Why do people discuss the nature of God in theological arguements when we have no clue what to make of it? We can round about theorize what we think God is and is about – but certainty will not come in this area. Obviously we have clues to how God seems to function – He cares about humanity for one. Beyond that we have to theorize.
I don’t get why people theorize that God creates people for destruction to prove His glory…seems callous to me. Yet this theory exists and enters arguments about election and God’s ability to do whatever He so much as wants. This is strange to me – and I’ll explain why.
If God functions like that, then is He really all-loving? He’s kind of sorta loving. To those created for destruction there isn’t much love for them…and as humans we always end up on the side that ‘God loves’ anyways…point is rather moot when you think about it. It is only in our judgment that someone else ends up on the ‘other side’…which says more about us than about God.
And that’s why I am writing today – I don’t put too much emphasis on what the character of the unfathomable is. My emphasis is on understanding the fathomable – simply put – you and I. Isn’t that what matters in the end of the day…what we think of God and how this effects our actions towards other people? Bruced used to say something cool about this ‘you are what your God is’.
Theology is important in that is effects the way we direct our lives…and that’s my personal concern in this area – how we treat people. I don’t really care about the suppositions about God’s character – I just need to know how this effects you and your behavior which in turn effects other people around you…I can understand that and even relate to that. That’s fathomable and I care about the fathomable.
So when we debate – let’s keep it mono-a-mono. Let’s stick to how this effects our realities. Because I don’t think I need to worry as much about God as I need to worry about us.