giraffes and diamonds

Thursday, September 08, 2005

unsure

i am totally unsure about this progressive revelation idea. we are discussing it dr. smith's christian doctrine class and have our first preceptorial on tuesday. i find myself still struggling with the concept and trying to digest as much information as my little brain can handle. why don't you throw your opinions around for me to chew on as well?

3 Comments:

  • At 10:28 PM, Blogger brandi said…

    the original post that was put up on blackboard (not by me) was this:

    "We were discussing progressive revelation in class and I just wanted to share a thought that popped into my head but one that I didn't really take time to share. We were discussing God's teaching ability and whether at any point in history he could have revealed to someone issues that we have today. For example, could God have shared with Samuel the idea of loving your enemy instead of chopping him into little pieces? The idea I was pondering about were the phrases "pillars of the earth" and "four corners of the earth" and Dr. Smith's comment of people "still living on a flat earth." I believe God could have explained to his prophets (or anyone for that matter) the concept of a round earth and the idea of gravity and how gravity works. But, I personally think these things would have destroyed their image of God. I believe they would have viewed these concepts as lunacy, and God would have done a disservice to them by revealing this.

    My question to you is this: Is it possible that this line of thinking about the natural world is similar to the line of thinking about moral reasoning. Would moral revelations have shocked the people in the same way as revelations about the natural world. (remember some astronomers were put to death for proclaimin the "heresy" of a round earth.

    I personally view Jesus's statement "but I say to you, love your enemies" had this kind of effect on his crowds. It was a revolutionizing statement that much of the Old Testament Israelites simply weren't capable of handling."

    My only response is that I don't think God limits the revelation of himself to past generations or reveals more of himself to future generations. I feel like His revelation is personal to each individual and he fully reveals himself to the point which that person will allow him to. Why would God have something to hold back from us or anyone before us? Maybe it is our own mortal inadequacies that separate us from any greater knowledge about God. I really have no idea, like I said, I'm still struggling with the whole concept.

     
  • At 1:52 AM, Blogger Toby said…

    Brandy,

    First things first, can you use a different font? On my comp he words are close to unreadable.

    Concerning progressive revelation. I think God could have done any number of things, maybe he even did and we don't know about it, but we must work with what we have and can glean from the source.

    One thing I would say about your example of "love your enemy" is maybe we misunderstand the true nature of the statement. We tend to think of it as revolutionary, but I think that Jesus was commenting on the state of religion at that time as compared to what God had commanded. You've heard it said... not the law says or the prophets say, but people say. that suggests to me that Jesus is trying to pull people back to the actual teaching of the Torah. The Torah teaches that God is concerned with the outsiders in society. Much attention is given today to the care of widows and orphans in the OT, but God also provided for aliens and strangers in the. Leviticus 19:18 is referenced in the NIV regarding Matt 5:43. It says:

    Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD

    But if you look a few verses earlier in Lev 19:10 God says concerning the harvest:

    Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God.

    DT 10:18-19 says it more suscinctly:

    [God] defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the alien, giving him food and clothing. And you are to love those who are aliens, for you yourselves were aliens in Egypt.

    Seems to me like this is a case where God had revealed the principle to Israel, but they chose not to follow it. Jesus just clarified God's intent by pointing out the baggage tradition had added to it.

    I don't know if that helps, but its somewhere to start.

     
  • At 5:14 PM, Blogger Toby said…

    Thanks Lex for bringing me back in focus. I lost where I was going while I was posting at 2am.

    I agree that there is a good case for progressive revelation, and that is in some ways what I was trying to say, but as I said I got to rambling.

    Concerning my last post:

    I think the idea to love your enemy was contained in the laws concerning aliens. I think that as Judaism was shaped out of the Hebrew religion, contexts changed and thereby changed the understanding of the law. It seems to me that Jesus is reinterpreting the current understanding of the law, along with the man-added tradition. God did not say hate your enemy. God said care for the stranger, and i think Jesus is extending this admonition to the percieved enemies of the Jews. So, I'll say that within the context to which Jesus was speaking, it was revolutionary, but I don't think it should have been revolutionary.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home