Re-examining the Nature of God

[This is part 1 of 2 (and maybe more) of my reaction and response to Mark Karris' post: see Feb. 2 post -- Pandemic Prayers and the Nature of God.]

Of all the ways my faith has evolved, especially over the last 15 years, this post will be, for most people who know me, my most radical departure from conservative evangelical theology.  

However, once (1) I saw the doctrine of biblical inerrancy as indefensible, (2) I accepted Jesus as the best revelation of the unseen God (John 1:18, etc) and (3) I replaced sola scriptura with a Wesleyan-like quadrilateral basis for my theology, I was free to consider other theological perspectives. 

I used to believe that my understanding of God based on sola scriptura was best because I thought it was “objective.” I believed that those people who relied on experience were “subjective” and thus they could create God in whatever image was pleasing to them. But what I came to realize was that we can never eliminate subjectivity when it comes to understanding God. When we claim that we are holding to sola scriptura we still have to interpret scripture, and interpretation is never 100% objective no matter how much we try. In order to try to better understand God's nature and how he works in the universe (and in my life), I now start with scripture but also consider experience (and observation), tradition and reason. I no longer fear the theoretical "slippery slope" since the quadrilateral provides the necessary checks and balances that control my rate of descent into the abyss [That's a bit of joke, OK?]

While working as a Teaching Assistant at Trinity Western University (a conservative evangelical post-secondary institution) for their introductory Old Testament course, I was introduced to the concept of Open and Relational Theology (ORT). What I initially read appealed to me because so much of my theological cognitive dissonance had to do with the inconsistencies I saw between the nature and working of Yahweh in the Tanakh as compared to the nature of Jesus as portrayed through the Gospel accounts, both in word and deed.

According to the Gospels' authors, Jesus taught that God truly loves all humanity (i.e., the world) to such an extent that God voluntarily sent the one and only Son of God into the world to save as many as possible. As we read later in the NT, God does not want any to perish but all to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth.  

For most of my Christian life, I'd been troubled by the violence in the Tanakh (i.e., Christian Old Testament) which was either commanded or condoned by God.  As well, so much of this violence, which was reputedly perpetrated by those men and women who are upheld as faith heroes, was either praised for its zeal or, at the very least, was not condemned or corrected. I simply could not see that aspect of God’s nature and will to be, in any way at all, consistent with the life and teachings of Jesus. 

In addition to many violent portrayals in scripture, I was also troubled by the genuine evil that has existed in the world for all of human history. If God is truly omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent AND loving how could he allow genuine evil to be perpetrated, especially against the innocent, the vulnerable, the disenfranchised, the marginalized, the abused, etc. and not intervene? For me, the portions of the Tanakh (and the New Testament) that call upon God’s people to care for, provide for and protect all such people are the most convicting, challenging, motivating and hopeful passages in all of scripture. Yet, if indeed God has the power to intervene and protect the most vulnerable humans and doesn’t do so, that is deeply troubling to me. Add to that, is my experience and observation that the sincere and desperate prayers of literally billions of people of faith (as now evidences in this pandemic) don’t seem to move the reputedly omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent AND loving God to act on behalf of those for whom they are praying (often with unceasing loud cries and tears)! 

Two million and counting! That's the global death toll from COVID-19 in its first year. And who has suffered the most and greatest losses, if not the poor, the vulnerable, the disenfranchised, the marginalized, the abused, and other helpless innocents? Yet, these are the very humans scripture challenges God's people to provide for, take care of and protect. Their unwillingness to do so is given by the prophets as the reason why God rejected Israelite worship and sacrifices. [E.g., the often quoted Isaiah 59:1–2 is preceded by infrequently referenced Isaiah 58 which clearly lists the sins that separated the Israelites from God. Please read it.]

The scriptural portrayal of God who commands and condones violence, combined with God's perceived unwillingness to protect the most vulnerable humans from the ravages of genuine evil, created in me such a degree of cognitive dissonance that I could no longer ignore it and still claim I had an authentic faith. 

How ORT significantly reduced my cognitive dissonance and calmed my inner atheist, will be the subject of my next post [or two, or more].