|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Why did Jesus have to choose to die?
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
daronmedway: What does Luke 9:51 mean?
I'm sorry, I don't read the Bible in the way you do.
Tell me how you read the verse then, because it sounds very much like you're saying, "It doesn't matter that what Luke 9:51 says because I've got my own personal take on things." Now, it may be that you're OK with that sort of approach to theological reflection but it doesn't really amount anything more than speculation.
[ 13. December 2013, 15:23: Message edited by: daronmedway ]
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
daronmedway: Tell me how you read the verse then
I just did. What is it you don't understand about my explanation?
quote:
daronmedway: because it sounds very much like you're saying, "It doesn't matter that what Luke 9:51 says because I've got my own personal take on things."
Everyone has their own take on how they read the Bible, including you. But I don't really want to go into a DH discussion on Bible 'literality/inerrancy' now.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
He tried not to die in Gethsemane. Where He also did not take up His freedom to not die.
And your personal take is as fine as mine or daronmedway's.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard: He tried not to die in Gethsemane. Where He also did not take up His freedom to not die.
Exactly. He could have abandoned everything there and then. He had the freedom to do so. But to do this would mean abandoning everything He stood for, abandoning His people.
Interestingly, I've found out that the Bible text daronmedway referred to (Luke 9:51-62) had a special meaning for those who fought for civil rights for black people in the USA. "Keep Your Hand On The Plow" refers directly to verse 62. I've read various sermons linking this text with what it must have been like for MLK to willingly go to a dangerous place.
[ 13. December 2013, 16:52: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Daronmedway quote:
What does Luke 9:51 mean?
quote:
When the days drew near for him to be taken up [to heaven], he set his face to go to Jerusalem.
I guess, Daronmedway, it means what it says. The subordinate clause is an insertion by Luke to indicate events immediately prior to the crucifixion, and the main clause that Jesus was determined to go to Jerusalem. What else is it supposed to mean?
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
daronmedway: That's not an interpretation. It's a completely different "gospel".
Maybe it is
No its not. The good news (gospel) is certainly most vividly described as being for the powerless: especially in the Gospel of Luke. Your interpretation is valid.
Not if The Gospel according to John is in your bible.
You think the Gospel of John contradicts the Gospel of Luke? Fair enough. They are quite different. John's gospel is certainly higher Christology and borders or gnosticism sometimes.
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
As for the free-will debate: biblically the odds are in favour by about 80 - 20.
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Yeah you're right. It's probably more like 95 - 5
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
daronmedway: What does Luke 9:51 mean?
I'm sorry, I don't read the Bible in the way you do.
My take on why He went to Jerusalem was that He had stood with the poor and the powerless in the countryside already for some time, but the root of the problem was in Jerusalem, so it's there that He should go, even if He knew that it was dangerous.
Well said.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
No, he went to Jerusalem because they had the best matzo in Jerusalem. Jesus was willing to risk death to use that matzo in his Passover. There isn't much evidence of that in the Bible. But, hey, my way of reading it is just as valid as any other.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Not its not. As you said, there isn't much evidence of that in the Bible.
For liberation theology (which seems to be Le Roc's leanings) there is plenty.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
Whereas daronmedway's position comes more from a very particular Reformation theology angle that has less biblical support.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Not its not. As you said, there isn't much evidence of that in the Bible.
For liberation theology (which seems to be Le Roc's leanings) there is plenty.
No there isn't.
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Whereas daronmedway's position comes more from a very particular Reformation theology angle that has less biblical support.
It has plenty of biblical support.
[ 14. December 2013, 04:13: Message edited by: Beeswax Altar ]
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Not its not. As you said, there isn't much evidence of that in the Bible.
For liberation theology (which seems to be Le Roc's leanings) there is plenty.
No there isn't.
Yes there is.
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
Whereas daronmedway's position comes more from a very particular Reformation theology angle that has less biblical support.
It has plenty of biblical support.
I didn't say there was none.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
Oh, for goodness sake! Jesus' identification with the poor and powerless is written all over the Gospels, certainly all over the Semaics. That doesn't mean that those actions did not spring from a conscious decision of His to cooperate with the Father in an eternal mission to redeem the whole of the cosmos, reconciling all things to Himself. You'd think the two were contradictory aims!
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
Sorry, Synoptics, of course.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
Yep, I think I'd agree with Jolly Jape - in fact, to a certain degree I'm reluctant to rule out any way of interpreting the Cross (even some form of PSA, though seeing it as God's act of love by substituting himself, rather than someone else). I just think something as significant as the cross can't be limited to one particular interpretation - and I don't think the NT, taken as a whole, does limit it.
The only thing I have about the interpretation put forward by LeRoc is that, on its own, it kind of seems a bit... futile. Jesus stands with the poor and the needy and the outcasts, even to the point of His own death at the hands of the powerful and then... what? If you're not careful with it, it can leave things exactly as they were: the powerful are still powerful, the poor, needy and outcasts are still all those things and the one they'd pinned their hopes on is dead. For all the nobility of Jesus' sacrifice, on its own it doesn't do much to actually change their situation. Certainly, ISTM, you need the resurrection to carry the story beyond that. But that's not a deal-breaker for me.
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
Stejjie wrote: quote:
The only thing I have about the interpretation put forward by LeRoc is that, on its own, it kind of seems a bit... futile. Jesus stands with the poor and the needy and the outcasts, even to the point of His own death at the hands of the powerful and then... what? If you're not careful with it, it can leave things exactly as they were: the powerful are still powerful, the poor, needy and outcasts are still all those things and the one they'd pinned their hopes on is dead. For all the nobility of Jesus' sacrifice, on its own it doesn't do much to actually change their situation. Certainly, ISTM, you need the resurrection to carry the story beyond that...
I seem to recall that the Vatican's critique of Liberation Theology* was something like that. It was not that it had a radical orientation towards the poor and the dispossessed - so did Jesus. It was that it had a defective Christology.
(* so-called. I presume there are other liberation theologies that don't suffer from this)
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
For all the nobility of Jesus' sacrifice, on its own it doesn't do much to actually change their situation. Certainly, ISTM, you need the resurrection to carry the story beyond that.
If Jesus wasn't raised and vindicated....there would be no liberation theology.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
Oh, for goodness sake! Jesus' identification with the poor and powerless is written all over the Gospels, certainly all over the Semaics. That doesn't mean that those actions did not spring from a conscious decision of His to cooperate with the Father in an eternal mission to redeem the whole of the cosmos, reconciling all things to Himself. You'd think the two were contradictory aims!
I don't have a problem with your statement.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Stejjie, the staggering thing isn't the Resurrection. The power ISN'T in the Resurrection. Jesus was Divine and the Divine CANNOT die. But to share in life and death, to be essence in that candle and for the candle to be snuffed out, to be a Person of God constrained to a twitching maggot from a literal egg and have that feeling, thinking creature that You suffuse and express yourself through as one of two perichoretic wills and to have it ripped from you in mind robbing, overwhelming agony ... that's powerful.
That's identifying with abject weakness, with powerlessness as powerfully as possible.
The resurrection of such an entity is indeed awesome and what an entity, what an imago. STILL a twin willed being surely! What a mystery.
But that death, THE Death.
We must NEVER underestimate its power, its symbolism. It is THE razor edged tipping point of the pivotal event between the eternities.
It does EVERYTHING claimed then and now.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Evensong: For liberation theology (which seems to be Le Roc's leanings) there is plenty.
Guilty as charged ![[Smile]](smile.gif) I'd just like to clarify that when I speak about "Christ standing with the poor and the powerless", I don't mean that this is all He did. It's kind of hard to summarize my view on Christology in one paragraph in a blog post. In fact, I would be hard-pressed to completely express it at all.
quote:
Stejjie: The only thing I have about the interpretation put forward by LeRoc is that, on its own, it kind of seems a bit... futile.
Yes, I see what you mean. Like I tried to explain above, this interpretation doesn't really stand 'on its own' as much as it appeared here. Let me try to begin to formulate what I mean.
In my understanding, part of the reason why God came to this world in Jesus, was to show a way for us to live in relationship with God, with the people and the world around us, and with ourselves. It means putting aside our egoism (which can be a liberation in itself) and trying to do what God asks of us, not because it will give us status (as exemplified in the portrayal of the Pharisees) but because we feel it is the right thing to do.
A big part of trying to live like this has to do with power. If we include our relationship with the poor in this equation, we rapidly see that the reason why they are poor is because power. This is what makes it hard, especially since we should resist the temptation to fight this situation using power ourselves. That is not God's way. We have to find different ways, and that is hard.
And you're absolutely right, this can feel futile and it can be frustrating at times. In my work with poor people, I can feel the trap of frustration and cynicism looming nearby very often. There's so little we can do, and the powers we're up against are so big...
But one of the things I get from the Gospel is that throught Jesus, God felt this sense of futility too. I find this expressed rather well in the 'bitchy' reactions Jesus gave in Luke 9:51–62. God is with us, He knows what it's like. Knowing this can be a liberation in itself.
And of course, the story doesn't end on the Cross. The Resurrection is kind of a hope against all odds to me, a 'fool's hope' as Gandalf expressed it that power won't win in the end. It is this that we can cling to.
Of course, this isn't the only aspect that the Cross and the Resurrection have to me. But I guess this post is already long enough as it is ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Stejjie, the staggering thing isn't the Resurrection. The power ISN'T in the Resurrection. Jesus was Divine and the Divine CANNOT die.
Of course the staggering thing is the Resurrection! The power is definitely in the resurrection. Jesus was human too.
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard: But to share in life and death, to be essence in that candle and for the candle to be snuffed out, to be a Person of God constrained to a twitching maggot from a literal egg and have that feeling, thinking creature that You suffuse and express yourself through as one of two perichoretic wills and to have it ripped from you in mind robbing, overwhelming agony ... that's powerful.[/QB]
You presume God doesn't know what it felt like to be human before the incarnation.
You presume wrong.
God knows everything.
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Evensong: For liberation theology (which seems to be Le Roc's leanings) there is plenty.
Guilty as charged I'd just like to clarify that when I speak about "Christ standing with the poor and the powerless", I don't mean that this is all He did. It's kind of hard to summarize my view on Christology in one paragraph in a blog post. In fact, I would be hard-pressed to completely express it at all.
quote:
Stejjie: The only thing I have about the interpretation put forward by LeRoc is that, on its own, it kind of seems a bit... futile.
Yes, I see what you mean. Like I tried to explain above, this interpretation doesn't really stand 'on its own' as much as it appeared here. Let me try to begin to formulate what I mean.
In my understanding, part of the reason why God came to this world in Jesus, was to show a way for us to live in relationship with God, with the people and the world around us, and with ourselves. It means putting aside our egoism (which can be a liberation in itself) and trying to do what God asks of us, not because it will give us status (as exemplified in the portrayal of the Pharisees) but because we feel it is the right thing to do.
A big part of trying to live like this has to do with power. If we include our relationship with the poor in this equation, we rapidly see that the reason why they are poor is because power. This is what makes it hard, especially since we should resist the temptation to fight this situation using power ourselves. That is not God's way. We have to find different ways, and that is hard.
And you're absolutely right, this can feel futile and it can be frustrating at times. In my work with poor people, I can feel the trap of frustration and cynicism looming nearby very often. There's so little we can do, and the powers we're up against are so big...
But one of the things I get from the Gospel is that throught Jesus, God felt this sense of futility too. I find this expressed rather well in the 'bitchy' reactions Jesus gave in Luke 9:51–62. God is with us, He knows what it's like. Knowing this can be a liberation in itself.
And of course, the story doesn't end on the Cross. The Resurrection is kind of a hope against all odds to me, a 'fool's hope' as Gandalf expressed it that power won't win in the end. It is this that we can cling to.
Of course, this isn't the only aspect that the Cross and the Resurrection have to me. But I guess this post is already long enough as it is
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Quotes file.
[ 14. December 2013, 10:34: Message edited by: Evensong ]
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941
|
Posted
Yes, thanks LeRoc, that's really great and helpful. I wasn't particularly accusing you of that, it was just a flashing red (or at least amber) light that went off in my head. I kind of think of the cross as a kaleidoscope of interpretations, images and ideas, all of which are significant and needed.
Also this:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Stejjie, the staggering thing isn't the Resurrection. The power ISN'T in the Resurrection. Jesus was Divine and the Divine CANNOT die.
Of course the staggering thing is the Resurrection! The power is definitely in the resurrection. Jesus was human too.
I'd agree with Evensong. In many ways, I think the fact that Jesus, though he is divine, does die is staggering in itself - the resurrection then takes it onto a whole other level (not quite sure what I posted that suggested otherwise ![[Confused]](confused.gif) ?)
--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist
Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Jolly Jape:
Oh, for goodness sake! Jesus' identification with the poor and powerless is written all over the Gospels, certainly all over the Semaics. That doesn't mean that those actions did not spring from a conscious decision of His to cooperate with the Father in an eternal mission to redeem the whole of the cosmos, reconciling all things to Himself. You'd think the two were contradictory aims!
I don't have a problem with your statement.
Neither do I.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Stejjie: Yes, thanks LeRoc, that's really great and helpful. I wasn't particularly accusing you of that, it was just a flashing red (or at least amber) light that went off in my head. I kind of think of the cross as a kaleidoscope of interpretations, images and ideas, all of which are significant and needed.
No problem, and I agree with you. Evensong is right in that I lean towards Liberation Theology, but I also feel that people can take it too far at times. When that happens, it can become a bit one-dimensional at times. Liberation Theology is definitely an important lens through which I read the Bible, but it isn't the only lens.
[ 14. December 2013, 12:21: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pydseybare:
I don't think he did (either choose to die nor have to die)
I agree. He was killed, and pretty much knew he would be considering the circumstances - but he'd have been happy not to have been killed imo.
quote:
Originally posted by pydseybare:
... not what what I think matters.
Of course it matters - as much as anyone else's ideas matter.
quote:
Originally posted by pydseybare:
The idea that someone can be both man and God is absurd.
I agree - and I don't think he was (both man and God). I think he was so filled with God that he was divine-human. He showed us the way and the way is to be filled with God's Spirit, totally and always. No-one manages it like Jesus did, but it's possible, as he showed.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Evensong - you presume that I presume. Of course I don't. God's omnipathy is a given. But this was PERSONAL. There is no greater mystery than the hypostatic union.
The Resurrection is meaningless without The Death. Paul preached the good news of the cross. The Resurrection is not as astounding as God Personally partaking of suffering and death. No Death no Resurrection.
Conservatives will always be able to tilt their heads back and narrow their eyes if we minimize The Death.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by Evensong:
Yes there is.
That Jesus had some comforting words for the poor? Yes. Liberation Theology? No.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
quote:
originally posted by Evensong:
Yes there is.
That Jesus had some comforting words for the poor? Yes. Liberation Theology? No.
slight tangent/
In the meeting I attended earlier this week, one of the speaker's more interesting points was a quote from a Brazilian priest along the following lines:
"If I help the poor, I'm commended for exercising charity. If I ask why they are poor, I'm upbraided for being a communist"
The difference in "lens" (to use LeRoc's term) being individual engagement as opposed to collective (and thus political) engagement.
/slight tangent
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
pydseybare
Shipmate
# 16184
|
Posted
Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard, what does it mean to kill a deity? How did Jesus' death have more inherent 'nastiness' than any other death?
I think we're so conditioned to think in certain ways that it becomes impossible to think in any other way. We have layers of story and layers of theological meaning upon the events, often interpreted in different ways by different religious figures of the past. Hence we can never talk as if all people subscribe to our point of view on the matter.
In actual stark fact, it is not impossible to have a resurrection without a death. For example: a great leader can be brought low and have a revival of fortunes.
The importance of the death of Jesus to Evangelicals is because it is considered to be redemptive. Not everyone thinks that.
--------------------
"If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future."
Posts: 812 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Looks like liberation theology to me:
Jesus Rejected at Nazareth - and not just there ...
Luke 4:14 Jesus ... stood up to read, 17 and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
[ 14. December 2013, 14:19: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Eutychus: In the meeting I attended earlier this week, one of the speaker's more interesting points was a quote from a Brazilian priest along the following lines:
"If I help the poor, I'm commended for exercising charity. If I ask why they are poor, I'm upbraided for being a communist"
This is a (paraphrased) quote from Dom Hélder Câmara.
[ETA: Sorry, cross-posted with pydseybare who said the same thing.)
[ 14. December 2013, 14:26: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Thanks to both of you for finding the source. It's probably another topic!
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
Martin, my experience of Conservative (evangelicals) is that they tend to downplay the resurrection in favour of the cross. But ymmv. Paul, though, featured the resurrection so prominently in his preaching that Pagans thought he was speaking of a two new Gods, Jesus and Anastasis.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Aye JJ, I've accused them of thanatophilia here, being in love with death. I'm now including them as I must and of course fully acknowledge that The Death is as meaningless, empty, futile except as raw humanism without the Resurrection, but we always need to hold our breath for three days and nights.
Not that this applies to you in the slightest, it applies to me first: To water down The Death dilutes The Resurrection.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pyx_e
Quixotic Tilter
# 57
|
Posted
It is possible to love death. It is possible to love more than one thing at once. I love my life and the gift of it all the more because in my death I am safe. I often meet people who for all the wrong reasons want to die. Sometimes I meet Christians who love death as it will free them into Christ. For this shall be our song as we go down to the grave, Alleluia, Alleluia, Alleluia.
Martin sometimes you overthink and underfeel. It is good to understand but it is all vanity if you (I) do not feel/know love. T'is mystery all, the immortal dies.
--------------------
It is better to be Kind than right.
Posts: 9778 | From: The Dark Tower | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Thanks Pyx_e. That cuts. Hurts. My eyes are hot. That's just a fact. I'm not being defensive, believe me. I'm completely open to you, in particular. I've been accused of being Aspergersesque and fear I must be. I feel I feel. But my feelings aren't my friends and I do try and make a metanarrative with them. To love them. So please cut DEEPER.
Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard, what does it mean to kill a deity? How did Jesus' death have more inherent 'nastiness' than any other death?
Pydseybare. Deity can't be killed. Deity partook of being killed in a distinctly mysterious, perichoetic way that It doesn't in omnipathically partaking of ours and gnats', There is nothing more nasty than death. Anyone's.
"I think we're so conditioned to think in certain ways that it becomes impossible to think in any other way. We have layers of story and layers of theological meaning upon the events, often interpreted in different ways by different religious figures of the past. Hence we can never talk as if all people subscribe to our point of view on the matter.". Me too.
"In actual stark fact, it is not impossible to have a resurrection without a death. For example: a great leader can be brought low and have a revival of fortunes.", that ain't a stark fact in my terms, merely a metaphor, but hey, that's rhetoric for us.
"The importance of the death of Jesus to Evangelicals is because it is considered to be redemptive. Not everyone thinks that." Most Christians have and do. Especially the first ones. If we REJECT that in liberalism, rationalize it away, turn the wine to water, we err. We lose. If we fail to communicate it, to
evangelize with it, we fail to evangelize. We fail to live, to present the good news of the cross.
For all they get wrong - damnationism - Evangelicals, conservatives since Jesus Himself, get this right.
We must add with liberalism, not take away in false maturity.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
For what it's worth, Martin and Pyx_e, of all the people on the ship,you must surely be the two most unlikely to underfeel.
[code]
[ 15. December 2013, 13:31: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Well said yourself pydseybare.
Death is perfectly rational in a material creation. Essential. Fundamental. Intrinsic. Consciousness isn't, it's evolution going too far.
Absolutely, there is no way God requires death to forgive. In my narrative, He's redemptive. WE needed the death, THE Death, obviously.
He couldn't possibly have achieved more by just dying of old age or martyrdom at 80-odd. Less. Infinitely less. The shock to our system was historically perfect: 'What, then, are we to do?'.
The life, death and resurrection of Christ is a story the that inspires story, including this. It should certainly inspire much more.
JJ - aye, that's my problem!
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pydseybare:
The life, death and resurrection of the Christ cannot be explained. It is to be believed and lived, not explained.
I'll give that an Amen to that.
St Paul attempts to explain it because , after himself sucumbing to a profound spiritual experience , he is assigned to task of converting a strange tale surrounding the execution of an itinerant preacher into a workable theology .
I'm not necessarily refuting said theology, but personally I prefer to let it wash over somewhat rather than attempting to scrutinize each word of it .
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
I've just done a quick read of this thread and I think the thing missing is one of Jesus' own major images of the matter - the idea that we owe a debt to God.
Of course God can forgive anyone he likes, anywhen he likes; but as you can see from human situations, any serious forgiveness is costly to the forgiver. Jesus' death is God showing us, inside human life, both his preparedness to forgive and the costliness of it. This challenges us to the repentance, faith, and spiritual rebirth we need to be reconciled to the God who forgives us at such cost.
There are lots of different images of atonement in the Bible; we need to use our brains to take the appropriate aspect of each image and not push it too far. The idea of penal substitution has quite a bit to teach, but if we treat it as the main or only explanation we end up unbalanced.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
What does death and life have in common? How are they the same? -- this seems to me to be a key question, and I would assert that they are same. Our tendency to be binary - either/or - creates the problem in our understanding.
This leads me to also assert that the question "why did Jesus have to choose to die?" is the wrong one. For which the only answer is "he didn't have to choose anything". And it only matters now because he did. A better question is "why did they (the people) kill Jesus?" And "would we kill him again?". The answers to these questions are "we always kill Jesus, and yes, we will continue to kill him". The moment in time when he was killed was structured that way, and our current killing moments are also structured this way. And we try dreadfully hard not to take responsibility for what we do, even if God is merciful to us even then.
--------------------
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
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
One man's question is another man's floor eh?
It's a miracle he lasted so long.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
I've just done a quick read of this thread and I think the thing missing is one of Jesus' own major images of the matter - the idea that we owe a debt to God.
Jesus believes we owe a debt to God? Where do you get that idea from?
Personally I don't see how we owe a debt to God.
God made us with free will. If we choose to go our own way can hardly be blamed for it.
The only "debt" we owe as I see it is to give thanks for our very existence. God didn't have to create us at all after all.
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hairy Biker
But God can choose to punish the innocent (and Jesus was innocent) and then let the guilty go without punishing them. That is justice? I don't think I'd trust a person who did that. Why should I trust a god?
Can you explain how punishing the innocent is more just than punishing no one?
But even though Jesus was innocent, God did not establish the principle of "the innocent taking the punishment of the guilty", as if this can be applied as a general rule. The cross was a specific event, and Jesus was not just a representative innocent man, but God incarnate.
You seem to be distilling some kind of general modus operandi from this unique event, and I think that that is quite dangerous, actually. I say this, because many innocent people can imagine that it is God's will for them to suffer no end of injustice, with the belief that they are "carrying their cross" and being versions of Christ. Of course, there is suffering in the Christian life, and we are commanded to "take up our cross", but we shouldn't assume that we have to live as doormats for the sake of the Kingdom of God.
Essentially it was God Himself taking the legal consequences for human evil. Only He could actually bear those consequences. Now, of course, the question arises as to why God didn't "just forgive" human sin as an act of authority. Why is there a need for the legal consequences of evil to be worked out? I am sure there are many deep reasons for this, but I would like to suggest that God cannot "just forgive" without the consequences of sin being dealt with in some way. God's moral law is an expression of His character. Unlike human ideas of absolute authority, in which the despot can just "make it up as he goes along", God respects His own law and His own character. He cannot contradict Himself by an act of authority. He cannot subvert His own moral character.
Now some Christians think that He can "just forgive". But, if that is the case, He can also "just not forgive" by an act of authority. If God is viewed as pure authority, and His moral character is whatever His authority says it is at any give time, then He is a being who is essentially unstable. Anyone who feels secure and comfortable in life can nonchalantly say that they can trust such a being, but I confess that I cannot. A God who can simply do anything without any reference to logic and the moral law, is a God who provides no basis for trust. The necessity of the cross is God's unequivocal statement to man that He is prepared to pay the ultimate price to uphold His moral law. It is God saying: "I am morally consistent, because if I were not, I would have just forgiven human sin without all this pain and suffering. I would have acted purely by my own authority, but I do not act like this. I respect the moral process and the demands of my own righteous law. Therefore evil has to be punished, but since I wish to forgive you, then I have taken the punishment on myself."
Now that is a God I can truly trust.
If that is "Bronze age" thinking, as some have said, then so be it. I'll have that any day over the confusion, dysfunction and neurosis of post-modern ambiguity.
--------------------
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
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
