A Brief Critique of Part 1 from an Interview with Ayn Rand (1959)

This is very interesting and quite telling. Where I think she's missing the conception of self-giving love in Christian thought is in that love -if it is to be LOVE- is in it's very nature free and uncompelled. What's more: the Christian Faith certainly recognizes varying degrees, origins, and characteristics of love. There is certainly erotic love, love for one's self (i.e., the lover) to be satisfied by the object of love (i.e., the beloved). There is common love (i.e., brotherly love), by which there is a unity of interest and intention. There is, further, self-giving (as she'd call it, self-sacrificing) love, which is free and personal, rooted certainly in the value of the other, whether it'd be a virtuous sort or (as in the case of the imago Dei) an intrinsic sort.

To Make God Perfect?

During the Sunday morning sermon a few weeks, I made a statement along these lines...

"Until the Cross, God was not perfect."

To be perfectly honest, I don't quite remember the wording, but these words at least capture the emphasis that I was certainly making. Fair enough?

At the time, I was wrestling with the passage in Hebrews that says:

For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. (2:10)

In several other places, the writer of Hebrews makes mention of the concept that our High Priest -Christ, the Son of God (God incarnate), that is- has been made perfect (i.e., "being perfected", "having been perfected", etc.).

Here's where we run into the seeming problem... If Christ is the Son of God and no less God than the Father, wasn't He already "perfect"? In what sense does the Cross of Christ perfect the One it bore?

First, the idea of being perfect, here, is the Greek idea. The Hebrews author isn't speaking to the perfection of the divine attributes of God. Rather, it seems, he's engaging us with the idea of perfection as the goal-oriented concept that the Greek term telos captures. The purposed goal in the heart of God was that the Son, the One through whom we were created, might redeem us by stepping into our predicament. Until -in the realm of time and space- that happened, the goal had not been met.

Second, even in the realm of eternity, it seems that in keeping with the divine nature, it is only fitting for the triune God to bear in Himself the sufferings of Man made in the divine image. Christ, being the very image of the Father, serves as Mediator between God and Man, becoming the theanthropic Person (lit., the God-Man) so that He might redeem those made in said image. Having been created in the image, they should be redeemed in the image. Were it not for the Suffering of the Son, for the Cross of Christ, God's heart and mind it seems would fall short of what it truly is. In other words, if God intends to save through suffering and then does not save through suffering, He is less than what He intended to be.

Please do bear with these thoughts, for they are weeks old and haven't been well-developed. Please also feel free to challenge, critique, or rebuke.

omni-

An interesting thing to note...

How we typically define a few terms related to God:
omniscience - God knows all things.
omnipresence - God is present to all places at all times.
omnibenevolence - God is all loving and good.
omnipotence - God can do anything.

* QUESTION #1 - Did you notice anything of interest?

* QUESTION #2 - Is there possibly a better way to think of these terms, are they wholly unnecessary / unbiblical, or are they just fine as they here stand?

on Pain and Death

Let's face it - LIFE IS A BIT RISKY...

Everyone who has ever lived has inevitably faced risk. Risk is not merely for extreme sports enthusiasts; it's a part of life. Every moment that your blood pumps through your body, you run the risk of it failing to do so. Every time you try out for the team, you run the risk of not making the cut. Everyday of your life -and everyday of mine- you risk pain and suffering.

Though the situation seems in retrospect to be quite trivial, I vividly remember the first time I went to a chiropractor. I had been experiencing a good bit of back / neck pain, but on that day, it became unbearable. I could hardly stand up straight, so during my planning period, I ran to see the father of another teacher's student, a chiropractor. He did a bit of work and assured me that it would take several days for the discomfort to let up considerably. Though I was truly thankful that I would feel better not very long from then, I remember getting in my car and being hit squarely by the thought "All I want is for the pain to be gone - right now... at this very moment."

The more I live, the more I am convinced that life comes with its share of pain. Part of the risk of living relates to pain - physical, emotional, mental, etc.

Likewise, death is a risk we all face in life. Just as the risk of pain is inevitable, so also is the risk of death necessitated merely by our living. It's a bit discouraging to recognize the fact that we must all eventually lose our lives to death. No one wins that battle... In the end, we all lose.


* NOTE: merely some thoughts