From Mud to Light – the Saving Work of Christ

Man is mud whom God has commanded to become god.
St. Gregory of Nyssa

+++

How do you create a God? How do you create a being that has true freedom, true love and thus, true existence?

This is obviously not an entirely rational question – but it is a serious question for Christian thought. For, as St. Gregory of Nyssa notes, the creation of man is more than the story in early Genesis. The creation stories of Genesis are only a prelude to the greater story fulfilled in Christ. In Christ, the mud has become light.

Freedom and love are necessary to true existence – at least true existence as made known in Jesus Christ. For things do not have existence in themselves – everything that exists does so because it is brought into being and sustained in its being by the good God who created it.  But to human beings a greater existence is gifted. In the Genesis account that gift is to exist “in the image and likeness of God.”

To exist as God exists – requires freedom. For if our existence is a requirement (if we must exist), then we are not free. We are simply here by someone else’s will and not our own. This is not the image and likeness of God. To exist in the image and likeness of God, we must be given the power to freely exist (or not exist).

Not only must we be able to exist freely – but true existence (such as God Himself has) – is not a purely self-referential matter. God exists as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The God Who freely exists, does so in love. The Father loves the Son, the Son loves the Father, and so on. Met. John Zizioulas, following the thought of St. Basil the Great, notes that God “constitutes” His existence in the free act of love that is the very meaning of personhood.

To exist in the image and likeness of God, is to exist as person. We do this in a free act of love in which we give ourselves to the other, even as we accept the existence of the other.

This is much more thought than we usually give to words such as “exist,” and it gives shape to the phrase “image and likeness of God,” in such a manner as to rescue it from the dustbin of banality.

The Christian faith is the story of this creation – in the fullness of its telling.

St. Irenaeus (2nd century) described Adam and Eve as “adolescents.” They were not “perfect” in the sense of “complete.” They represent a beginning and an intention – but something that not only remained unfulfilled – but even something that had deviated from its intended path. From “mud commanded to become Gods,” they became beings unable to be truly human. Death and corruption mark their existence. The stories in Genesis include fratricide among their children. The early chapters of Genesis are not the record of a promising start – they are the record of the start of promises.

That promise begins with Eve, who is told that her “seed” will someday “bruise the head of the serpent.” On the most primitive level, the statement can mean as little as, “your offspring will hate snakes.” But in the ears of Christians it is a promise of the One to come who will destroy the bondage of death and the distorted path.

The story of man’s salvation, on the lips of Orthodox Christians, is not a tale of abstract theology. There is no offended justice and original sin, no theories of predetermined schemes and imputed goodness. There is the story of a movement from a rejected possibility to a realized divinity. God’s own entrance into the story is that of God become man so that man could become God. Christ, according to St. Paul, is the “second Adam.” He, in both His humanity and divinity, is both the promise and the fulfillment of the promise. And so, St. Paul describes the path of salvation as being “conformed to the image of Christ,” who is the “image of the invisible God.” This is the fulfillment of man created in the image and likeness of God. In the words of St. John Chrysostom:

It was [God] Who brought us from non-existence into being, and when we had fallen away [He] raised us up again, and did not cease to do all things until [He] had brought us up to heaven, and had endowed us with [His] kingdom which is to come.

This is the direct line of the work of God, the saving work of Christ. It is our “re-creation” in the image of God. But it is a story that requires our freedom and our love. For we cannot exist in His image, except we do so freely and with love. Our re-creation requires our cooperation.

Why didn’t God just create us the way He wanted without all of the suffering and death that continue to occur? Isn’t this a cruel creation?

Our suffering and death are the story of Adam lived in each of us. “In the day you eat of it you will surely die”…and we do. But our suffering and death are also the path of our freedom and love. The true Image of God takes up the same path of suffering and death and transforms what would otherwise be tragedy into the victory of Pascha. This is the true story of Adam. God became man so that man could become God.

The harshest judgment of this story comes from the lips of Ivan Karamazov in Dostoevsky’s greatest novel.

And if the suffering of children goes to make up the sum of suffering needed to buy truth, then I assert beforehand that the whole of truth is not worth such a price….  They have put too high a price on harmony; we can’t afford to pay so much for admission. And therefore I hasten to return my ticket. And it is my duty, if only as an honest man, to return it as far ahead of time as possible. Which is what I am doing. It’s not that I don’t accept God, Alyosha, I just most respectfully return him the ticket.

Ivan’s poignant description of suffering children is perhaps the most effective argument ever offered against the love of God. Is the journey from mud to God worth the suffering of children? Can true existence in freedom and love be worth such a price?

I’m not certain that any rational answer is sufficient. I do understand that Christ has made the suffering of children (and of us all) His own. “In the day you eat of it you will surely die,” can also be stated, “In the day you eat of it innocent children will suffer.” And the most innocent of children takes His place on the Cross precisely in the midst of that suffering. “Let the little children come to me,” He says – for He has come for them.

Like Ivan, we can refuse the ticket. We can declare that the innocent suffering of even a single child is not worth all the journeys from mud to deification. But we are told in the larger Christian story that the “Lamb was slain from the foundation of the earth.” The suffering of that single child, and of every child (and us all), is clearly foreseen in God’s creation. Our path towards suffering and death comes as no surprise. Apparently there can be no freedom and love in creation that does not embrace that path. And yet God says, “Let there be light.” It is not only the proclamation of the beginning of creation, but a declaration of its end – for the mud becomes light.

But how can we weigh the price? God has weighed it and found it worth the price (a price He Himself has paid). The great Russian saint, Seraphim Sarovsky, once said:

Oh, if you only knew what joy, what sweetness awaits a righteous soul in Heaven! You would decide in this mortal life to bear any sorrows, persecutions and slander with gratitude. If this very cell of ours was filled with worms, and these worms were to eat our flesh for our entire life on earth, we should agree to it with total desire, in order not to lose, by any chance, that heavenly joy which God has prepared for those who love Him.

I accept his witness and hold it in wonder. What must it mean, to exist truly, in freedom and in love, as God Himself exists? For what possible joy would a good God create us, though the path to that joy be marked both by our own and His own great suffering? We are told that Christ went to the Cross “for the joy set before Him.”

I cannot imagine. But I accept the ticket.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About Fr. Stephen Freeman

Fr. Stephen is a priest of the Orthodox Church in America, Pastor Emeritus of St. Anne Orthodox Church in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. He is also author of Everywhere Present and the Glory to God podcast series.


Comments

207 responses to “From Mud to Light – the Saving Work of Christ”

  1. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    dinoship,
    Where do I find a spiritual father? I know priest and monks here locally. H

  2. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    Dinoship,
    Something happened and sent the reply before I finished. I know priests and monks here locally, but how do I choose?

  3. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    George,
    You choose the way you choose your doctor. It could be more important to have one readily available to start off with than to have (an amazing) one that you have to travel far away for.
    All will be well on that path, even if there are difficulties…

  4. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Well, I must say that I am rather pleased that I haven’t had to say a word before the things to which I might raise an objection or question has been raised. 🙂

    Fr. Stephen:

    What I find disturbing is how lightly so many Christians make efforts to justify a brutal God. I think it is unnecessary, even if it leaves me perplexed.

    That you are perplexed says something important. It sounds to me a bit like the “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” statuettes that one can find about. “I know my daddy is a good man so he must have had a really good reason for ordering his henchmen to kill that family” does not make a very sound argument.

    If the events didn’t actually happen, then even as allegory god looks somewhat horrible in many texts. I see no way around that.

    Dinoship:

    Their understanding of death is distinctly Orthodox in that they see it NOT as the bad thing it is seen in Western thought. In fact, they clearly see it as “the second biggest beneficence” granted us by God…

    I have a hard time reconciling this against the idea that life is sacred. The logical conclusion to your statement is that all Christians should want to die. But this is not the case. I know of no one who embraces their own death as a gift, let a lone the death of a loved one.

    Michael B:

    Ananias & Sapphira lied too the Holy Spirit so His life was withdrawn, IMO. Death is the wages of sin.

    How is it than any Christians have survived then? Even Peter was duplicitous and Paul thought himself to be the “chief among sinners.” I have a hard time believing that Christ would cry out for his father to forgive the people brutalizing him and then would strike down A&P for lying. That’s simply ridiculous to me. (Torquing someone for not handing over all the cash is the sort of thing that Paul Crouch might do, not Christ.)

    In our society, there is no consensus about what the Bible means or how it is interpreted rightly. Even within the traditional churches, yours included, there is great diversity — as you admit. What is true? What is historical? Are the truth and the historical one and the same? How do you distinguish one from the other? What can be rejected in good faith?

    This was pretty much where I got off the bus as well. I prefer hobbit sense. If even the fathers cannot seem to agree, what chance do I have to get anything right?

    Are we uncomfortable with the destruction of the Amelkites because we are sensitized to the value of human life — or desensitized to sin?

    I think we are uncomfortable with it for the same reason we are uncomfortable with any holocaust. To be comfortable with such things would be to wink at Stalin and say that Hitler was acting as god’s agent.

    I agree with a lot of what you say, but I wonder if you’re not overstating your case at points. I don’t know of any father who would, for instance, read the plagues of Egypt as pure allegory: the mass killing of the first born sons obviously has many layers of meaning, but they don’t erase the reality of the event, which was seen by the fathers as a great act of God in history, and is seen as agnostics like John as wicked and monstrous.

    St Gregory of Nyssa in the Life of Moses explicitly states that this account can only be understood in an allegorical sense as we may not attribute evil to God.

    To me, this is just plain silly. You can’t go about saying that god said that he was going to harden Pharaoh’s heart as some kind of allegory. There’s no point to that. Pharaoh not caving would be a natural reaction of a monarch; “We don’t negotiate with terrorists.” Even as allegory it’s too far fetched. It’s as if the writer is going out of his way to show what kind of person this god is then we have to come back with “what he really meant was…”. Who wants that?

  5. PJ Avatar
    PJ

    John,

    I once knew a very pious woman whose younger sister (also very pious) was killed in an auto accident at the age of 20. She was sad, yes, but her sadness was overshadowed by joy and hope: joy that her sister was at rest in the arms of God, and hope that she would one day rise in a glorified body. Her reaction shocked me. It was perhaps the first time I really “saw” Christianity. It tore away the respectable bourgeois veneer and exposed the utter foolishness of the gospel. At the time, I was scandalized, even disgusted. Now … now I am beginning to understand. It’s no wonder the Romans called Christians “haters of mankind,” with their happy embrace of martyrdom.

  6. Margaret Avatar
    Margaret

    You cannot know God – but you have to know Him to know that.
    – Fr. Thomas Hopko

    Seems an appropriate place for the reminder that quote brings. Fr. Thomas Hopko is quoted in the April 18, 2012 posting here: https://glory2godforallthings.com/2012/04/18/to-know-what-you-cannot-know/

  7. Brian Van Sickle Avatar
    Brian Van Sickle

    Something to reflect upon…

    When God’s patience with mankind delays His righting of the injustices we perceive, we often question His goodness, while when He acts to right injustice we are often quick to accuse Him of cruelty.

    Yet in the end, when those innocent souls who have borne the worst injustices and suffered virtually intolerable tortures at the hands of their fellow human beings for doing nothing more than loving God finally see the culmination of His mysterious plan, they cry out, “You are worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power… Worthy is the Lamb who was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom, and strength and honor and glory and blessing.”

    Simple man that I am, I take this to mean that…

    1.) The sufferings of this present life are not worthy to be compared with the glory that shall be revealed.

    2.) Their use of the word “worthy” to describe the Lord God is a specifically human acknowledgement of His goodness, an acknowledgment that they themselves now see that He knew what He was doing all along even if they couldn’t see it at any given time, and an acknowledgment that He alone is qualified to rule in their own estimation – not only by virtue of who He is, but also by virtue of what He has done from the beginning to the end.

  8. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    John S.

    Nice to see you back. I was getting a little worried that we hadn’t heard any objections from you on this post :-). Seriously, I’m glad you still want to be part of the conversation…

    Life IS sacred. This life is just the beginning. It gets more sacred as we move more fully into the love of God. I both want this life (for as long as I am meant to have it) and I want the fullness of life that is to come. In a spiritual sense, I look forward to death, though I have the same human fears as others.

    I know there is no rational argument that will help you feel that but I hope some day that you do. Blessings.

  9. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    JohnS,
    I believe some of those questions of yours are (especially our view of death and suffering) are answered very well on that talk (the second half – questions and answers) I put the link up of earlier (by Father John Behr)

    here is the URL again:

  10. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    In the Philikolia, one of the Fathers says that when one is in the ascetic stage of spiritual growth and the burden of the emencity of one sin is excruciatingly apparent, there is the desire to die and be with Jesus. I sometimes have such sorrow over my sins that I no longer want to live. I want to be God.
    In 1970, while laying face down on the floor, I said to Jesus,” I don’t want to be here anymore. I want to be with You.” Immediately, I was out of my body, up near the ceiling, looking down on my body face down on the floor. I became very frightened and went back into my body.

  11. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    George Engelhard,
    we must always surrender totally and trust fully in God’s plan for us, no matter what unbearable darkness inside of us is revealed to us through grace. It sounds like an impossible combination, but it is feasible, remember that:

    “Man is more himself, man is more ‘manlike’, when Joy is the fundamental thing in him, and Grief the superficial. Melancholy should be an innocent interlude, a tender and fugitive state of mind; Praise should be the permanent pulsation of the soul. Pessimism is at best an emotional half-holiday; Joy is the uproarious labor by which all things live.”

    From St. John Cassian

    Our tears are right when there is Joy lurking underneath, and our Joy is right when there are tears accompanying it

  12. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    George,

    our tears are right when they are accompanied by joy and our joy when accompanied by tears. No matter how unbearable the darkness of our soul -revealed to us through grace- the joy and trust in God and His providence must dominate.

    “Man is more himself, man is more manlike, when Joy is the fundamental thing in him, and Grief the superficial. Melancholy should be an innocent interlude, a tender and fugitive state of mind; Praise should be the permanent pulsation of the soul. Pessimism is at best an emotional half-holiday; Joy is the uproarious labor by which all things live.”

    From St. John Cassian

    I’ve been having some trouble commenting again, so excuse any double posts!

  13. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Marc:

    Until you are willing to humbly seek healing for your wounded ego, you will not be able to acknowledge that there is a greater reality beyond the material.

    I think a case could be made that much of what passes for Christianity (I’m thinking Protestants, Anglicans, etc) could conceivably be the sorts of belief systems that PT Barnum might have created. I would be an idiot to just accept what someone is telling me as being the truth. I have to ask questions and the answers have to make sense. If they don’t I have to abdicate my humanity to accept that which by nature is unacceptable.

    I am sorry that you understand me so poorly and that you use the Protestant tactic of “blame the victim” as a refutation.

    I have, in the last four years, become what sociologists term an “open individual” or having a high level of “openness to experience.” This trait is marked by a craving for novelty, variety, diversity, and contemplating new ideas. It is what makes it possible for me to converse with you whereas when I was a Protestant Christian I would not converse with you because I was a very closed individual, as most conservatives of any religion are, and thought I had the answers when in truth I never even asked the right questions.

    That being the case, I actually have no objection to the possibility of something beyond the material world. Indeed, I can conceive that “eternity” means more than just from the point of my conception forward as some tend to consider it.

    The question that arises if one accepts that there is something more is “Does it matter?”

    If you ask a Christian, the answer is yes because what we do here in this short lifetime determines the rest of your eternity.

    To others (some very dear to me), who simply see this as a place to have the kinds of experiences that cannot be had in the eternal realm, the answer is yes but they apply no eternal consequences to these experiences beyond having them as memories.

    To others still who see this reality as a sort of womb, the answer is no; you will still continue on after you die just as a fetus does after it is born.

    And to those who think that this is all there is, the question has no meaning.

    The point is, I have not yet adopted the Christian viewpoint. That does not mean that I have ruled it (or anything else) out. I simply am not convinced that the Christian viewpoint is accurate. And since it claims to be the only way, it makes sense that I should investigate.

    Another aspect if this is that I am free to ask questions without feeling like I need to defend a position.

    If, for example, one proposes “God is Good” and leaves it at that, the attributes that I might attribute to god include all the good things that I would attribute to another human being. Conversely, I would not attribute those things that are bad about people and apply them to this good deity. That’s pretty simple (and maybe simplistic).

    But when the person then hands me a Bible and says, “Read this and you’ll see that God is good” then we enter into debate about the meaning of the word “good.” If god had been all along doing those things that Jesus demonstrated, the OT would be a very different book. But rather than a selfless, merciful, benevolent god who is a friend to sinners, we find that god in the OT to be somewhat exacting, mean, and cruel with very little exception.

    We can only judge based on what we comprehend. I see a well-intentioned Mitt Romney and a well-intentioned Barak Obama, both with polar ideologies, and if I had to make a determination on the character of each, I would come to pretty similar conclusions. They’re both good guys. I happen to think that Romney’s fiscal ideas are better for the country and I’m disappointed that he lost. But at no point during the debates did I assign some moral superiority to one or the other man. This is very hard for most people to do.

    Similarly, I am trying to make heads and tails of Christianity without castigating those who hold to it or lauding those who openly oppose it. To me, this is the only rational way to behave. It troubles me that so few people in the world take the trouble to behave rationally. It is why I am drawn to this community. I have found a group of rational human beings who can have a civil discourse. To me, this is a delight and a rarity.

  14. Grant Avatar
    Grant

    Dear John Shores,

    A good starting point for you (or a point along the way of what sounds like a long journey) might be ‘What does matter -really matter- to you?’ I would be interested to hear from you.

  15. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    PJ:

    I once knew a very pious woman…

    I too have seen similar things. Most recently, my daughter’s friend had an older brother in his teens who was a drug addict and OD’d. We attended the funeral and the mother, who was strong and loved her son fiercely, spoke openly about their struggle and all that she had done with her son to get him straight. He had made an effort but kept falling back. She spoke directly to his druggie friends who were there and there was such love in her. She had accepted this boy and his friends and did not berate them in the least. She was convinced that her son was with god. All of this contrary to the protestant belief system.

    Then the preacher got up and talked about the “elephant in the room” and started openly prodding wounded people with an “are you saved” message. Peddling the god-product. I was nauseated and outraged. I had to leave. I would have loved to have had an opportunity to punch that preacher in the face.

    Mary:

    Life IS sacred…

    I agree. This is why I have such a hard time with things like killing David’s baby as punishment for David’s sin. What’d the kid ever do?! And if Jesus would not even accuse the adulteress, let alone going to the trouble of forgiving her, where is that found in the heart of the OT god? I find it baffling.

    Dinoship:

    I’ll watch the 1.5 hour presentation later and comment as necessary.

  16. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    JohnShores,
    I know not how to convince someone of God’s goodness through the use of words. His goodness, no matter what unbearable suffering has, is or will be ‘thrown’ at us (I use ‘thrown at us’ as this is how we mostly perceive it).
    What I do know, with a greater conviction than anything else in life (not simply believe but know), is that at the bottom of the deepest hell, a hell beyond all human conception, the Lord Jesus Christ extended His hand and took the lost sheep from the belly of that unutterable darkness. In that light of personal experience all arguments to the contrary whether from life or from someone’s understanding of scripture pale into complete insignificance.
    This might not be the paradisial encounter of the Lord you, and everyone, might yearn for, quite the contrary; however, it can convince you like nothing else in the world… (I would say from personal experience that this hell is even worth it, and there is no other way for the hardened prodigal son to learn of the love he was blind to, until he hits rock bottom like that)

  17. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    John,
    concerning the OT difficulties you keep having, please ensure you keep an ‘open mind’ concerning what Paul says in 2 Corinthians, which I clearly think applies not just to Jews, but also to most Protestants, as well as agnostics and atheists of the Protestant and Catholic influenced world (most who have not been taught the Orthodox understanding of OT),.:

    for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom…

    When St Ignatius was asked to prove the Lord of the Gospel he claimed was assuredly hidden in the ancient Scriptures (this was during the end of the 1st century), his answer was that “for me the sacrosanct records are Jesus Christ’s cross and death and resurrection, and the faith that comes through Him”. (to the Philadelphians)

  18. PJ Avatar
    PJ

    John,

    “I too have seen similar things. Most recently, my daughter’s friend had an older brother in his teens who was a drug addict and OD’d. We attended the funeral and the mother, who was strong and loved her son fiercely, spoke openly about their struggle and all that she had done with her son to get him straight. He had made an effort but kept falling back. She spoke directly to his druggie friends who were there and there was such love in her. She had accepted this boy and his friends and did not berate them in the least. She was convinced that her son was with god. All of this contrary to the protestant belief system.”

    As a former user, this speaks directly to my heart. Several of my friends died — in more ways than one. I try to remember them always in my prayers, especially in this month, the month of all souls.

    I used to sell drugs to the son of the woman who is today my godmother. She is relentlessly forgiving. After I contributed significantly and materially to the near destruction of her son, she took me in with open arms, not even asking for an apology (though I’ve since offered many…).

    If Christ walked the earth today, He would surely eat with crack whores, junkies, hedge fund fraudsters, pimps, drug dealers, pornographers, gun smugglers, and AIDS-ridden gay men. The lowest of the low; the down and out; the dregs; the hard cases. That this crowd is largely unevangelized — or, if evangelized, crudely so, with little effort at sympathy — is frankly scandalous. (Not that there aren’t some humble apostles tilling these rocky fields with charity and mercy…)

  19. PJ Avatar
    PJ

    John,

    On an emotional level, I share your indignation, but when I think deeply about the matter, I fail to see why the death of David’s son is any more outrageous than the death of my godmother’s infant child. We have no life in us: it is given, and it is taken away, and God’s purpose and providence is beyond our wildest imagination. Through death and life, through scarcity and abundance, through war and peace, through earthquake and gentle rain, God works His plan for creation, the ultimate goal of which is the most wonderful thing possible: God “all in all.” Suffering is always with us — Christianity begins with the recognition that the Creator has partaken of the bitter cup with His creatures. Mystery of mysteries!

  20. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    Death is not he end but the beginning. We had the funeral for a 50 year old man in our church who has two young children. He past on from cancer. But the cancer did not win the man did not loose the battle. He won. The cancer is dead and he is alive. He fought the good fight and is now with the Lord, more alive than he had ever been on earth. His funeral was a celebration of his victory with Christ over death and eventual resurrection.

  21. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    At Sts. Cosmos and Damien House in Orlando, FL, two Orthodox monks tend to the needs of men terminally ill with AIDS.

  22. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    John S

    I have shared your questions/doubts about the OT portrayal of God. I say “portrayal” because, as indicated in some of my comments above, I believe that the way the OT writers interpreted events led to attributing certain violent or punishing events to God’s personal acts. (Without the veil removed – good quote, Dinoship – they were understanding their salvation in a very primitive fashion.)

    Many of us still fall into the habit of doing this, e.g. thanking or blaming God for specific events that we like or don’t like. God’s movement in our lives is so much more than that.

    Again, I am not saying that that means that the OT is not true but rather that, read alone, it is not a good way to understand salvation history – and therefore to learn about God. Christ’s resurrection changes how we understand everything.

  23. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    Well said PJ,
    our over-reliance on our own thinking (something to strive to become freed from) can make us doubt God to the extent that:

    You can be in the cave with the hungry lions respecting you like Daniel, and yet still carry on with thoughts of: how can it be Him protecting me here? He allowed the massacre of so and so etc etc…

  24. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Hi Mary – I reeeeally struggle with the idea that “God killed them (or commanded them to be killed) so it’s OK.” If we look at exactly how many people Christ killed or commanded to be killed or how many he condemned (I don’t think he even condemned the pharisees) and we use that as a lens to look at the OT, the actions of god don’t really improve. In fact, they reveal an entirely different personality.

    Dinoship: We have to rely on our thinking to some degree, wouldn’t you agree? If we are to rely on the Fathers etc. then we must also take into consideration mystics of other religions who have things to say. To do one without the other is to fall short.

    Marc: You stated, “If we can eliminate those concepts and teachings that are clearly not true, we will move closer to what is true.” I do not think you can know what is true until you don’t have an agenda or position to defend.

    If you want the truth to stand clear before you, never be for or against.

    The struggle between “for” and “against” is the mind’s worst disease.

    -Sent ts’an, c. 700 AD

    This I have tried to do, not holding an agenda but simply trying to see things clearly without judgment or presupposing a position.

  25. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    John,
    I clearly see your point “I do not think you can know what is true until you don’t have an agenda or position to defend” and “thinking”
    But, as John Behr puts it, at some point you need a 1+1=2 axiom to stand on.

    To understand Scripture, it is crucially important that one has the correct hypothesis. While for some branches of knowledge finding the right hypothesis may be a tentative and pragmatic thing, we cannot philosophically demand demonstrations of first principles.

    This means, as Clement of Alexandria points out, that the search for the first principles of demonstration ends up with undemonstrable faith. For Christian faith, according to Clement, it is the Scriptures, and in particular, the Lord who speaks in them, that is the first principle of all knowledge. It is the voice of the Lord, speaking throughout Scripture, that is the first principle, the (nonhypothetical) hypothesis of all demonstrations from Scripture, by which Christians are led to the knowledge of the truth. For us that is Jesus crucified and exalted.

    It is these first principles that are the basis for subsequent demonstrations and function as a canon to evaluate other claims to truth. Knowledge is impossible without such a canon, for enquiry would simply degenerate into endless regression and it is for this reason that Irenaeus, Tertullian and Clement appealed to a canon to counter the constantly mutating Gnostic claims.

  26. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    Because God has acted in Christ in a definitive, and unexpected, manner, making everything new, Scripture itself must be read anew – in the light of what God has wrought in Christ.
    As Father John Behr often reminds his students, “it is important to note that it is Christ who is being explained through the medium of Scripture, not Scripture itself that is being exegeted; the object is not to understand the “original meaning” of an ancient text, as in modern historical-critical scholarship, but to understand Christ, who, by being explained “according to the Scriptures,” becomes the sole subject of Scripture throughout.”
    That the veil was removed by Christ means that it is only in Christ that the glory and love of God is revealed and that we can discern the true meaning of Scripture, and that these two aspects are inseparable.
    Otherwise (without the axiomatic canon of the crucified and exalted Christ to stand on), the OT is just a ‘jewish book’ read like the Koran. Your interpretation of it can indeed vary from black all the way to white…

  27. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    We must decide whether to pick up our own crosses and follow in the way to truth and life, or to curse God and embrace the second death.

    This made me laugh (sorry). Those are not the only two choices left to us. Supposing so has the tendency to cause people to think of those “outside the faith” as being the kinds of people who are self-absorbed and who “curse god” just by virtue of being outside the faith, much as some think that atheists are amoral by default.

    This is simply not so.

    I would also add that one of the main objections of agnostics and atheists are based on the fact that the god being presented to them appears to be morally compromised. How can that be if we have no concept of what is morally correct? We know what the characteristics of a “good” personality are and we embrace those ideas. Morality is extremely important to the non-religious who are willing to have a discussion about god. Otherwise, no discussion would be possible.

    I object to any notion that would suggest that morality is in any way connected to “godliness” or that one’s morals improve with exposure to god or religion (see Gregory Peck’s “The Keys of the Kingdom” as a premium example of what I mean). I also object to the notion that rejecting Christianity is tantamount to cursing god. You must admit that most who reject Christianity do so because of Christians.

    “I don’t reject Christ. I love Christ. It’s just that so many of you Christians are so unlike Christ.”

    From: The Knights Templar & the Protestant Reformation in a dialogue between missionary Stanley Jones and Mahatma Gandhi.

    If god is good, I am certain that he would not condemn one who wants him to be better than he seems to be. (see the end of The Last Battle in which Aslan welcomes the servant of Tash who served Tash with his whole heart.)

  28. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Sorry: …one of the main objections of agnostics and atheists is

  29. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    John,
    I clearly see your point “I do not think you can know what is true until you don’t have an agenda or position to defend” and “thinking”
    But, as John Behr puts it, at some point you need a 1+1=2 axiom to stand on.

    To understand Scripture, it is crucially important that one has the correct hypothesis. While for some branches of knowledge finding the right hypothesis may be a tentative and pragmatic thing, we cannot philosophically demand demonstrations of first principles.

    This means, as Clement of Alexandria points out, that the search for the first principles of demonstration ends up with undemonstrable faith. For Christian faith, according to Clement, it is the Scriptures, and in particular, the Lord who speaks in them, that is the first principle of all knowledge. It is the voice of the Lord, speaking throughout Scripture, that is the first principle, the (nonhypothetical) hypothesis of all demonstrations from Scripture, by which Christians are led to the knowledge of the truth. For us that is Jesus crucified and exalted.

    It is these first principles that are the basis for subsequent demonstrations and function as a canon to evaluate other claims to truth. Knowledge is impossible without such a canon, for enquiry would simply degenerate into endless regression and it is for this reason that Irenaeus, Tertullian and Clement appealed to a canon to counter the constantly mutating Gnostic claims.

  30. Grant Avatar
    Grant

    Dinoship,

    Brilliant comment, very insightful, totally supports Father Stephen’s point. Scripture is about Christ, Christ is new…

    Thank you.

  31. PJ Avatar
    PJ

    John,

    “I would also add that one of the main objections of agnostics and atheists are based on the fact that the god being presented to them appears to be morally compromised. ”

    What is their basis for judgment, beyond a subjective and arbitrary sense of right and wrong?

    “This I have tried to do, not holding an agenda but simply trying to see things clearly without judgment or presupposing a position.”

    This presupposes, rather groundlessly, that “standing outside” is possible — and not just possible, but good. Isn’t this an act of faith in and of itself?

    I don’t mean to get too sophistical here, but the notion that any viewpoint is free of presuppositions seems pretty unreasonable to me.

  32. fatherstephen Avatar
    fatherstephen

    PJ,
    John Shores makes an entirely valid point, substantiated in the fathers. The God of the OT, when read literally would have to be seen as “morally” compromised. This point is clear even in the early Church. The heretic Marcion rejected the OT on that basis. His trouble was a literalism, but not the moral judgment. Christian and Jewish critics had long noted how utterly immoral the gods of Rome and Greece were – chasing women – raping – murder – lying – etc.

    It’s pointless, to my mind, to construct a theology (whether Calvinist or Dispensationalist) that seeks to justify genocide, etc. Such stories in the OT are used by some preachers, such as Chrysostom, for their moral content (“don’t do this or you’ll be punished”). But the East never develops an account of God that sought to incorporate these stories as revelatory of His character. It’s certainly the case that in the apophatic writings of the fathers – which are by far those to be most closely read when thinking on the nature and character of God – these stories are “radically reinterpreted” as I’ve said before – usually in an allegorical form that removes the “immoral” points within a literal reading.

    If the gospel you presented to me was confined to the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, then I wouldn’t want to worship that God either. For some, that story is just as revelatory on its literal level as the entire Gospel account of Christ, and we are forced to create a reconciliation in which the S&D God is equal to and the same as the Father of Jesus Christ. If that is the case – everything you say about the Father – revealed through Christ – will be trumped by the S&D story.

    Many of the fathers get this – and treat the story’s doctrinal content as something other than its literal content. That a sermon might use its literal content for a “moral” point is not the same thing as a father holding the literal content as a “Gospel” point.

  33. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Hi PJ – Good questions! I deny, however, that “right and wrong” are “arbitrary.” Much of it is innate. Some is simply that which makes civilization possible. There are, however, absolutes. In all of human history you will not find a thriving community in which the most successful rapist is prized for his ability to rape (for example). There are many sources to indicate that morality is not arbitrary and (as I’ve mentioned before) the foundations of morality can be found in other species.

    “Standing outside” of Christianity is certainly possible. You stand outside Norse or Aztec mythology and are able to examine what they have to offer and then make an assessment based on those things.

    You would not have to submit yourself to the doctrines wherein ripping out the hearts of your enemies as a sacrifice to the gods would help you to understand the depth of that teaching. (This sort of surrender is what Christians say must be embraced before full comprehension is possible but, as you see, that is not really a valid argument. Anyone involved in any cult would claim the same things. You have to be outside in order to see through this.)

    One would consider you an “atheist” with regards to those gods. This would not, however, make you a horrible person or incapable of being discerning.

  34. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    The heretic Marcion…

    LOL. I’m going to get business cards that say:

    John Shores
    Heretic

    Many of the fathers get this – and treat the story’s doctrinal content as something other than its literal content.

    This begs the question of why to include the OT as a sacred writing at all. More importantly, to my mind, is the question, “Why should we take anything in the Gospels as literal?” If we start down that path, we become Arians.

  35. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    JohnShores,
    I think you have a rare charisma – exponentially increasing comment count!
    🙂

    Remember was said earlier regarding the “veil” on the OT.

  36. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    dinoship – Only online. In person, I’m boring as all get out.

  37. PJ Avatar
    PJ

    Father,

    I sympathize with John’s misgivings. I’ve said as much. I’ve wondered for years about certain Old Testament accounts, and I’ll surely keep wondering for years to come.

    However, I cannot in good conscience issue blanket statements constricting God’s providence to certain means and methods that I, as a postmodern westerner, find acceptable. God is infinitely great and vast, and His ways are infinitely complex and mysterious.

    Human beings have no life in them. It is given and taken in accord with God’s wonderful and beautiful plan, which I can only begin to fathom. The Lord takes millions of souls every day: I don’t feel compelled to deny this fact to preserve His goodness. Why then must I deny that He took the life of David’s son, or the firstborn sons of the Egyptians? What is the difference between the death which happens at His commission (Sodom) and the death which happens by His omission (the tsunami)? Does God not take all of our lives, one way or another?

    Note that I am not trying to propagate any hard and fast doctrine. I am musing, hopefully prayerfully. I am trying to take account of ALL the data — all the fathers, all the Scripture.

    You’re a man of principle and honesty. I hope you appreciate my frankness. I offer these thoughts with all possible humility.

  38. PJ Avatar
    PJ

    John,

    I don’t think you’re a horrible person, heh. I’m just doubting the possibility of a paradigm without presuppositions. We aren’t beholden to every presupposition — but neither are we free of every presupposition. Do you see what I mean?

  39. PJ Avatar
    PJ

    Father,

    I might also add that you speak of the “eastern” understanding of God — but is it so simple? I follow the writings of three Orthodox priests: Fr. Hopko, Fr. Reardon, and yourself. There is much agreement, but also significant disagreement — especially on the matter of God’s wrath and justice. Fr. Reardon in particular has no problem affirming, say, the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira at the “hands” of the Holy Spirit. You’ll forgive an outsider for struggling to wrap his head around it all …

    Nonetheless, I’ll keep reading and meditating on your words. They have been enormously helpful thus far! God bless you!

  40. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    PJ – I see what you mean. What I presume, though, is that people are scoundrels and you have to be careful before trusting them.

    I saw an interesting lecture last week in which the speaker outlined the problem of lying. In it, he pointed out that until about 5,000 years ago, with the advent of writing, what people said really carried no long-term consequences. Then we came to an age where a record of what was said was possible. In the last 300 years, more people have become educated. In the current day and age there is a record of almost everything we say or do.

    The point was that people are now far more conscious of whether they are telling the truth or not. In fact, it has been demonstrated that people lie less vie email than they do face-to-face, for this very reason.

    The point is, and perhaps this relates to the whole “look at it as allegory” thing, no one tells the truth all the time. When it comes to big things (e.g. Capitalism vs. Socialism), people are more apt to be untruthful, just to see their side win.

    Imagine then, how important it is to get to the truth when matters are so weighty.

    Why god would rely on people to be his ambassadors rather than communicating with us individually makes me wonder.

  41. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    PJ,
    whether the death “happens at His commission (Sodom)” or “by His omission (the tsunami)” as you say, we mustn’t forget (which I mentioned earlier) how the Fathers saw death, (from a spiritual and eschatological point of view), namely, as a beneficence…
    If the first and foremost desire of a person is the inextricable duo of Love/Life, the very core of being (not so much in the obvious love spawns life and vice-versa way, but in the Trinitarian relational/personal divine mode of Being manner).
    The second yearning of man is that of final immutability (within such a ‘paradise of limitless’ love just mentioned of course).
    The answer to the first yearning comes through the inseparable duo of Cross-Resurrection; while the answer to the second comes through Death. So, that’s why death is seen in such a way by the fathers, it is an extension/interpretation of the well known saying: “in order that evil might not become eternal” …
    Father John Behr’s talk (a few comments back) answers a profound question on the very matter towards its end.

  42. PJ Avatar
    PJ

    Dino,

    I agree that fear of death and pessimism about the afterlife contributes significantly to modern man’s disease with stories wherein God takes life. Clement of Alexandria said that when God takes a life, he is either bringing a person unto salvation, or saving a person from heaping further damnation upon his own head. That is, the merciful are rewarded, and the wicked are prevented from “digging themselves deeper,” so to speak. This makes sense to me. But, again, I hesitate to state anything too categorically, given my own ignorance.

  43. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    John Shores –

    You seem to be very well read of CS Lewis. What was your take on “Out of the Silent Planet”?

    I ask because is seems to me that a world in which many or most inhabitants are “bent” are likely to write “bent” stories, even when trying to write about God.

    I think some of the OT stories are told in “bent” ways because of the writers’ poor understanding of the ways of God. This ties in some with Father Stephen’s more recent post on “The True Agent of Change”. The writers thought in cause-effect ways (These people died and therefore God struck them down for this reason.)

    However, I do agree with you that it can seem a slippery slope once one decides not to read the OT in literal fashion. Can I/we trust ourselves to read it otherwise? (Probably not, quite honestly. My sense is that the Orthodox say that this is where the writings of the Fathers and Tradition help to teach us.)

    I do not disagree with that but I probably also rely a lot on my personal search for and experience of God. Once in relationship, it becomes hard to deny the Other’s existence or think Him cruel – His love overwhelms my most undeserving self.

  44. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    John,
    God does communicate with us individually, but we must be quiet and listen. It is a still small voice. If we are in Christ and Christ is in us, is the life in us, the light in us, the way in us then all of this thinking, arguing, discerning, discussing is superfluous, unnecessary. If we live and move and have our being in Him, then nothing else is needed.

  45. Grant Avatar
    Grant

    Well put.

  46. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    “If we are in Christ and Christ is in us, is the life in us, the light in us, the way in us then all of this thinking, arguing, discerning, discussing is superfluous, unnecessary. If we live and move and have our being in Him, then nothing else is needed.”
    Well put George

  47. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Hi Mary – I loved Out of the Silent Planet and Perelandra precisely because they demonstrate what life could be like without a Fall story. So many Christians say that things are the way they are because they had to be that way. There had to be “free will” and all that. But both of those books show love where “free will” does not result in evil. I would rather live in either of those two worlds than this one, given a choice.

  48. Laura Avatar
    Laura

    Father, I appreciate this discussion on the old testament as well, and wonder if there is a commentary that might be good to read as converts like myself begin to read Christ is scripture? Some passages are easy, because the church makes it so (like the Burning Bush), but others are more difficult. I imagine reading the fathers would be a good place to start, but I was wondering if you have any suggestions for something a little easier to pick up?

  49. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    Hi John S.

    I’m glad you liked Out of the Silent Planet and Perelandra too. I want to live there too!

    An interesting question emerging from these books is whether, given the choice between good and evil, we could have chosen good (i.e. no “fall story”). Obviously, if there really was a choice, we could have. So the question is – why didn’t we?

    I don’t have an answer to this. It makes sense to me that the first humans (whether conceived of as literal Adam and Eve or archetypal), making the wrong choice, allowed evil into the world. And since evil begets more evil, it is hard (on our own) to get it out of our world again. Hence, all people born into the world after these first humans come into a “bent” world where we witness evil and are hurt by it, thus skewing our ability to consistently make choices for the good.

    I believe that Christ has overcome evil. I know that sounds a bit nuts, given how much evil there still is in the world. For us to still have a choice though – and not be totally predetermined by our ancestors’ mistake – we need to choose Him. Even this choosing is not a simple thing though – as you well know.

    I think many of here have chosen Him. And sometimes we mess up (or understand Him wrongly) and need to reaffirm that choice – again and again. In my own life, I believe that I am being transformed into someone who chooses good more than I used to – though I still have quite a ways to go. But because I believe I am completely loved in my fallen state, I have the hope and courage to keep trying.

    I hope this makes a bit of sense. I may sound like I am confident of what I believe – but that is not always true. Fortunately, it doesn’t all ride on me… I am not my own savior and never will be.

  50. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    Jesus overcame evil by allowing evil befall Him without falling into evil Himself.

  51. drewster2000 Avatar
    drewster2000

    Like Laura and Marc and others, I appreciate this ongoing discussion of the OT and the God within its pages. I instinctively understand that the problems with it are in me and my perspective. As the Green Lady would say, this discussion is making me older.

    Information is ever at our fingertips. Where the world would say reply us who are looking for answers, “google it – duh!”, some Orthodox might give the same reply but substitute google with the fathers.

    That answer is not sufficient. The problem is that we are drowning in data. The problem is not that there are no resources available but there are few guides for the mountain of resources. Most of us would drown in even one chapter of the fathers.

    I want to understand how to look at the OT. As Fr. Stephen says, there is no way to “reconcile” it with the NT per se, but the OT is still part of the Bible. I won’t hang my salvation on understanding it but it’s still very important to me.

    I will continue to glean what I can from this blog on the subject, but if there is a guide or a book on it (like Discerning the Mystery by Andrew Louth), I’m definitely interested. I believe that it is a sticking point for those of us coming out of a Protestant background. As such, in the name of removing roadblocks from their path of salvation (most of our friends, relations & coworkers), this is important to me.

  52. fatherstephen Avatar
    fatherstephen

    Laura,
    Fr. Lawrence Farley’s The Christian Old Testament is a useful place to begin. We’re using it in my parish.

  53. Laura Avatar
    Laura

    Thank you, Father!

  54. drewster2000 Avatar
    drewster2000

    Yes, thank you Fr. Stephen.

  55. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    The Christian Old Testament : “…a source of exciting stories to tell the kids…”

    With so much violence, sexual promiscuity, and R rated content, it seems to me that the OT really isn’t fit for anyone under the age of 17.

    I find it amusing when the same people who teach their kids from the OT also don’t allow their kids to watch movies like Braveheart.

  56. fatherstephen Avatar
    fatherstephen

    We teach OT stories – love them in Sunday School. They are taught in a very iconic manner – kids get them. We do not use them to draw moral points or scare kids. The NT is the point of the Old.

    Most of what I hear as your objections to OT stories are just objections to the sad hermeneutic of Protestant theology (which has often enough been “read into” American foreign and national policy – as well as large swaths of our culture).

    But, you’re right, much of the OT is R rated. There is a Jewish tradition (in some places) that men are not allowed to study Ezekiel until they’re over 40.

  57. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    dinoship: (re: Father John Behr)

    I have heard this sort of message many times over. When thinking about these things, it is not the concepts which he puts forth that strike me the most. Like a good detective, to me seeing what’s not at the scene is as telling as what is there.

    It is not the words of St. Ignatius that strike me but rather how singular he is. Of the billions of Christians throughout time, why is it that the Orthodox must constantly reach back and talk about singular individuals (the saints)?

    It is as if the saints are the All-Star team and everyone else is sort of relegated to being poor or mediocre ball players who gather at the local park, never expecting to achieve greatness.

    This is one of the reasons that I give credence to the possibility of “the fall” being nothing more than a result of our biology; if there is a Holy Spirit indwelling Christians, one would expect the idea of a “new creation” to hold true and there would be a world full of people like Ignatius.

    If this spirit could so inspire the very few who have been dubbed as “Saints” then what’s the deal with everyone else? Why are there not more “Saints” to quote? Why are there so few modern-day saints to highlight (one whose life and words will be highlighted by future generations of Christians)? Why is Mother Theresa so outstanding? If all Christians were like her, we would never know her name.

    This became a very personal question; why could this person not make me like Christ as well when this is what I wanted more than anything? The silence that I received in reply to that question defined much of who I am today.

    I think that the “Saints” are exceptional people who would have been exceptional regardless of what philosophy or religion they adopted. I have a very difficult time accepting that god had anything to do with that.

  58. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    John,
    well… part of the reason there are not as many saints as we would hope for is our singular reliance on rational reasoning and logicality instead of our singular reliance on faith…
    You see how difficult you have been finding the dive into the deep waters of faith yourself…
    I must say: rational reasoning and logicality actually (pardoxically) leads to irrationality, an unreasonable and illogical Hell, we (“logically”) perceive God ( a god of love) as the exact opposite. Exactly as in the icon of the river of fire on the one side and the light of heaven on the other, (both being different interpretations of the same energy emanating from Christ!
    With faith however, with the heart instead of the mind, we are lead to love and to God. Only that way my friend…

  59. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Almighty God vs. Reason

    One would have expected a completely different outcome.

  60. fatherstephen Avatar
    fatherstephen

    John Shores,
    Yes. God could smash us to smithereens and dance trippingly on our bashed out rational selves. 🙂 But, healing the soul which is “doing the best it can” with its rationality and other wounded modes of existence, is more important to Him than winning the battle. Apparently He is committed to losing these battles as He wins the war.

  61. PJ Avatar
    PJ

    John,

    I have met many saints in my time as a Christian. Many men and women who live quietly, humbly, charitably, dedicating much time to prayer and good works, and bringing the light of Christ into all realms of their lives. I have also met many who, despite their faults — some of these faults are serious — struggle strenuously for sanctity, engaging the passions and the devil on a daily basis. Go to Mass. Wait til the church empties out after the service. Then spot one of the old folks who remains, meditating in silence, lingering for twenty, thirty minutes, perhaps lighting a candle or tilling prayer beads. Talk to him or her. There is a good chance that it will be an enlightening experience: perhaps you will find that saints, while not abundant, are not so few and far between. (This is not to say that all saints are pious old church ladies, don’t get me wrong, but I have found not a few wondrous souls in such a fashion.)

  62. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    John,
    You are very good at finding the inconsistencies, in the Christian message. Have you looked for the consistencies? Have you found anything in this world that does not have inconsistencies? If you have, you haven’t looked long enough at it or deep enough into it. We are all hypocrites, which is Greek for actor, even you. None of us is real all the time.
    If you want to know if God is real ask Him if He is. Say” God, if you’re real, show me.”

  63. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    The reason that reason and Almighty God are in opposition is because reason has become the god of this age suplanting Him.
    Not “I think therefore I am” but “I love therefore I am.”

  64. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    I am becoming a saint. I am not there yet. But if you could see the progress that God has made in me especially over the last 20 years since I became an Orthodox Christian, you might possible be amazed. Most people say that I am a good person.They have said that to me. But 30 and 40 years ago I was an evil person and I enjoyed being evil. But God had other plans for me.

  65. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Hi George – Thanks for your comments. Oddly, the same can be said in the other direction.

    My father was a protestant pastor who later was ordained an Orthodox Priest. When I was a Christian, he and I used to argue like Patty off the boat about just about everything. After I left the faith, all of that stopped.

    About a year ago, I was visiting my parents and we had a good time together. Dad said, sort of off-handedly, that he had never seen me happy before and that it was obvious that I had become content.

    In many ways, I have made “progress” since leaving the faith. One of the manifestations of this progress is that I have accepted that (as you say) everything in this world has inconsistencies. “People are not essentially good or bad, they are essentially people.” It’s a very freeing philosophy.

    That Christianity claims to have god working on its side and within its people is remarkable to me simply because the Church has exactly the same inconsistencies (read: hypocrisy) as any other group of people. The fact that that group is no different from any other tells me that, well, it’s no different from any other group. One would expect something different when god is added into the mix.

    I’d like to ask a question about forgiveness, if I may. In many books and movies that I have digested in the past four years, the theme that one ought to forgive someone who has offended them had surfaced repeatedly. But the reason behind it is not so that the offender will benefit but so that the offended can heal.

    Is it at all remotely possible that the forgiveness of god is not simply for the good of man but that somehow god is behaving in such a manner for his own mental health?

    Another theme that I have seen frequently is the casting the first stone impetus of forgiveness. You don’t judge others because you yourself are guilty of something. Is it possible that god feels guilty for making us as defective beings?

    I guess that what I’m trying to figure out is, what does god get out of forgiving us? If he needs nothing, then this whole experiment is pointless and makes god out to be a nihilist. So, what does he personally gain from any of it. There has to be a motive that benefits him in some way.

    I’d also like to ask if it would be wrong for a person to forgive god.

  66. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    I must repeat John, all this “if this then that, and what about if that, or is it possible that this then, or why does he not do that then etc etc etc.” will lead nowhere. It is simply a bottomless pit of arguments demanding an answer against faith. You “chop one head off” and two pop up to replace it. (as in Hercules and the Lernean Hydra) I could sit there until the end of time answering them but it will never convince a person who does not want to recognise that he must be liberated from the tyranny of his mind and embrace the freedom of his heart…It is the “rationality” used by the enemy of our souls to be perfectly honest, and it can either seem ‘impossible’ to defeat him (when we essentially fight ourselves from his side of this reasoning) or it is actually very easy to defeat him if we ignore him through faith. That is why “the children inherit the Kingdom”.

  67. Grant Avatar
    Grant

    Well put, dinoship. I’d like to get to know you better. You keep getting it spot on for me (if not for others). Thank you.

  68. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    The offender does benifit from being forgiven. The greatest example is Christ’s forgivenes of those who crucufied Him. they were changed. many if not all became Christians.
    Forgivinng the offender benifits the world because there is a little less hate and anger in the world.
    By definition, God needs nothing. He forgives because forgiveness is His nature. He can do nothing else.
    Forgiving others because you are guilty, too is only the beginning. As one becomes more and more the likeness of God, forgiveness becomes the natural thing to do.
    Again, God doesn’t get anything out of forgiving us. He doesn’t need anything. He is simply being what he is.
    If I gave you something, needing nothing in return, would I be nihilistic?
    Hve you forgiven God? Do so.

  69. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    The church was from the beginning and still is a light of goodness in the world in spite of the hypocracy within it. one ofthe things that made Christians stand out in the early centurieswas their love for one another and those not of the faith. Humanitarian efforts, even those of secular governments, had/has itsroots in the Church. Before Christ and the Church, it did not exist in the world.

  70. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    A Difference Between Philosophy and Theology
    November 23, 2012 By Fr. John A. Peck
    [Translate]
    ——————————————————————————–

    By St. Nikolai Velimirovich
    One of the differences between the eloquent philosophy of the Hellenes and the Christian Faith is that the entire Hellenistic philosophy can clearly be expressed with words and comprehended by reading, while the Christian Faith cannot be clearly expressed by words and even less comprehended by reading alone. When you are expounding the Christian Faith, for its understanding and acceptance, both reading and the practice of what is read are necessary.

    When Patriarch Photios read the words of Mark the Ascetic concerning the spiritual life, he noticed a certain unclarity with the author for which he wisely said:

    “That [unclarity] does not proceed from the obscurity of expression but from that truth which is expressed there; it is better understood by means of practice and that cannot be explained by words only.”

    And, the great Patriarch adds,

    “It is not only the case with these homilies nor only with these men, but rather with all of those who attempted to expound the ascetical rules, passions and instructions, which are better understood from practice alone.”

  71. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    Hi John S.

    I agree with dinoship about the bottomless pit of questions. All of your questions about what God “feels” or “gets out of” this whole thing makes God sound like no more than another human being.

    I admit I do talk to people about forgiving God – because it is often hard for people to acknowledge anger toward God. This anger, if clung to, can be psychologically painful and damaging. God doesn’t need our forgiveness but we need to be free of our anger.

    Not that it’s any of my business, but I hope you allow yourself some quiet time for meditation. Something like a mindfulness meditation can be peaceful if you are not comfortable with a theistic theme. I too am a person full of questions but sometimes inner stillness gives “answers” at a deeper level. Blessings.

  72. Andrew Avatar

    JS, if I may:

    If you are struggling with references to God commanding “people to be killed” and the like, in the OT; then you are doubtlessly equally at odds with much the same happening in the NT. At a stretch you might find some of the NT even more disturbing, possibly:

    I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds. (Rev. 2:23)

    Fret not. The truth is that death pervades the NT in as much the same way that it pervaded the OT. There is not a line dividing the two, as such. That line is purely an invention of modernity. It is Christ’s Pascha that divides the old world from the new.

    Note: It follows, that the NT is as hard to read properly as the OT. That said. Your father is a wise man. Despite knowing you only from your online scribblings (my italics); clearly, his son’s never been happier. 🙂

  73. George Engelhard Avatar
    George Engelhard

    John,
    I will say I was never happier than when I was a hedonistic atheist, bedding women right and left, doing what I pleased when I wanted to. But now I am more complete than I have ever been. The journey to completeness is often sorrowful because I have to face up to and aknowledge my incompleteness and my sin. Not fun but worth it. I feel great joy but not happiness. JOY TRUMPS HAPPINESS. Take it from someone who knows.

  74. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    D and others – I agree. I really shouldn’t pose these questions until the foundational question upon which the whole thing rests is resolved. Sorry for sidelining.

    George – I have gone nowhere near hedonism. Indeed, most non-religious people I know live under the same scruples as you or I would. I think that the contentment my father saw was a product of my realizing that it was OK for me to look at things rationally (I am a rational being after all – which is what Protestantism so crazy-making for me) and be the final authority on what I should or should not believe. It all came down to this; I am the way that I am and if god is around and wants me to believe in him then he knows how to reach me in ways that I understand. If he doesn’t, he isn’t worth following anyhow.

    I confess that I am somewhat obsessed with this subject much as a man I once knew who was a raised in communist Russia is obsessed with communism and politics. Indoctrination has a lifetime price tag. I often envy those who were raised in agnostic homes.

  75. Dana Ames Avatar
    Dana Ames

    John S,

    I read Fr Stephen every day, but rarely comment. I do, though, want to let you know that I appreciate the honesty and openness you have revealed since you arrived here. I want to reiterate: do stick around! At a place like this, we can experience being here for each other’s salvation (Orthodox definition), and your presence is truly a blessing.

    Earlier, someone -perhaps Fr Stephen- mentioned that you’re now free from a tyrannical god. FWIW, I think the reason you’re so happy is that you’re out from under the thumb of that not-god. Can’t blame you one bit.

    I know how tempting it is to want to try to convince someone to “believe in god” the way I do. Sometimes it’s from good motives, insofar as I can determine them 🙂 I came to Orthodoxy in part because I was tired of the whole attitude and pressure of having to be right, to believe correctly, to convince others; like an addict, the Protestantism through which I sojourned hooked into my own codependencies around that stuff. I really had a sort of theological and existential crisis; I just had to disengage from that scene entirely, and it took a few years. I never wanted to be anything else but a Christian, but I certainly wandered in a wilderness for a time.

    I think a person who is being as honest as possible in any given moment is being as human as possible and is about as open to The Divine as possible. I think that following the crucified and risen Jesus of Nazareth in the setting of the sacramental life of Orthodoxy gives a person the best help there is to be able to come to that honesty, humanity and encounter with The Divine. That’s why I’m Orthodox – at least from “my side”… It’s not that there’s no help elsewhere; of course there is – cf Fr Stephen’s post on the hidden hand of God, and his remarks about his father-in-law, and definitely our own experiences of goodness with and through other people, whatever they believe about Ultimate Reality. Orthodoxy at its highest and deepest allows for God to be that “big” -and that good- because it portrays and teaches a God who is *that humble*.

    I think what we are really looking for is Life as we intuit and hope it should be. We all have notions, whether we can articulate them or not, whether they are “logical” or not, about the way life, the universe and everything is “supposed to work.” For a reasonably aware person, I think this involves some struggle. I think part of what Fr Stephen is about is engaging in that here. Thanks for helping us.

    Dana

  76. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Hi Dana. Thanks for your comments. And you’re welcome. I have never before come across a community of Christians that is willing to discuss such things without being defensive. Indeed, I have not had a relationship with my “Christian” sister for four years because she is incapable of reasonable dialogue. It really used to bother me at first but I actually don’t miss the arguing or self-righteousness at all. I wish her well but we don’t talk.

    …like an addict, the Protestantism through which I sojourned hooked into my own codependencies around that stuff

    Yeah. My four-month cold-turkey detox was pretty painful. I didn’t confide in anyone and I’m afraid I put my wife and kids through a great deal of negativity as I wended my way out of that addiction. Thankfully, when I came clean and explained it all to my wife, she was completely empathetic. She’s still very spiritual but not Christian. It’s a bit of a weirdness between us but we actually get along rather well.

    I think that following the crucified and risen Jesus of Nazareth in the setting of the sacramental life of Orthodoxy gives a person the best help there is to be able to come to that honesty, humanity and encounter with The Divine.

    Just out of curiosity, do you think that it’s possible that there are other paths outside of Christianity that will lead to the same place? Would a true Humanist be very different (in Practice) from a true Christian? Aside from the “divine” (which I cannot quantify), would there be any real difference in behavior and regard for other people do you think?

  77. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    Your question: “do you think that it’s possible that there are other paths outside of Christianity that will lead to the same place? … Aside from the “divine” (which I cannot quantify), would there be any real difference in behavior and regard for other people do you think?”
    makes me wonder if you are too concentrated on the “popular or average” aspect of the middle of the road Christianity (a Protestant approach methinks) rather than the total and utter “Christization” of a person, as seen in the lives of true Orthodox ascetics and martyrs?
    Differences that may seem very small when looking at middle-of-the-road representations become immense if you were to experience the real depths. If for instance you compared, say Hinduism (or “Humanism”) to the real depths of Orthodox Hesychasm, I assure you the differences are beyond vast. I liken it to the difference between various strong experiences (Hinduism for instance -almost akin to various psychotropic drugs sometimes), and the ontological transformation of someone into the universal Truth that lies behind the Cosmos and is Christ (far more than just another experience).
    Elder Sophrony of Essex is an example of someone who was extremely well versed in eastern contemplation in his early life and talked about how that apparent “illumination” compared to the divine love bestowed on man ( a love unlike all of its ‘cheap replicas’ experienced outside the Uncreated Light) through the action of God’s “great” Grace.
    His comparisons from experience are to be found in the first part of the book “Saint Silouan the Athonite”. (earlier called “the undistorted image”). He was aware that he was addressing this very exclusively ‘eastern Orthodox spirituality’ book to a western multicultural audience when he was writing it.

  78. Karen Avatar
    Karen

    John S, in order to understand (at least a little) of what Dinoship is talking about I think you would have to enter into a relationship with such a person who is in a very advanced state of what Orthodox call “theosis” (which means transformation into the likeness of Christ–being exceedingly full of the Holy Spirit). There is no question that the virtues can develop in anyone (since all are created in the image of God) and Orthodox believe the “light of Christ enlightens every man coming into the world” (John 1:9), and so the Holy Spirit also empowers their development of the virtues according to their willingness whether they acknowledge Christ as such explicitly or not.

    Another way of looking at making such comparisons, though, is not just to try to quantify the apparent goodness of people based on external actions, but to try to qualify those based on the meaning of those acts in their own context. As an extreme example, is the “martyrdom” of a terrorist who straps a bomb to himself sacrificing his life in order to blow up those who are seen as enemies of Islam equivalent to the “martyrdom” of a Christian who accepts persecution, torture and even death rather than renounce his faith in Christ? Similarly, I think you understand that self-sacrificial service rendered out of gratitude and love does not have the same meaning or value as that rendered out of a servile fear of another’s power (which comes from the instinct for self-preservation). Rather, we understand the first as a virtue and the latter as a vice.

  79. Dana Ames Avatar
    Dana Ames

    John,
    although “following Jesus” does imply some sort of path, I’m not sure that “Are there other paths leading to the same place” is the appropriate question. Virtuous behavior and kind regard for other people are just that, and “against such there is no law.”

    One of the many things I love about Orthodoxy is that it affirms all that is good in human beings as our true “natural state” that is being enlivened and enlightened by Christ, as Karen says. It’s very much like Emeth in “The Last Battle.” Aslan knows what is true about his service to Tash – the rest are not to judge, as what Marc said; only God knows the true meaning, as Karen said. There is a saying in Orthodoxy: We do not know where the church is not, but we do know where the church is. This is not a comment about the individual lives of people in the church, but about the deepest reality of existence.

    Philaret of New York (+1985) wrote regarding concerns about people who are not Orthodox:

    The Lord, “Who will have all men to be saved” (1Tim 2.4) and “Who enlightens every man born into the world” (Jn 1.43) undoubtedly is leading them also towards salvation in His own way… They have a Saviour Who desires the salvation of every human being. He will take care of them. You and I should not be burdened with such a concern. Study yourself and your own sins…

    (again, with the Orthodox understanding of “salvation” in view)

    There is an advantage to being a Christian, and particularly if one is seeking to be transformed into a person of honesty, humility and love. Certainly, anyone who has an honest and good heart (Lk 8.15) will be helped by the Holy Spirit – Christians with such a heart even more so, for they have some inkling that they are turning toward the real God and seek union with God. So many people like this live “above” their stated/received theology, but for the most part their lives are hidden; they’re not the ones that get into the news, or cause the pain you and I and others have experienced in churches. They’re not into “instant” anything, but rather know about “bearing fruit in patience,” over the long haul. I think being that kind of Christian gives one a “leg up,” a “head start” in this life. As I said, I think we get the best help there is for that within the sacramental life of the Orthodox church; it’s not anything “magic”, but it brings us into and nurtures the reality of that union like nothing else. That is why Fr Stephen writes that Orthodoxy is the fullness of Christianity.

    If you read what Fr Stephen has written about St Isaac of Nineveh, well, that’s the corner of the table where I’m sitting. Orthodoxy allows that corner of the table. I can’t express with what blissful rest I found a little seat there. That was a huge deal in my inquiry into Orthodoxy.

    Here’s another quote I like, from St Seraphim of Sarov:

    We condemn others only because we shun knowing ourselves. When we gaze at our own failings, we see such a swamp that nothing in another can equal it. That is why we turn away, and make much of the faults of others. Instead of condemning others, strive to reach inner peace. Keep silent, refrain from judgment. This will raise you above the deadly arrows of slander, insult and outrage and will shield your glowing hearts against all evil.

    To me, this is the kind of life that bears the marks of entering into the humility of the Crucifixion and the blazing new-creation life of the Resurrection in the here-and-now. As Fr John Behr said, it’s not all that self-evident… but that is how we are able to “see” it. I think that’s at least part of what dinoship is trying to get at when he rhapsodizes on the saints and elders 😉

    Dana

  80. Dana Ames Avatar
    Dana Ames

    Okay, I tried to follow the blasted blockquote instructions, and ended up with that mess. I expect you’ll be able to sort it out.

    D.

  81. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Dana – you have to be sure to put a / on the closing quote </blockquote>. I’ve miffed this a couple times as well.

    We condemn others only because we shun knowing ourselves.

    I’ve heard it said that “justice was invented by the innocent and mercy by the guilty.”

  82. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    John,
    when we use words such as mercy or justice, it is not so much a matter of innocence or guilt. No. It is a matter of Ontology -we mustn’t forget that. The wrong concept of ‘sin’ proves we have the wrong basic perception of the God. The wrong perception of mercy and justice proves we have the wrong perception of the Church (Ecclesia) and the Person. Your quote “justice was invented by the innocent and mercy by the guilty” seems to demonstrate something of the sort.

    Sin -that tragic prerogative of the person alone- is understood in Orthodoxy as ‘actualising’ the inherent limitation of creaturehood. Its connection to “createdness” is highly significant. It therefore introduces nothing ‘new’. This limitation is only revealed when the creature chooses to be left to itself. So the fall is my positing myself, rather than God, as the ultimate point of reference. It means ontologically that I have refused to make being dependent on communion, even though “being as communion” is the personal mode of being of my very Creator. This rupture between being and communion results in “individuals” (a fragmented existence), rather than “persons” or “hypostases” (an all embracing exitence). However, it is death that is the most tragic consequence of the individualization of being in our falleness, for a “dying being” is almost a contradiction in terms. Death intervenes not as the result of punishment for an act of disobedience but as a result of this individualization of nature, it is the rupture from communion with the One Who bestows true life. In other words, there is an intrinsic connection between death and individualization.

    Met. J. Zizioulas in “Being as Communion” explains this fantastically, even though he can be difficult to comprehend rationally without the necessary first-hand experience.

    The salvation we see in the crucified and exalted Christ is accomplished because this individualization of nature becomes transformed into communion. Communion becomes identical to ‘being’ itself in the life bestowed on us through Christ. That ineffable Life of the One Who is Love becomes mine; whereas the minute I am separated from Him, I perceive the falleness of my existence. I then see that I am a tragic figure, or worse still, I become blind to my darkness…

    Salvation means that we become participators in the Divine Life, precisely because we come to participate in God’s personal, relational existence. This life imparts a ‘catholicity’ which permits a person to become a “hypostasis” without falling into individuality. This is experienced here and now, even though in their fullness, terms such as ‘ecclesial hypostasis’ or ‘eucharistic hypostasis’ are always fundamentally eschatological, with roots in the future, perpetually inspired, or rather maintained and nourished, by the future.

    Christology, in the definitive form which the Greek Fathers gave it, looks towards a single goal of purely existential significance, the goal of giving man the assurance that the quest for the person, not as an individualized “tragic figure,” but as the authentic person, is not mythical or nostalgic but is a historical reality. Jesus Christ does not justify the title Saviour because He brings the world a beautiful revelation, a sublime teaching about the person, but because He realizes in history the very reality of the person and makes it the basis and “hypostasis” of the person for every man.

    So, “knowing myself” rather than “condemning others” means becoming a relational being, an authentic person embracing the entire universe with my heart (through the mercy of God) rather than a fragmented individual, tyrannised by the endless judgements of my mind’s rationality.

  83. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    Wow. I know you were writing all of this for John, but dinoship (and others) what you have written here is profound. Thank you for giving all of us much to think about.

  84. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    Mary,

    Reading over it again, I am reminded St Ignatius’ words, which make me want to keep quiet:
    “…it is better to keep quiet and be, than to make fluent professions and not be. No doubt it is a fine thing to instruct others, but only if the speaker practices what he preaches. One such Teacher there is: He who ‘spake the word, and it was done’; [Ps 33,9] and what He achieved even by his silences was well worthy of the Father. A man who has truly mastered the utterances of Jesus will also be able to apprehend His silence, and thus reach full spiritual maturity, so that his own words have the force of actions and his silences the significance of speech.”

  85. Vitus Avatar

    Father Bless;
    We are Orthodox.. I have a few comments and a topic that there are not many willing to discuss.. The topic of Genetic Disorders, and Mental Health Disorders.

    ” For things do not have existence in themselves – everything that exists does so because it is brought into being and sustained in its being by the good God who created it. ” Indeed.. (and we had NO freedom in our actual existence..)

    And on the suffering of Children.. who become suffering men and women.. with NO real freedom.. these are those with Genetic Disorders, and Mental Health Disorders. They suffer continuously and are ignored and relegated to horrid existences by our society and what is really sad.. by Christians.

    Let me explain. I (We) have struggled with these discussions my beloved and I as well as 2 of our sons. The third son (and youngest…now just 18), Luke, well.. you see.. he was born with a genetic disorder. Mosaic Trisomy 13.. He is rare, very very rare. We no longer ask or complain to God “why?” You will understand the horrors of this existence if you look up these types of things on the Internet. He is maybe 10 on the entire planet who is actually living with this disorder..

    I have counseled with Monks and others… they all say that Luke’s suffering, our suffering is to the benefit of our salvation in Christ.. We just do not understand why.. “We cannot go there…” one will loose their minds trying to do so.. I know.
    I struggle with my sanity each day.. (you will understand this if one reads the book by Dee Pinnock on the Path to Sanity).

    This just to say.. Luke, some mud that God has created WILL become god..he is like an angel.. This is the only conclusion I have… and even for ALL those who suffer in like manner with NO real freedom.. they exist by God’s doing and actual commandment..

    Man is mud whom God has commanded to become god.
    – St. Gregory of Nyssa

    Thoughts?
    The struggling sinner
    Vitus

    PS. You will be happy to know Luke serves behind the iconostasis with our Priests! EVERY Sunday… We pick him up at his special school and take him .. This ensures that he receives the Mysteries every week.. Luke is 18..and all of 5 feet tall.. his robes are often trailing… 🙂 You can see (and pray!) for Luke at the link to the simple blog .. which I have not had the heart or strength to update…

    PSS.. The ONLY Orthodox people that I know have written on this topic are:
    Jean-Claude Larchet (his 3 books on illness, especially “Mental Disorders and Spiritual Healing, Teachings fro the Early Christian East” a difficult read..
    and
    Father Alexis Trader.. His book on Cognitive Therapy..

    —–+++++++—–+++++++—–
    God is the life of all free beings. He is the salvation of all, of believers
    or unbelievers, of the just or the unjust, of the pious or the impious, of
    those freed from passions or those caught up in them, of monks or those living
    in the world, of the educated and the illitrate, of the healthy and the sick,
    of the young or the old. He is like the outpouring of light, the glimpse of
    the sun, or the changes of the weather which are the same for everyone without
    exception.

    St. John Climacus (of the Ladder)
    —–+++++++—–+++++++—–

  86. fatherstephen Avatar
    fatherstephen

    Dinoship
    a “dying being” is almost a contradiction in terms – very well said. I will remember it – and undoubtedly use it.

    I have been searching for the past couple of months for a small article (or book intro) or something by S. Bulgakov in which he talked about his first perception of sin as ontological and how it radically changed everything for him. It’s common throughout Orthodox thought, but it was his own personal perception and the story of its impact that struck me. This same insight came for me when I was in Seminary in the 70’s. I was struggling with a class in “moral theology,” knowing there had to be a better way to approach these things. At the same time I was taking a class in Soteriology and working with Atonement theories. The two came together. I didn’t know it then, but my conversion to Orthodoxy had begun.

  87. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    Vitus,
    I think you have the answers already… “Luke is some mud that God has created and that WILL become god..he is like an angel.”
    Indeed.
    The question is not Luke’s Cross but the Cross of those around him, all these crosses are for the purpose of salvation.
    I will post an edifying story from elder Paisios when I get some time (later on) concerning this Vitus.
    May God illuminate you all with His Grace…

  88. drewster2000 Avatar
    drewster2000

    John Shores,

    I didn’t see one of your questions answered. You ask many, but this one stood out – and in my browsing I didn’t see it answered:

    No it’s not wrong for a person to forgive God. In fact you will have to do that before you go much further. But don’t attach conditions. When you’re ready, simply share your heart on where you’ve been wronged, how it hurts, and all that you can think of in that regard. Then, be willing to let go of those things – and trust that He’s heard you.

  89. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    Vitus,
    here is that story I promised earlier for you:

    There was a severely disabled person who somehow managed to visit a Monastery on Mount Athos. His disability meant he was in a wheelchair, in a similar situation to the famous astrophysicist Stephen Hawking. At the same time, a very rich, faithful man was also visiting the Monastery and they got chatting… He was heartbroken by the disabled person’s (let us call him John for now) predicament and promised him all the money he needs, explaining that there are new therapies for such nervous disorders performed in certain surgeries in the States. The disabled John was overcome by enthusiasm upon hearing this, but, sought the advise of the monks as well. Unfortunately, most of them seemed to be reluctant and shared little of his enthusiasm, something that eventually made him shout: “none of you understand what it feels like, living like I do!!” What he did agree to however, was to go and seek the advise of the famous Elder Paisios, someone whose clairvoyant discernment he fully trusted.
    The next day it was arranged for the Elder to come and see him in the middle of the night, as it wasn’t possible for the man to go to the Elder’s place of course.
    The Elder, upon seeing him, addressed him with his name and kneeled at his legs whispering something like “what salvific legs you have been granted…!” Then he said: “now get up and let’s walk!”. To which the man responded, “I have never stood up in my life Elder! What are you talking about?”
    Elder Paisios said: “hold on to me and let’s walk!”.
    John stood up and started walking! …tears were running down both of their eyes. He almost seemed to be “flying” more than walking, as he had never experienced such a thing in his life. The Elder was meanwhile uttering some incomprehensible whispers and prayers, sobbing and sighing in between.
    After having walked the room a couple of times back and forth, he sat him back down and said very sternly:
    “John! You will never walk. God does not want that. He has given you this for your salvation and the salvation of those around you. You, as well as them, cannot be saved another way! If you go to the doctors they will turn you into a failed experiment…”
    The man, having just witnessed the power of God first hand and the ease with which he was (temporarily) “cured”, took the Elder’s words to heart. He accepted them fully and a deep joy, a joy for his predicament and a trust in God’s ineffable providence flooded his being.

  90. Karen Avatar
    Karen

    John S., as a brief summary of a part of what Dinoship wrote in his last comment (and forgive me if this is repetition of something that has already been said), we have a tendency in the West to interpret Genesis 2:16-17 as God saying that if Adam and Eve disobey, He will kill them (to put it bluntly). In other words, God will cause them to become mortal as a punitive measure. (Hence “salvation” is understood in terms of pardon from guilt, rather than our restoration to a state of being in communion with God.) However, this is not an Orthodox interpretation at all. Rather, we understand God, being Himself Life, is the Source of life. The rupture of trust and communion with Him, reflected in Adam and Eve’s yielding to the temptation of disbelief in His pronouncement about the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil leading to their disobedience, is a rupture from the only Source of all life. Death, an ontological state (spiritual and physical) is simply the natural consequence of Sin (which is manifest in this very individualistic self-referencing inclination under discussion). We do not have life in ourselves–it is the gift of God. It is freely offered to all, but we have to be “plugged” back into God–which God, the Son, did on our behalf in becoming human.

  91. PJ Avatar
    PJ

    Vitus,

    My brother-in-law has Downs Syndrome. He is a beautiful soul with the goodness and innocence of a child. Remember Christ’s words, “Unless you become like these little ones…” He has had numerous heart surgeries and suffers from physical pain due to his condition. Nonetheless, he remains kind and gentle, constantly smiling and laughing. He is a great model for me in many ways. I will pray for your son.

  92. Vitus Avatar

    Dinoship, PJ..
    What a wonderful story! and your words are heartfelt. The story brought tears to my eyes.. “…He has given you this for your salvation and the salvation of those around you….” This is exactly what the monks are telling me over and over again.. But what an experience for “John” and an encouragement.. Luke does not have that level of understanding… he is very simply minded.. he thinks he is absolutely normal. His world is not our world. Most days they conflict.. which causes him much pain and anguish (and us too.. if you have ever had something occupy your mind endlessly you will know how this can feel…)

    thanks for your prayers.
    Vitus

  93. mary benton Avatar
    mary benton

    Vitus,

    Your comment led me to look up Trisomy 13 – I had heard of it but never been touched by it personally. I viewed a beautiful video of music and photos of these special children.

    I do not claim to understand the “why” of any suffering – but I believe that God can bring salvation and blessings in ways incomprehensible to us. I will pray for your family.

  94. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    Vitus,
    when seen correctly, sufferings (the Cross) have the power to transform our fragmented individualistic mode of egocentric being into a humble and all embracing person, a universal hypostasis in the image of the Crucified One Who takes upon Him the weight of the Cosmos.
    The day to day distraction of life does not allow us a constant enjoyment of such a realization, illumined by the Lord Himself, although, there can be certain times in the day that this assuredness can be contemplated and the ineffable Joy of the Martyrs’ flame tasted. This is always combined with prayer.
    In the light of the life-giving Cross we can comprehend the late Elder Ephraim of Katounakia, a true hesychast with great experience, who used to say at the end of his life, (in his 90’s) in his typically outspoken way:
    “I have tasted of the ‘fruits of Paradise’ that few know of in this world, and I have drank from the bitter waters of Hell to a degree that most cannot sustain, I thank the Lord more for the latter than the former; after all my years of living in the desert, I come to clearly see that they are a far greater blessing and honour”

  95. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Karen:

    We do not have life in ourselves–it is the gift of God. It is freely offered to all, but we have to be “plugged” back into God–which God, the Son, did on our behalf in becoming human.

    I have such a hard time with this. If there is a god who is the source of all life, it seems to me that to be separated from that source is to not exist at all.

    Drewster:

    No it’s not wrong for a person to forgive God. In fact you will have to do that before you go much further …simply share your heart on where you’ve been wronged…

    So, you think that god can wrong us then?

    But don’t attach conditions.

    Why not? Doesn’t the Christian god attach conditions to forgiveness? He most certainly does not simply forgive and leave it at that.

  96. drewster2000 Avatar
    drewster2000

    John Shores,

    I don’t believe God actually wrongs us, but I certainly believe it can look like it sometimes.

    True forgiveness is granted with no conditions. We’re called to go further after that. We have consequences of our actions to learn from and work through, but forgiveness is not part of or related to a legal system of claims and conditions. It’s given and then you move on toward next things – like healing and restoration.

  97. Michael Bauman Avatar
    Michael Bauman

    John Shores, when I go to confession and when I have experienced God’s forgiveness in my life other than in confession. I have seen no conditions from God. We repent, not because that is a condtion for God’s forgiveness but so that we may remove the blocks in our own heart to experiencing His forgiveness. Human beings often put all sorts of conditions on our forgiveness, but I’ve never known God to. Jesus said from the Cross in the darkness of the crucifixion and the depths of agony and pain: “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.”

    That is the paradigm for Christian forgiveness of one another as well. That it often does not happen is not an indictment of God, but of our adament will to take His place.

  98. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    True forgiveness is granted with no conditions.

    I think some others here would disagree with this statement.

    However, that is how I view forgiveness as well.

    This in turn causes the brow to furrow when considering the Cross, for which I see no point at all except as a Yang to the Yin of the “Fall” which, as far as I can tell, is an anthropomorphic representation of why we are the way we are. That being the case, I see no purpose for a literal god-man and a cross if there was not a literal fall.

  99. John Shores Avatar
    John Shores

    Hi Michael – Well for starters, you have to go to confession. God’s not just gonna forgive you unless you confess, right?

  100. dinoship Avatar
    dinoship

    John,
    I was surprised to see you still clinging to the idea of the Cross as a necessity for protestant-style “forgiveness” after all my explanation of the ontology (as opposed to “juridicallity”) of Sin. As I said above sin only ‘actualises’ the inherent limitation of creaturehood. You keep missing the point that it is all about “createdness” and its need to be connected to the source of Life (the Cross is the ultimate example of “nothing, not even the crucifixion itself, having the power to separate Christ in his capacity as man/creature from the source – His Father”) Sin is only when the creature chooses to be left to itself. The “fall” is my positing myself, rather than God, as the ultimate point of reference. It means that I have refused to make being dependent on communion.

    If there is a god who is the source of all life, it seems to me that to be separated from that source is to not exist at all.

    No. To be separated from that source is rupture between being and communion and results in fragmented “individuals”, rather than authentic all-embracing “persons” (in the image of the all-embracing and crucified Christ) . This rupture does however produce, a “dying being” – a tragic contradiction in terms.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Subscribe to blog via email

Support the work

Your generous support for Glory to God for All Things will help maintain and expand the work of Fr. Stephen. This ministry continues to grow and your help is important. Thank you for your prayers and encouragement!


Latest Comments


Read my books

Everywhere Present by Stephen Freeman

Listen to my podcast



Categories


Archives