Orthodox Christian Relativity

To some recent respondents:

I may have, unintentionally, misled some with my use of “relative” and “absolute.” I agree with all criticisms if I meant these words in the ordinary sense. I need to define my terms more specifically. The root meaning of relative is “relate-ive,” and that is what God is all about. God is love. Love is a relationship, not a principle, a thing, or a theory. The incarnation, the atonement, and the resurrection of Jesus are all meant to make possible a restored relationship with God. A Christian is a person who is in right relationship with God.

God is love. God is all about relationship. Sin is anything that disrupts our relationship with God. God is eternally trinitarian. Christianity is not a mere monotheism, it is a trinitarian monotheism. The God Christians worship, serve, and trust is Father, Son, and Spirit in eternal relation to each other. This is one way I use the term, “relative” in connection (relation) with God.

There is a second use of the term, however, in my theology. That is that God relates to his creation according to his purpose, human need, or the historical situation. This has many implications I will deal with another time. It means, among other things, that he dealt with Israel differently than he dealt with the New Testament church. He dealt with ancient Egypt differently than he dealt with the Roman Empire. As I wrote before, Jesus dealt with each individual relative to their unique situation, and the New Testament epistles are relative to local situations.

One specific issue needs to be addressed. The book of Hebrews doe not says that “God” is the same yesterday, today, and forever. It speaks of Jesus as “the same yesterday, today, and forever.” One of the major emphases of Hebrews is that Jesus was in all points tested like we are, that he is our brother (See ch. 2), that he understands by experience what our life is like and therefore can be a faithful high priest on our behalf. That is who he was yesterday (in his days on earth), that is who he still is, and that is who he will be forever: “our “faithful and merciful high priest.” That will not change.

Now to the word, “absolute.” “Ab,” plus “solvere.”
ab-prefix, from L. ab-, ab "off, away from," from PIE base *apo-“
L. solvere "to loosen, dissolve, untie," from PIE *se-lu-, from reflexive pronoun *swe- + base *leu- ‘to loosen, divide, cut apart’ (cf. Gk. lyein ‘to loosen, release, untie,’ away; see ab-1 + solvere, to loosen.”

The above demonstrates the historical roots of “absolute.” It means “away from,” “loosened from any connection to,” i.e., “all by itself with no connections–relations--to anything.”

This would be true of a mono-theistic God, but the God who is a trinitarian monotheos is not separate from all connections or relations. Rather, as Father, Son, and Spirit, God is eternally relational in his very nature. He is not a “lone.” He is one God, an eternal, divine relationship–a relational mystery.

To believe God is absolute in the sense I have just described is heresy. I understand why so many use the term, however. Absolute is commonly understood as the ultimate, the highest and supreme attribute that can be given to anything. It is used as a term of worth-ship. I understand that, but consider the word misleading. Here are the words I use for the same: ultimate, universal, supreme, and, of course, holy.

This is a bit long for a single blog, but I must make one additional statement. I am a Christian. I’ve trusted my life into the hands of the Son of God, the Messiah of Israel, the one who by his life, death, and resurrection made complete atonement for sin. I believe the historical statements of orthodox Christian theology. I do interpret the meaning of these doctrines differently than they have been commonly interpreted, but I do completely believe in the meaning of traditional Christian thought.

I believe a Christian is a person for whom Jesus Christ is decisive and definitive in all things present, past, future, and eternally.

On the other hand, I don’t worry about human judgments of my relation to God. I don’t have to be conservative, liberal, evangelical, Catholic, orthodox or neo-orthodox, post-modern, emergent, or traditional. “On Christ the solid rock I stand; all other ground is sinking sand.”

No Biblical Absolutes

Contrary to popular understanding, the Bible delivers us no absolutes. Everything in the Bible is relative: on one hand, to God, and on the other hand, to some particular person or group, occasion, or need.

The ten commandments are not absolutes, they are addressed only to God’s covenant people, Israel–not to the Egyptians, the Amalekites, the Moabites, nor to the Yoruba or Arapaho.

The Sermon on the Mount contains no absolutes; it is addressed to the larger group of his disciples. These teachings relate specifically relate to those who commit to follow Jesus and allow their life to be disciplined by him.

The need to be born again is not presented as an absolute necessity. Only Nicodemus is told that he must be born again. Jesus says to one that all he needs is to sell out and follow Jesus. Another is told to leave his parents and follow Jesus. Still another, the Gerasene demoniac, is not allowed to follow Jesus, but told to stay in his home territory. There is no single “plan of salvation.” Jesus deals with everyone differently, relative to their personal condition.

The epistles of the New Testament offer no absolute teaching or rules. Each epistle is written relative to the needs in a particular church. The Galatian churches are not taught the same thing about women in the church as the Corinthian church. Different places, different situations. The letter called Philemon was written to Philemon relative to a runaway slave named Onesimus. Paul deals with rules differently with Timothy than he does with the Galatians. The book of Hebrews is written relative to Hebrew Christians and relative to the Hebrew Bible book of Leviticus.

Christians are not to try to impose absolutes on anyone, but to serve as faithful witnesses to Jesus Christ, living out all the things he has commanded them.

Last week we attended, along with maybe two hundred others, my brother-in-law's 90th birthday party. About half of these were relatives, many, like me, relatives by marriage.

We use the word "relative" in two or three different ways (at least). In speaking of the divine relativity, I use it in two of these senses.

We all have relatives, people we are related to. This is one usage. Human's are, by nature, inescapably, relate-ive. We are related to people, we relate to non-family members also. We are relative. In this sense, God is relative.

The common understanding of things that are "relative" is that there is no definite truth or goodness. That these--and other matters--are just "relative to the individual. No universal true, no universal good. It is a matter of personal choice.

Relative, by its nature, means "related to something or someone." In the common usage, it seems to mean, "related strictly to each individual or individual group." This usage, I reject as nonsense.

Another common usage of the term is that things are relative to the situation, relative to a context. Specific instances of right and wrong, truth and falsity may in some real sense be dependent on the particular time and place. God seems to be relate-ive in this sense. When we read the Bible, God appears--and acts--in ways that, by common standards, are not consistent with each other. God changes, relative to the circumstance.

In the end, everything is relative to God; God is relative to everything. God and thus, all reality is relational. God relates, we relate. God cares and is involved.

The Bible is about relations and relationships, not ideas, doctrines, principles or propositions. Everything about it is relate-ive.

I am Back

I am Back

It has been over a year since I have blogged. I took time off to finish writing a book that I began years ago. The first full draft is now finished. I expect to edit and rewrite for a few months, then publish late this summer. The book focuses on how to become a good or better thinker.

I intend to serialize it, a chapter per month, on my “Considerate Thinking” blog. Meanwhile, I am posting snippets of it on Twitter daily. Check Twitter–wallaceroark. http://twitter.com/#home

I hope to update at least two of my several blogs (see the bottom of My Profile) each week