Wednesday, December 26, 2007

Can God make a circle with four sides of equal length?

This question not only separates classical thought from empirical thought but it demonstrates how meaningless their kind of logic has come to.

Can God make a square out of a circle? Yes, but even I can do it depending on the parameters. However, I cannot make a circle with four sides but....listen to this..... NEITHER CAN GOD!!!

Now is this complete arrogance on my part? Of course, not! The point is simply definitional. God has already made some kind of circle with four sides, but man himself has called this a square! I believe that God has adopted man's convention and called it a square Himself.

When man, using the intelligence and wisdom God has given him, decided to define what a circle is and what a square is, God was not sleeping! Although God, who is omniscient, who already knows all things past and present (and "some" future, but by His own choice), who passively (most probably so) participated in man's evolution of language, thought, conventions and definitions subsequently "conforms to" or adopts the vehicles by which man communicates meaningfully with each other and with God.

The point of all this is that the all-wise and all-knowing God has handpicked Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek to be the vehicles of His progressive revelation to man. This has tremendous implications to meaningful theology.

First, God picked the language, the context of its use, the maturity of the meaning of the words based on the time in history it was used for communication. Hence, God knew that the use of such language would communicate fully and clearly His will, His intentions, His thoughts and His heart to the receivers of such communication. It would therefore be arrogance on man's part to designate some portions of scripture as anthropomorphisms, for example, knowing that God used the language and context to "uncover" Himself to man in order that man should know him (the object of theology after all).

It is further arrogance to call some passages mysteries simply because it does not fit into one's theological foundation. It is even further arrogance because this is another way of saying that I don't understand it now but I refuse to study further and I don't care to understand it even if God is trying to reveal something to me! Nay, a true theologian has to be willing to abandon his theology or parts of it if they fly in the face of scripture. A mystery or an anthropomorphism is really an arrogant way of saying that God still does not know how to communicate with man!!!

All of these excuses literally and (God forbid) deliberately insult God's attempt at progressive revelation! He is all-wise, omni-competent, the master communicator (understatement, no one can communicate better than God in terms of used of language, culture and time in history context, the very words...there are no better words than what He used (or enabled his vessels to use). If that is the case, it is sheer arrogance to continue to make excuses for God, excuses for His analogies, His idioms, His metaphors - - - God means EXACTLY what He says in the language that He used within the context of its time, geographic, anthropologic and cultural setting!

Second, we have to carefully watch and analyze the Word of God as revealed through Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek when we develop our theology. We tend to create theologies based on our language (like English) and we miss out significantly in our path to knowing God better. We tend to dismiss many incidents in Scripture as exceptions to the rule simply because they contradict our cherished theologies. However, we should readily abandon any theology that is not consistent with the Word of God.

The whole point of this discussion is for man to approach the Word of God as containing the complete revelation of God, His person, His designs, His intentions, His thoughts and His heart to man. This means that man should be able to know enough about God for man to claim that he knows God truly and personally. I agree that there is something about the infinite that the finite will never grasp. However, since God is a personal and relational God, He Himself has stated in Deuteronomy 29:29 that whatever He has chosen NOT to be revealed would be totally irrelevant to man's benefit in this life.

To state it quite bluntly, anyone who claims that biblical Foreknowledge, biblical Predestination, the Trinity, etc are mysteries, simply do NOT have the correct definitions in their minds. As I pointed out in another blog, they are still thinking Greek (Hellenistic) when they should be thinking Jewish (Scripture).

In conclusion, based on what I have presented above, anyone who claims that we can never know God fully in this life falls in any or all of the following categories:
  1. Ignorant and refuses to be further informed or is lazy in the pursuit of knowing God.
  2. Misinformed either by choice of theology or by lack of education in understanding the words of scripture, or because their information is based entirely on a non-revelatory language like English (Revelatory-language would mean the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek languages chosen by God as His written vehicle of communication)
  3. Deeply indoctrinated the wrong way and refuses to learn otherwise, like many Hyper-Calvinists are, unfortunately.
Note that "humble" is NOT one of the choices above! (I have pointed out how this pseudo-humility is really arrogance.)

When God tells it like it is, it is arrogant to say that God speaks a mystery! Get a clue!
You are actually saying that God does not know how to communicate or that your mind refuses to understand. "No one can understand this mystery" is NOT an option. Otherwise, there is NO such thing as revelation!

No comments:

Post a Comment