Above all of the contestations and hypothesis in the various aspects of theology with regard to Soteriology (theology of salvation), or for that matter, systematic theology in general, we must recognize the utter inability for our human mind, and even the biblical record (for we must interpret this too), and diverse glossaries to be able to truly describe the nature of metaphysical categories or events.
By this, I mean that when, for instance, we talk about an issue such as propitiation (satisfaction for our sins), on the one level we are employing a metaphor, (actually, the bible is steeped in the Jewish sacrificial system, itself a rich panorama of metaphor) while on another level, this actually refers to a transcendent, metaphysical event or effect that we will never approach fully - though, we may benefit from it nonetheless. Whether propitiation is believed by some, and not by others is largely irrelevant to my point. Furthermore, there are always ramifications to each theological assertion, further stretching and perhaps, breaking our original analogy.
Some writers have stressed the place and necessity of using analogy and metaphor to explain aspects of theology, and arguments for God's existence in particular, beginning perhaps with Aquinas, to whom I tip my hat through the hypothesis, previously posted - and even Gaunilo's “paradise isle”. To use Isaiah's words, ' "I don't think the way you think. The way you work isn't the way I work." God's Decree. "For as the sky soars high above earth, so the way I work surpasses the way you work, and the way I think is beyond the way you think." ' Isa 55:8-9; (The Message) Nice poetic phrasing comes in handy, too.
So if God's ways are above or beyond us, though specifically relevant to us nonetheless, we still need ways to talk and think about these matters - but we'll always have to admit a degree of uncertainty in our apprehension and comprehension of things. We also must admit that the language we use also falls prey to exactly the same problems, being metaphors in themselves.
This goes to issues of epistemology - how we know what we know - of course. Maybe, even to issues of ontology, or meaning; of why we are asking these questions, and to the noble quest which is theology as a formal enterprise, which Barth calls the "fairest of sciences", as well as an individual journey of positing ultimate questions.
I love the idea the Anselm of Canterbury positing his theological musings in the form of prayers - this is perhaps the best way to proceed with (our) theological work. Therefore, we should endeavour to find answers, with a good dose of humility with prayerful dependence and faith in God. This is an approach which is not unfamiliar to the Eastern Orthodox, who are much more apt to approach theology on their knees than we might - at our desks or in dusty classrooms.
Next time, I'd like to continue by introducing the important role of the incarnation.
Have a splendid Autumn season.
Peter
No comments:
Post a Comment