I posted here about a recent religious research report by Bayler Uni which showed that americans believed in 1 of 4 types of God (based on how judgemental/involved participants viewed God) - of course there is a limition that God is only being viewed on this axis - change the labels on the axis and I'm sure we'd keep getting multiple views of God.
As I said in the comments I do wonder about viewing God in terms of this is my God, this is your God and how we fracture the stainglass into shards of colour/shape/thickness to describe our own individual experience/encounter. I can see why we do but i wonder if we can view God other than through the lense of me the individual? It reminded me...
of this poem (with a powerful moral for those of us with a theological bent)...
The blind men and the elephant
It was six men of Indostan,
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.
The First approach'd the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, -"Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear,
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"
The Third approach'd the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," -quoth he- "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"
The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee:
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," -quoth he,-
"'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"
The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said- "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"
The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Then, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," -quoth he,- "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!
MORAL,So, oft in theologic wars
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean;
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
I like the idea that the bible can only really describe God in metaphors/images that point to who he is but cannot contain who he is.
I love that he didn't just leave us with a series of images/ideas but came as Jesus, God incarnate and involved, to reveal to us what he is like, to litererally put flesh on our image, to breathe life into our ideas, to inspire us in our encounters and to infill us with holy spirit so that we can see and know in part and to journey into increased wonder at his ongoing revelation of who he is...
I love that too. And yes, I have heard that poem/story.
Posted by: Makeesha | 18 September 2006 at 05:07 AM
That is so good...
The full expression of God is found in the Son (Heb.1:1-3 or is it 1-4?).
We have an expression of God in the Scriptures (therefore anyone who loves Him will tear those pages apart in their quest to know Him--lol), but the Bible is not the FULL expression of God. It is the *written* (still certainly alive and active, as the Spirit breathes on the pages!) expression. Huge difference!
I am really, btw, working to remember that exact analogy (of the elephant) as I study all the stuff about women...remembering that no one is honestly INTENDING to express God's heart wrongly, only that they clearly felt a leg and honestly think that's the fullness of the whole thing.
That helps ME not only to have compassion on them, but also provides a humbling reminder for ME...
Do I know all truth, comprehend all fullness of God [even apostle Paul said that *he* didn't, how much less I]?
Then while speaking boldly of Him (which is not bad!), let me not forget that I may *know* this elephent "is very like a fan," and I may even know that fan like the back of my hand, but chances are high that there is more that I have yet to discover, and therefore bold speech must always be tempered by a rememberance of one's own infallibility.
(Lecture to self. *ahem*)
I suppose all this would add up to only so much drivel to someone inclined to view all postmodern thought as sinful, but... I dunno. History is replite with human beings thinking they have all truth...only to change their minds a few years or a hundred years later. What makes us think we're any better?
Posted by: molly | 18 September 2006 at 07:44 AM
Hi Molly, I think you do live out a very generous and gracious understanding for the people who engage in conversation on your site, altho i expect you sometime do need remember the elephant before posting back in haste ;)
I'm not sure I understood your last para, would you mind expanding on in what way would you think that someone would view postmodern thought as sinful? thanks :)
Posted by: Paul | 18 September 2006 at 11:00 PM
There is a huge traditionalist-type group that thinks postmodernity itself is sinful. Seriously. Postmodernity is the enemy. It's very interesting (and I belonged to that camp until I started asking questions).
Posted by: molly | 20 September 2006 at 12:43 AM