Good Read

jordanreich — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 02:41:27 +0000

There are some things in life that are inseparable. Bonnie and Clyde. Ice-cream and Summer-time. A smile after a tickle. But the most unlikely of duos may just be grace and sin. Cornelius Plantinga, Jr. delivers the latter as the cornerstone of his argument in Not the Way It’s Supposed to Be, A Breviary of Sin. Plantinga takes us on a rollercoaster ride of introspection, focusing on the very things that sever our ties to God and yet clarify the gift of grace.

From the get go he qualifies the relevance of his thoughts by suggesting that we have traded the real definitions of sin for ones of “caloric” crime and watered down euphemisms (x). We find in Plantinga’s words that sin is more than just moral and ethical failure. Every sin has its opposite in the character of God. For Plantinga anything that trashes shalom ordained and perfected by God is in opposition to the way things should be (14). Better put, “In short, sin is culpable shalom-breaking” (14).

But most importantly Plantinga reminds us that grace is not cheap:

But to speak of sin without grace is surely no better. To do this is to trivialize the cross of Christ…and therefore cheapen the grace of God that always comes to us with blood on it (199).

Blood! Blood that washes over every sin. Plantinga shows that while sin may seem like the end; grace is the new beginning. And what a compelling and lovely grace that is!

The Extent of the Revelation of God

jordanreich — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:14:14 +0000

Consider Augustine’s inquiry: “Do heaven and earth contain you because you have filled them? or do you fill them and overflow them because they do not contain you?”[1] It is this questioning that leads us to believe that revelation has its beginning in impartation. Is there something that was lost in Genesis 3 that began an upward thrust of coming to knowledge of God again? Was Eden in its fullness the totality of God’s image? Was it the indecent audacity of man to take it upon himself to become like God that took away that fullness of God’s revelation and therefore prompted God to give man various ways of being rejuvenated with his image? And it is as Augustine says, “In filling all things, you fill them with the whole of yourself.”[2] The image of God manifest in humanity was both the aim and the product of revelation, both in the burning bush and in the virgin birth of a baby.

Emil Brunner introduces another deeper view of Jesus as revelation. He says, “…thus revelation was again understood as God’s action in Jesus Christ.”[1] And the means of Jesus Christ is what refashions God’s image that was offered in Eden. Brunner goes on to say, “…the knowledge of God creates community, and indeed community is precisely the aim of divine revelation.”[2] This is the chief end in revelation. The chief end cannot be knowledge, for what good is mere knowledge?[3] The chief end must be something that brings humanity back to the community of the garden. Ultimately it must be something that brings humanity back to God.

And now the conclusion of the matter is this: the extent of the revelation of God is so deep and so far reaching that each unveiling of his character becomes a means of reinstating his communion with humanity.[4] It is almost as if Eden was absolutely flooded with his revelation as he walked through the garden.[5] There was no need for a burning bush or a written word because he was truly amongst them, which trumped both the aforementioned. Revelation was at its best and brightest in Eden. Community was heavy and at large. But that first shadow of sin fell over the garden and destroyed access to God’s image and severed communion. I wonder if God deemed that the world was not ready again for his revelation in full and that there would be limits, an extent per say, to revealing himself. And if there were limits to revelation of his image he would have to build slowly toward revealing himself fully. He would have to prime man and woman with pieces of himself along the way, as a secret admirer leaves notes, until that very moment when he would reveal himself for who he really was and confess his undying love for humanity in the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ, God’s best and brightest revelation to date.

[1] Emil Brunner, Revelation and Reason, (Philadelphia; The Westminster Press, 1946) p. 10.

[2] Brunner, p. 27. This proves to be the crux of the argument. Brunner is one of very few, if not the only introducer of this idea. It is helpful though that this idea is a final addition to other views of revelation. For the extent of God’s revelation is more than just a sacrificial death; it is a death that brings the life of God’s community and image. Without this view of revelation we would be stuck with the resurrection and no where to go. For what is the death and resurrection without the meaning and chief end of such revelation? Brunner gives the most concise thesis and expounds on every aspect of it as it pertains to general and specific revelation.

[3] Brunner, p. 27. “The knowledge of revelation does not add to my knowledge; it does not make me ‘educated’; it does not enlarge my ‘sphere,’ but it transforms me myself; it changes the one who receives it. For this process of transformation the Bible uses the strongest expression possible: rebirth, the death of the old, and the resurrection of the new man” (p. 27).

[4] Brunner, p. 27. “…and to be ‘known by God’ means to have communion with Him” (p. 27).

[5] Genesis 3:8, Today’s English Version. The implications here are that God was revealed in person in Eden and would be revealed in person again in Jesus. The two were nearly identical.

[1] Saint Augustine, Confessions, A new translation by Henry Chadwick (New York, Oxford University Press, 1991) p. 4. In these writings Augustine takes a plethora of ideas in Christian theology and expounds on them in great detail as referenced in his life. The good that comes from Augustine’s Confessions is most likely a refocus on the image of God. We get a good deal of Augustine’s deep musings but also some of his life lessons on the side. For the present study there is not much on the study of revelation but bits and pieces referring to knowing God. His main contribution to the extent of God’s revelation is in his idea that God longs to fill the earth with himself again because it does not contain nearly enough of him. .

[2] Augustine, p. 4.

Hello world!

jordanreich — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:29:32 +0000

I’m finally here! I’m on the internet! It took a long time to get here, but I’ve arrived. So…what do you do for fun around here? Go to what link? I don’t know guys…that URL doesn’t look safe. Are you sure? Ok…here goes….what the?!?!?! Wait a minute…SICK! That’s disgusting! You tricked me!

Ok…I’ve got to go clean my hard drive now. Sorry. I’ll try to blog later once I’ve installed some anti-SIN (aka – anti-WICKEDNESS) software on my computer.

TTYL

(not sure what that means, but I see the kids these days doing it all the time).

Blogging for a Better World

Good Read

The Extent of the Revelation of God

Hello world!