November 13th, 2024 by G.
Christians, Muslims, and Jews
Long-time readers know that I am sympathetic to creedal Christians. I think they are sincere and even admirable about a great number of things and I try to avoid taking shots at them for no reason. But here I am going to disagree with something they do taken even on their own terms.
Another thing I like to do is poke around in obscure corners of the internet. I have an eccentric’s taste for eccentricity. Most of what you find there is interesting as a spectacle but doesn’t add to your own stock of truth. Sometimes you do find something worth taking back with you though. For me, one such is the concept that one form of error people fall into is trying to be “holier than Jesus” or “more Christian than Jesus” if I have the phrase right. The meat of it is that when people advocate for extreme and almost inhuman versions of some of Christ’s teaching such as talking about how you need to feel love for Satan or some other performative shibboleth of reified compassion or act like the presence of people “less compassionate” than they are is an intolerable insult to their purity, they are essentially trying to be “holier than Jesus,” who certainly pulled no punches but also recognized the messiness of life in many ways.
Whether you agree with that or not, it was the prompt for me to realize one issue I have with the creeds and their Jewish and Muslim equivalents. Even if you believed, as they do, that its just not possible that God the Father has a body or is a person, that is how he presents himself in scripture. By your own standards, he is ineffable and incomprehensible. So what warrant do you have to think that you have a better way of understanding the Father than the one He himself gave you? “Oh, that’s just for the common folk.” Compared to God, you are all common folk. Plato was a peasant. So was Aquinas. Much smarter than me, but that’s like saying the kid who has five bucks is richer than the kid who has a quarter. True, but irrelevant in the presence of billionaires. So maybe you feel sure that God cannot “really” be an embodied Man because he is clearly beyond anything we can comprehend. OK. So then the next question is what would be the best method to comprehend him as best as a human being can–the one you came up with, or the one God uses?
But “God is spirit”! Yeah, God says he’s vitality and life. The very essence of personhood.
But “God is love”! Yep. The deepest of human emotions.
The closest you can come to comprehending God is to think of him as a glorified eternal man.
