I do not believe that God is a God without limits. This is a cornerstone of my faith.
His limits are two-fold:
He has self imposed limits or those things which he has committed not to do by his own will, and the limit of being true to his own nature. Although he can and does do as he pleases, we must understand that his very nature dictates those things which he pleases to do.
If God could violate his own nature he would not then be an unchanging God. This is what I believe is meant when he claims to be so, he cannot and will not violate his own pure and righteous nature.
This does not however mean that he is unable or unwilling to redirect his actions provided that in doing so he is still true to his character. For example when prior to creating Adam, God exemplifying his triunal state, debates with himself about man's fate following his fall.
I also do not believe that God is subject to his own creation(s), perhaps more accurately he is not limited by them. They are his to with as he pleases except in those instances when he has willingly committed to being so for the benefit of them. For example again bestowing man with freewill in the choice to or not to pursue God. Though God does pursue man, man is free to reject God.
As I always say:
What can man actually give to God that God did not afford him in the first place. What is it that he would not, could not take from him in spite of his great desire for it?
Love.
That and that alone is man's to give.
.
I digress...
That said, another creation of God's to which he is not limited is time. To be subject to time disallows the notion of an eternal nature since time inherently marks a beginning and an end.
If we believe that God is subject to time as being within it, rather than outside of it, we must then believe in things such as a literal 7 day creation story, or that he is not all knowing since he, just as we, have not yet experienced the future. He would therefore be limited in his ability to maintain order in his own creation for in so being he may change the course of events but to what end he could not know. We would have made God in our own image to believe it so.
All of this to ask the following: At what point did prayer become a means of petitioning God to not simply intervene but to heed our desires and undo what has already been done? And why would he?
There are many examples in the Bible where he, as many fathers do, has chosen to do indulge the requests of his children. There are many reasons why I as a father do so, but I am finite and limited just as my children are. I simply have the benefit of experience which really only allows me to make more informed guesses about what may be best, nevertheless they are still guesses.
I don't believe that God guesses. I also believe that being outside of time and thus all knowing, God is able to undo that which has been done and so with certainty rather than informed guesses entertain the requests of his children.
The father is not subject to the will of his child except in those instances which he allows it to be so. That's just logical parenting. But God calls himself Father and we his children.
So why does God actually change his previously determined courses of action?
It is an overwhelming concept to me. Especially when I consider the examples of prayer given to us by Jesus, setting forth a pattern which really only allows us to pray for God's will rather than the fulfillment of our desires, though we are allowed to express our desires... like not wanting to be crucified.
I must admit that a fair amount of this curiosity came from my reading of the Jew that felt so free to haggle with God about his conditions for saving Sodom and Gomorrah. Down and down he brought the price, from a seemingly certain destruction. But we know how that story ended as well I suppose.
I've really gotten off track but this in part my questioning about the relationship between God and man. The finite grasping to comprehend the infinite.
Good thing I'm using my phone, this could have been much longer.
Solo Cristo Salva
db
I love it when you wrote like this!
ReplyDeleteThanks.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHere are my thoughts regarding this blog post The Limited Unlimited God. I am not a theologian so this will be simple, but reflects my view of God as I see it revealed in the Word of God. I have firm beliefs, but I recognize that I’m limited in my knowledge, so I’m always willing to listen and to learn.
DeleteIn the first two paragraphs, I see two assertions:
1. God acts within the limits of His own nature.
2. If God could violate His nature, he would then not be an unchanging God.
I agree 100% with the first point. C S Lewis, in his book Mere Christianity addressed the objection given by atheists and non-believers that God can’t exist because Christians say essentially #1 and therefore put limits on God, who Christians also say is unlimited. The objectors then conclude that Christians believe something self-contradictory. Lewis response is that God is no more capable of nonsense than you are I are. For example, the famous objection “can God create a rock so big that even He can’t lift it?” is nonsense because it deliberately posits two contradictory concepts which it then applies to God. We recognize that we human beings are incapable of doing this, but to extend the idea infinitely and apply it to God, doesn’t make it any more possible for Him than for us. The proper thing to say is that God can create any object of any scale that He pleases, and since He is its Creator, He can do whatever He likes with it, including destroying it.
I have a problem with the second paragraph simply because it seems like a non-sequitur (If A, then B); however, I don’t understand it as written, and as written, it seems like B does not necessarily follow from A. But, I am probably just not getting it.
Paragraph 3:
DeleteThis does not however mean that he is unable or unwilling to redirect his actions provided that in doing so he is still true to his character.
To me the question is whether God redirects His actions. We’d need to go to scripture to determine that one.
Summarizing the 2nd part of the paragraph, I believe it states that God debated [within the Trinity] whether He should create man, that man would be created in the image of God, possessing free will to choose good and evil, and that God ultimately decided this would be good, so did so.
I am unaware of evidence for this debate in the Word.
There is ample evidence of the Trinity and the fact that all were present in the creation (Gen. 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness…”.
I don’t think we have anything in the Word about the counsels or debates within the Trinity. It does say in Eph. 1:4 “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.” I draw from this and other scriptures that we, specifically the redeemed, are God’s Plan A. IOW, God did not create man with free will, then man sinned, then God said, “Oh oh, what do we do now?” God is not taken by surprise.
As to why He made the world this way, we are not given knowledge, apparently because it’s not pertinent to what we need to know.
In regard to free will, it’s one thing to discuss what it looked like before the fall (which I won’t address), and another as to what it looks like now. Eph. 2:1-4a “And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But[c] God…” It doesn’t say we were sick. It doesn’t say we were desperately swimming against the tide and PTL, Jesus tossed us a life preserver which we barely were able to reach out and grab. No, it says we were dead. Metaphorically, we were 2 miles below the surface, at the bottom, dead, -- But God!
Paragraph 4
…bestowing man with freewill in the choice to or not to pursue God. Though God does pursue man, man is free to reject God.
As I mentioned above, free will is certainly problematic after the fall. Our entire nature, mind, heart, will, and spirit are corrupted by sin. Paul spends a lot of time in Romans 1-8, explaining how we suppress the truth, how we exchange God for idols, how no one seeks after God, how although we are His enemies, He died for us, how it is impossible for those in the flesh to please God, but how those in the Spirit are given the ability to serve and obey Him.
I think we have certain freedoms within our natural condition, but we only act according to our nature. God has to give life, which He does through the gospel.
Well, this is sad; here it is almost 11:30. I’ve only managed to speak much too briefly to the first 40% of your article. I’ll try to pick up the rest tomorrow.
In Christ, bro!