Nathan: Holiness is not an attribute of God?!
Well it seems that it is the way in which he interacts with the world he's created, not an attribute of his character. When he calls us to holiness as he is holy, he is asking us to relate to the world in the same way he does, in a specific "dynamic" that flows from his character. Kindness, patience and gentleness are virtues that flow from him and holiness is the dynamic by which we experience these virtues. Holiness is the blueprint for how God interacts with the world he's created, not an attribute of his character. It's a way of life that he calls us to - a way to interact with the world in the way of Jesus.
Nathan: Holiness can turn into exclusivity and elitism rather than a way of interacting in a good way with all of Creation. Some Jews in the N.T. took this need to be holy and did turn it into exclusivity and elitism. This was a barrier to the Gospel that Paul dealt with continuously. Yet there was still a need for holiness. What's the balance is my question and I feel closer to it than ever before.
Lonnie: Interesting thoughts, but not sure I agree (though this might be semantics). Scripture doesn't tell us that God does holiness, or command us in turn to do holiness, but rather it states that God IS holy, and we are likewise commanded to BE holy. (1st Peter 1:16)
I am not sure where you would get a difference between holiness, and the other attributes of God (ie. kindness, justice, love) I am also not sure how this makes much a difference either, since being holy will include us doing things that will set us apart.The only reason I mention this, is that it does seem dangerous to be playing around with God's attributes, and dismissing one or another of them as not being attributes (or in the case of Openness Theology, deciding one is more important or supreme to his other attributes).
Nathan: I'm drawing from Lev. 10:10 where there is a distinction made between what is understood as sacred or common or profane. The Hebrews had three different categories (not sacred and secular) Holiness is understood as the way that these three categories interacted.
The sacred was to be "separated" from the common and "protected" from the profane. The first item in Scripture that is called holy is "time"! God is not the first to be called holy in Scripture. Inanimate objects are called holy. Holiness can be ascribed to things, people, ways of life, space and time, even ideas.
The problem is that it would be a stretch to call a certain space "kind" or a certain time of the week "generous" or an object "patient." A virtue/attribute seems to describe something different than what holiness is after. Things that are holy can also be holy for a time - with a start and end date, whereas you are either just or unjust, kind or unkind and there is never a good time to stop being kind. Moral purity is not equated with holiness - it is assumed (subsumed) underneath it or as an implication of holiness.
Therefore, it seems that holiness is a description of a way of life that involves the attributes of God, as a blueprint of how to engage the world around us, not a virtue or an attribute. It is more robust and holistic and requires us to consider every aspect of life in every sphere and then determine how all of these should relate in a "good" way.
Lonnie: It isn't a stretch though to give an object an attribute. It is done countless times in literature. Or to give a time period attributes is not unheard of either. Christmas (the time period) is supposed to be a Generous time. Even if that did hold up, it is a stretch to use that as a reason why holiness cannot be an attribute. Objects being described as holy did have attributes then. If nothing else, they were holy, becuase the Lord or whoever described them as such. They were set apart from other objects that weren't holy.
Starting and end dates to attributes do not take away the attribute status. One can have the attribute of Kindness, or mercy, and then lose it, or suddenly gain it where it didn't exist before. In fact that is something we as Christians should chase after! Many more "start dates" to many wonderful attributes we do not currently have, but need. Eternalness in attributes only really exists in God, everywhere else it is finite, as in all things.
I couldn't agree more with your final statement. I would state that actions themselves are less so than attributes. One can perform actions in the moment, and do wonderful things briefly, but to have the attribute of said concept (kindness, holiness, etc) you must consistently and persistently show that quality before people will begin to think, "Wow, Nathan is a kind/just/merciful/superto
Well it seems that it is the way in which he interacts with the world he's created, not an attribute of his character. When he calls us to holiness as he is holy, he is asking us to relate to the world in the same way he does, in a specific "dynamic" that flows from his character. Kindness, patience and gentleness are virtues that flow from him and holiness is the dynamic by which we experience these virtues. Holiness is the blueprint for how God interacts with the world he's created, not an attribute of his character. It's a way of life that he calls us to - a way to interact with the world in the way of Jesus.
Nathan: Holiness can turn into exclusivity and elitism rather than a way of interacting in a good way with all of Creation. Some Jews in the N.T. took this need to be holy and did turn it into exclusivity and elitism. This was a barrier to the Gospel that Paul dealt with continuously. Yet there was still a need for holiness. What's the balance is my question and I feel closer to it than ever before.
Lonnie: Interesting thoughts, but not sure I agree (though this might be semantics). Scripture doesn't tell us that God does holiness, or command us in turn to do holiness, but rather it states that God IS holy, and we are likewise commanded to BE holy. (1st Peter 1:16)
I am not sure where you would get a difference between holiness, and the other attributes of God (ie. kindness, justice, love) I am also not sure how this makes much a difference either, since being holy will include us doing things that will set us apart.The only reason I mention this, is that it does seem dangerous to be playing around with God's attributes, and dismissing one or another of them as not being attributes (or in the case of Openness Theology, deciding one is more important or supreme to his other attributes).
Nathan: I'm drawing from Lev. 10:10 where there is a distinction made between what is understood as sacred or common or profane. The Hebrews had three different categories (not sacred and secular) Holiness is understood as the way that these three categories interacted.
The sacred was to be "separated" from the common and "protected" from the profane. The first item in Scripture that is called holy is "time"! God is not the first to be called holy in Scripture. Inanimate objects are called holy. Holiness can be ascribed to things, people, ways of life, space and time, even ideas.
The problem is that it would be a stretch to call a certain space "kind" or a certain time of the week "generous" or an object "patient." A virtue/attribute seems to describe something different than what holiness is after. Things that are holy can also be holy for a time - with a start and end date, whereas you are either just or unjust, kind or unkind and there is never a good time to stop being kind. Moral purity is not equated with holiness - it is assumed (subsumed) underneath it or as an implication of holiness.
Therefore, it seems that holiness is a description of a way of life that involves the attributes of God, as a blueprint of how to engage the world around us, not a virtue or an attribute. It is more robust and holistic and requires us to consider every aspect of life in every sphere and then determine how all of these should relate in a "good" way.
Lonnie: It isn't a stretch though to give an object an attribute. It is done countless times in literature. Or to give a time period attributes is not unheard of either. Christmas (the time period) is supposed to be a Generous time. Even if that did hold up, it is a stretch to use that as a reason why holiness cannot be an attribute. Objects being described as holy did have attributes then. If nothing else, they were holy, becuase the Lord or whoever described them as such. They were set apart from other objects that weren't holy.
Starting and end dates to attributes do not take away the attribute status. One can have the attribute of Kindness, or mercy, and then lose it, or suddenly gain it where it didn't exist before. In fact that is something we as Christians should chase after! Many more "start dates" to many wonderful attributes we do not currently have, but need. Eternalness in attributes only really exists in God, everywhere else it is finite, as in all things.
I couldn't agree more with your final statement. I would state that actions themselves are less so than attributes. One can perform actions in the moment, and do wonderful things briefly, but to have the attribute of said concept (kindness, holiness, etc) you must consistently and persistently show that quality before people will begin to think, "Wow, Nathan is a kind/just/merciful/superto
Nathan: Good response Lonon. I would say that the ability for an object to be holy comes from someone with the authority to make it holy and make it unholy. This then makes it impossible for an object to have the intrinsic ability to be holy. Intrinsic to God is the way in which he relates to the world so we can call him holy.
I would also comment that for time, place or objects to be given an attribute or virtue, one does so poetically and figuratively. Kindness is not a necessary attribute of time, place or any object. It is a necessary attribute of God - meaning that because he exists, kindness exists as a quality or virtue.
We bear his image by also having certain inalienable virtues or aspects of goodness as we image him. Whether we allow his image in us to be seen or not is our decision, but our imaging of him is not something we can fundamentally alter - though we can hide and distort it. This is why the Trinity and humanity are set apart from all other aspects of life and maintain certain attributes that are necessary to our existence. Objects, places or time do not need attributes/virtues to exists necessarily.
No comments:
Post a Comment