CA, USA | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zach82:
"The judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether." You are maintaining your narrative by simply ignoring those parts that have inconvenient information, Leo. You don't get to choose what parts are in the bible and which ones aren't.
Everyone else does!
Anyway, it isn'[t about 'ignoring' and neither about 'information.
The bible is not that sort of book (collection of books, rather).
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
quote:
Many scholars believe that much of John's gospel is in fact eyewitness accounts placed and commented on, to make make the truth of the Gospel known
Who are these "many scholars"? From my cursory view of New Testament scholars, it seem that most, trained in the historical-critical method, are skeptical of the historicity of John, especially since it is so different from the Synoptic Gospels.
One of my favorite NT scholars, Paula Fredricksen, argues for the Johnine timeline for Christ's ministry as being more probable than the synoptic one in Jesus of Nazareth:King of the Jews. I'm not sure I agree with her on this, but she is such a thoughtful scholar that it gives me pause. She sees, e.g., the failure to pursue the disciples after Christ's crucifixion as strong indication that the authorities had some prior understanding of the threat (or lack thereof) that Jesus and His disciples posed to the empire. FWIW
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
I don't see that God "lets Jesus down" in any of the New Testament, and it soundly contradicts the view of God and of his plan of salvation throughout the whole Bible. Jesus is God's chosen one, in whom he is well pleased. Jesus gives every indication of knowing full well what was coming in the Gospels. Like Luke says, "Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?"
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
How about - if the early church tried to come to terms with a crucified messiah and searched the prophets so that they could develop a theoloogy of 'It was God's plan all along.'
I can't see how god has any 'plan' for anyone, given that we have free will, than that we may had abundant life.
(And was it God's 'plan' for Judas to betray Jesus? Poor Judas? Is God morally right to use people like that?)
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Ok, since we're not going to agree on the eyetwitness accounts in John, let's go to Mark - earliest Gospel, the record of Peter's preaching.
Leo, you say strongly that Jesus was 'shafted' by God - which if I am not mistaken is another way of saying he was buggered by God, metaphorically speaking (!) ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif) and 'let down'.
Using Mark's Gospel, you need to address the point made in a couple of places above, that Jesus knew what was comimng, accepted what was coming, deliberately went towards it with his eyes wide open and, in unity with the Father, laid down his life of his own free will.
He was not shafted, buggered, tricked, deceived, duped, conned, used, abused or even 'let down.'
I don't know what your sermon was about on that Maundy Thursday and your two cronies may have liked it (which says a lot about them) but it was evidently not a God-honouring sermon seeing that in it you have accused God of basically taking the devil's role and deceiving Jesus.
It's no wonder the church is in the state it's in!
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
churchgeek
Have candles, will pray
# 5557
|
Posted
Can't we agree that people have different theologies about atonement and stop hurling insults at leo for maintaining his particular theology? I think his idea of God "shafting" (i.e., letting down, or one might say, abandoning) Jesus refers to what Jesus as a human being must have felt. And whaddya know, Jesus himself said something similar, praying the Psalm: "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" This is often called the "cry of dereliction." Is anyone here really saying Jesus didn't, in some way, feel abandoned by God on the Cross? - whether or not he really was abandoned by God (which to me is nonsensical, given the doctrine of the Trinity, but to each her own).
Now, about seeing Christ in other people:
First of all, this thread has shafted - I mean shifted ![[Biased]](wink.gif) - in the direction of the most extreme examples, and that's often helpful for finding where the boundaries are. But I think that could leave out part of the OP's poignancy: how do we treat each other on an everyday basis? How do we treat our spouses, co-workers, family, friends, and random strangers with whom we interact? Is the bus driver or check-out clerk or farm worker or janitor just a human-like robot whose services can be taken for granted, or are they people like us, on whose toil we depend?
Whether or not you can appreciate mitigating circumstances for a murderer's actions, most of us could probably do a better job of charitably interpreting our coworkers' or family members' actions when they annoy us or let us down.
[And as a mentally ill person myself, I'd like to ask that people remember it is precisely the organ that makes choices which is diseased. We need really good support systems - family or friends who will help us see when we might need to see a doctor or adjust our meds, and access to affordable health care - in order to get by with minimal problems. People who lack those supports might still manage, but they might not. It doesn't mean their illness will take the form of violence, but sometimes it does. I can tell you - and I'm just a type 2 bipolar - that sometimes it feels like you're helplessly watching yourself do what you don't want to do.]
--------------------
I reserve the right to change my mind.
My article on the Virgin of Vladimir
Posts: 7773 | From: Detroit | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
The Creed states that Jesus descended into Hell.
One interpretation that I've heard is that Jesus descended into the utter depths of despair and suffering which includes the reality of being forsaken by God. Is Hell not the absence of God? Therefore, Jesus must experienced fully that alienation and pain or else humanity cannot be redeemed. God either experiences the full reality of the human condition or else the human condition is not redeemed.
The fact that God did not truly forsake the Son comes into realization in the light of the Resurrection when God raises the Son into new life, affirms the entirety of his Incarnation and Passion, and in doing so, raises humanity into glory.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
And it's so easy, when someone commits an unfathomable evil, to say that they're trash, that they're a monster, that they're subhuman. But they are, and remain, an icon of the Most High. When we say that another human is trash, we are saying that of Christ.
That's just pious tosh. Satan himself is an angel. That he has angelic nature doesn't stop him from being an evil asshole, so why should having human nature stop humans from being evil assholes? James Holmes may be an icon of the Most High qua human nature, but that does in no way or form mean that I must ignore what he has done. Actually he is probably more very, very sick than simply "human trash", but the idea that we need to treat everybody as "image of Christ" no matter what they say or do is just plain bollocks. Is shooting dead plenty of innocent people a conceivable "image of Christ"? Nope. So why pretend otherwise?
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
So where do you draw the line?
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
