在討論了“聖經是什麽？”“我們為什麽應該相信它？”之後，今天我們來看聖經的主題──神。在這一講裏，我們要討論的題目共三條： 一、神是可知的
二、尋求、認識神的努力是合情合理的、崇高的
三、神是美善的 這幾條看上去再簡單不過了，但我們這些需要被糾錯的基督徒常常能把甚至是最簡單、最明了的概念攪成、擠成一根根纏擾不清的神學麻花。 一、有一位可知的神 基督徒在關於神的知識上有許多東西需要進行糾錯。我們聽到的教導常常把神視為不值得去知道、去了解的。另一種傾向是：神就是不可知的，理由是他之所以不可知是因為神與我們之間的差別是如此之大，以致於在與神交往的事上我們根本就不知道東西南北。 1) “同齡人”般的神 在今天的西方教會裏，神常常被視為與我們是同齡人，是“哥兒們”(buddy)。在一定意義上，神看上去好像是這樣的。我們在《出埃及記》三十三章11節讀到：“耶和華與摩西麵對麵說話，好像人與朋友說話一般。”主耶穌在《約翰福音》十五章 11節中教導說：“以後我不再稱你們為仆人，因仆人不知道主人所做的事；我乃稱你們為朋友，因我從我父所聽見的，已經都告訴你們了。” 這麽看來，神是我們的朋友。但當摩西代表神向以色列說話時，他的臉發光，以致人們都因害怕而不敢走近前來(出34:30)。盡管基督稱他的使徒們為朋友，可他們從來未用過“朋友”這個稱呼，而都是自稱是基督的奴仆。《路加福音》五章8節裏彼得對耶穌行了神跡之後的反應，才真正表達了人對基督應有的態度：“西門彼得看見，就俯伏在耶穌膝前，說：‘主啊，離開我，我是個罪人！’” 在我們所一頭紮進的、將基督教加以簡化的傳福音的努力之中，我們將神降到了一個地步 ──神是如此容易地被認識，以至有些人就不再把神看作是值得我們尋求、認識的神了。神成了一位超級心理學家、一位老好朋友，或是我們從未有過的親人或配偶。但是，假如我對自己的生活(朋友、家人或婚姻)已很滿意，那麽神對我還有何用？我不需要再多一位朋友。 2) 不可知的神 另一種流行的有關神的錯誤概念是：神是根本不可知的──他遠遠高過我們，在一個不可知的範疇內運作，甚至與人類行事的方式是完全相反的。當我們存著這種不符合實際的“謙卑”心態來想像有關神的概念時，我們就得出了另一種結論，即：神既然是無限的，那麽我們思考神的一切努力就都是徒然的。 但神的無限本質並非使他不可完全企及。保羅在《羅馬書》十章8~9節中寫道：“他到底怎麽說呢？他說：‘這道離你不遠，正在你口裏，在你心裏。’就是我們所傳信主的道。你若口裏認耶穌為主，心裏信神叫他從死裏複活，就必得救。” 因此，我們需要糾正我們關於神的錯誤觀念。他既不是“哥兒們”，不值得特別花時間去認識；也不是遠到外太空裏哈伯望遠鏡[注1]探不到的。我們若將這兩種極端折衷一下，或許就離真理近了一步。神既是無限偉大崇高的，又是降卑而使我們可以認知的。他既是住在我們中間的神，又是天上永恒的神，既深不可測，又是可知的。下麵我們就來對此加以討論。 3) 無限而又可知的神 “神是誰？”“聖經裏是如何定義神的？”問這個問題的人本身就有點過於驕傲了。我在聽到別人談論神的時候以及當我自己談論神的時候，我總有點不自在。人在試圖定義神的時候，就有點兒像是那些正在被鯨魚吞入口內的浮遊生物想要為鯨魚下定義一樣愚蠢可笑。我不知道浮遊生物的認知能力到底有多少；有一點可以肯定的是，鯨魚絕不局限於它們竊竊私語的認識範圍之內。 基督徒認為：神已經向他的被造物顯明他那些可知的方麵。 讓我們真誠地謙卑下來，承認神的不可測性。但也讓我們清楚地知道，神並非因為他所具有的無限性及不可測性就使我們對他完全不可認知。換言之，我不能完全認識神並非意味著我就一定不知道任何關於神的事。你們中間的絕大多數人大概不能麵麵俱到地向我描述壘球的詳盡規則和全部所在，但這不等於你不知道什麽是“三振出局”[注2]。 4) 有理性、講邏輯的神 另外一點我們同樣應該清楚知道的是：我所掌握的那點關於神的有限的知識，對於我、對於神，都是真的，是絕對不矛盾的。也就是說，當我知道神不能說謊(多1:2)，我就應該知道，“說謊”就是說謊，它在神眼裏和在人眼裏都是同一種行為。例如 2+2對於我來說等於4，那麽2+2對於神來說也等於4。假如兩條平行線對於在地球上生活的我是不相交的，那麽在天上神的國裏也絕不會相交。我們也可以這樣說：“當我明白真理的時候，我就知道了神的心思(當然是在定性的而不是定量的概念上)。” 我並不是想要把問題搞得過於複雜化、過於哲學性；但隻要稍微作點解釋，我們就能看出，認識“神的可知性與合情合理性”有多麽重要。無論如何，假如神是不可理喻的，那麽他當然就是不可知的，因為你是無法了解捉摸不定的東西的。 地上的真理之所以是真理，是因為此真理是神頭腦裏的真理。有人說，“平行線在天上或許是相交的；反正神在邏輯之上，是超邏輯的。”這話聽上去也沒有什麽害處，甚至還顯得挺謙卑的；這樣做也很容易來解釋神學上的難題。有了問題，隻要說上一句“ 神是超邏輯的”，問題就迎刃而解了。但是我們必須知道，平行線之所以在地上不相交，是因為它們在天上不相交(這裏所說的天上是指神的規律、法則)。 請允許我來說出這裏的關鍵所在。假如平行線在天上不相交，那麽我們就必須承認神可能是自相矛盾的。倘若真的如此，當他說“是”時就意味著“不”；說“相信”時就是指“懷疑”，對我們說“信的人必得救”而實際上可能是“信的人被定罪”。那麽問題可真是嚴重了。 我們已經確定聖經是我們知識的起始點。既然神是聖經的作者，那麽他就是我們知識的起始點。聖經宣告說：“敬畏耶和華是智慧的開端”(箴1:7)。使徒保羅在《歌羅西書》中寫道：“神的奧秘就是基督，所積蓄的一切智慧和知識都在他裏麵藏著。” 在這些聲明以及聖經中其它多處經文所不言而喻的是，知識來自神，我們是可以獲得智慧與知識的。這也就毫不奇怪為什麽當初蛇在對人類的第一次進攻時說：“神豈是真說......？”(創3:1)。 二、合理的追求 我的第二大點是：人類最高的追求目標是認識神。不信的人用來反對有組織的基督教信仰常用的一個論點是：“基督教內部就充滿了對聖經中關於神的教導的不同理解”，就仿佛沒有組織的宗教之間矛盾就少似的。 最近，我在與一位基督徒朋友為神學上不同的意見爭論時，被一位不信主的朋友聽到了。他就說：“真有意思，教會到今天還在那麽多的事上爭論不休！”言下之意就好像教會外麵就沒有爭論似的。按他這句話的邏輯，有爭論的東西是不值得追求的，或者是不會有結果的。但我們不應該對教會裏的爭論感到泄氣(我們以後還會對基督徒之間的爭論詳加討論)。 從前我有一位教練，他曾訓練出無數的創田徑記錄和金牌得主。他在田徑運動上的知識遠遠超過了我的智力與能力所能企及的。難道這就意味著我找這樣的人作教練是不理智的蠢舉嗎？假如自己無知而且能力太差，就不能在這位天才教練之下受訓練──這是一種何等扭曲的邏輯啊！ 假如人類因著自己找到正確結論的能力很差就放棄對認識神、事奉神的追求，那就是無理性的。歸根結底一句話，神是可知的──這是神自己的應許：“愛我的，我也愛他；懇切尋求我的，必尋得見”(箴8:17)。 三、神是美善 1)我的最後一點是：神是美善。這點看上去是如此一目了然，實在沒有什麽好討論的。但是，作為一個需要被糾錯的基督徒，我發現自己甚至在關於“神是美善”的這一點上都是認識不足的。我思考問題時的缺陷是，關於神我有一個觀念，關於美善我則有另一個觀念，然後我下了個結論，說神與美善是可以劃上等號的。下麵我來解釋一下這意味著什麽。 神常常被描繪成一位好心的老人，想要幫助把世界搞得有條有理。我們都喜歡這樣的好心老人。我們在金球獎和艾美獎頒獎大會[注3]上也說“感謝他”，可是在聖經裏神卻要求我們忠心於他，要求我們敬拜他。他是一位忌邪的神，要懲罰否認他的人。神的這一以他為中心的絕對性也被教會給輕描淡寫了。突然之間，那位“老好人”變成了“薩達姆．侯賽因”(胡森)。這樣的神就成了“男權主義者”、“憎惡同性戀者”、“好戰分子”、“反對婦女有生、殺自己胎兒權利”者了；他也因為人有罪而把他們“送到地獄去”。這樣的一位神在奧斯卡頒獎大會上是不受歡迎、也不會被提到的。 這裏的問題是：神被視為僅僅是被造物中的一分子；一般說來，他做出的和選擇的都是好決定。有時候，人們覺得神越了界，任意稱邪惡為美善。在知識分子中，我們常常聽到對這位“好戰的”、“令人不可忍受的”神進行嚴厲指控。 但神不因為某些事情是好的就選擇它們或製定法律來肯定它們(仿佛它們之所以好是出於它們本身)；它們好也不是神任意說它們是好的──好與善本身就是由神的本質和特征所定義的。 《威敏斯特信仰告白》是這樣說的： 一切生命、榮耀、善良、祝福都在神自己裏麵，也屬於他；......唯獨在神自己裏麵，且歸給他自己時，才有完全的充足；他是萬有的獨一根源，萬有都是屬於他、藉他而立，也歸於他。(第二章第2節) 2)恨神就是恨善 《詩篇》119篇68節：“你本為善，所行的也善。”使徒保羅這樣說：“因為萬有都本於他，依靠他，歸於他”(羅11:36)。換句話說，當我們說某事、某物是善的，那善本身就與神的特征相和諧。得罪神就是得罪善；恨神就是恨善。“我恨上帝 ”是今天很流行的口頭禪。《箴言》八章35~36節將神自己與生命等同起來： 因為尋找我的，就尋得生命，也必蒙耶和華的恩惠。得罪我的，卻害了自己的性命；恨惡我的，都喜愛死亡。 恨惡神就是恨惡生命。生命、真理、美麗、純潔、善良、公義、愛......不僅僅恰好是神所具有的屬性，也並不僅僅是神能夠來為這一切下定義；這一切都是神本身的特征，都源於神，當然也由神來定義。 我記得當初自己在考慮要不要成為基督徒的時候，還在那裏詳細考查，看看基督徒的信仰是否真的符合倫理道德，是否真是那麽好？聖經裏的上帝是否值得我去為之獻身？他真的是美善的嗎？希望現在我們大家都能認識到這種態度的傲慢、自恃。當時我想做的是，不知天高地厚地試圖要來判斷美善本身是否美善，於是我就自以為是地作起了美善和神的檢查官。簡直是瘋了一樣！但這卻是人思考問題的常用方式。 3)尋求認識一位美善的神 根據聖經，有一位美善的、可以認識的神。世上沒有什麽比尋求、認識這位神更高尚的追求了。他是那聯接輪子上所有齒條並驅動它們運轉的齒輪。當神被從平衡式裏挪走之後，家庭的事、政府的事、人與人之間的關係、教會裏的事......都會遭瓦解、破壞。主耶穌在《馬太福音》六章31~33節裏教導說： 所以，不要憂慮說吃什麽？穿什麽？這都是外邦人所求的。你們需用的這一切東西，你們的天父是知道的。你們要先求他的國和他的義，這些東西都要加給你們了。 神不僅僅是美善；他就是美善之源。丟棄“神”的觀念就是丟棄“美善”的觀念。這樣的例子我們看到的難道還少嗎？ 4)神是良善，我們不是 到此為止，假如我不向你們指出我們都為之痛苦但又清楚知道的一件事，我就是失職了。那就是：神是良善，我們不是。耶穌明確地指出：“除了神一位之外，沒有良善的”(可10:18)。神的公義、聖潔與美善是如此高出我們，從一定的程度上說，人尋求、認識神的努力實在是愚人之舉。人不可能造出一座“德行塔”或搭起一架“公義梯”去認識神。以賽亞先知教導我們說：“我們都像不潔淨的人，所有的義都像汙穢的衣服”(賽64:6)。 那麽我們的希望何在？我們的希望不在於我們自己，而在於神，在於神找到我們。神通過他兒子耶穌將他的愛賜給我們、找到我們： 他本有神的形像，不以自己與神同等為強奪的，反倒虛己，取了奴仆的形像，成為人的樣式。既有人的樣子，就自己卑微，存心順服，以至於死，且死在十字架上。(腓2:6-8) 這是神自己為我們提供的人能認識神的唯一方式：神的兒子變成為人，倒空他自己，變成為有罪，自己卑微，以至於死，好使我們擁有生命──擁有唯靠與神聯合才能找到的生命。人與美善的神和好的唯一途經就是通過信基督，唯獨信基督。願神賜給我們眼睛看見此真理！讓我們永遠求告救主的名字！ __________ [注1]
世界上最強大的射電望遠鏡。 [注2]
壘球是美國最大眾化的運動項目；“三振出局”是家喻戶曉的一條比賽規則。 [注3]
美國電視界年度頒獎大會，級別次於奧斯卡。 | Remedial Thoughts Regarding the Knowledge of God Having discussed what the Bible is and why we should believe it, we now turn to the main topic of the Bible—God. I have only three goals in this present section. To show: (1) that God is knowable, (2) that the quest for knowing God is reasonable and noble, and (3) that God is good. This seems simple enough. But we remedial Christians are capable of taking even the most simple and straightforward concepts and twisting them into theological pretzels. A Knowable God There are many things Christians encounter regarding our knowledge of?God that require remedial instruction. First we are often presented with a God?who may not be worth knowing. Another is a God who simply can’t be known. He can’t be known because He thinks so differently from us that in our?interaction with Him; we can’t really know which end is up. A Contemporary God Today the church is very hip on viewing God as a contemporary. In a certain sense it seems that God desires this. We read, “So the Lord spoke to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend” (Exodus 33:11). Jesus taught, saying “No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you” (John 15:15 NASB). So God is our friend. But when Moses spoke to the people on behalf of?God his face shone in such a way that the people were afraid to come near (Exodus 34:30). And even though Christ called His apostles friends, they never used that title for themselves. Instead they referred to themselves as servants or?slaves of Christ. Peter’s response to one miracle of Jesus accurately portrays man’s proper response to Christ: “When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord” (Luke?5:8)! In our headlong pursuit of seeking to make Christianity significant, we often bring God down to a level where He is so knowable that some reckon He is?no longer a God worth knowing. Instead of a God who is to be revered and worshiped, He is a super-psychologist, a phenomenal friend or the parent or spouse we never had. If I’m happy with my life, friends, family, or marriage, what use is God to me? I don’t need another friend. The Unreachable God Another popular remedial view is that God is not knowable at all; He is so?above us that He operates in a realm that is unknowable, and perhaps even contradictory, to mankind. With a sort of false humility, or cop-out (since if there is a God He no doubt has a certain claim on our lives), we reckon that there is no?point in trying to extend our thoughts to such an infinite being. But God’s infinite nature does not make Him unreachable. Paul writes, But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach): 9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved (Romans 10:8, 9). So, in our remedial thinking, God is either my buddy who may, or may not, be worth knowing or He is so far in outer space that even the Hubble can’t pick Him up. If we could somehow put these two together, we might be closer to the truth. God is both immanent and transcendent. He is the God who is among us and the God of heaven and eternity. Either way, God, though incomprehensible, is knowable. I’ll explain. An Incomprehensible God, A Knowable God Who is God? How does the Bible define God? The question itself seems so arrogant. I’ve always found it a bit disquieting to hear people talk about God. I’ve always felt a bit uncomfortable talking about God myself. For men to seek to define God is like plankton seeking to define the nature of the whale that’s swallowing it. I am not sure at what level plankton might know things, but there does seem to be a certain aspect of the whale to which they are privy. Christians believe that there are certain aspects of God that He has revealed to His creation. Let us, in all humility, acknowledge the incomprehensibility of God. But let us also recognize that simply because God is incomprehensible, in terms of His immensity or vastness (quantitatively), it does not follow that God is entirely unknowable in any sense whatsoever. In other words, the fact that I don’t know everything about God does not mean I don’t know anything about God. Most of?you could not give me an all-encompassing, comprehensive definition of baseball but that doesn’t mean that you don’t know what a strike-out is. A Logical God It’s also important to recognize that the limited number of things I do know about God are as true for God as they are for me (qualitative). In other words, when I learned that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2), I had to understand that lying is to God what lying is to me. If two plus two equals four for me, it equals four for God. If parallel lines don’t intersect for me on earth, they will never intersect for God in heaven. It might be said this way, “When I know the truth, I know the mind of God (in a qualitative but not quantitative sense).” I don’t mean for this to sound overly philosophical, but a few quick explanations can reveal the importance of recognizing the knowableness and reasonableness of God. After all, if God is not reasonable, He certainly is not knowable; you can’t know nonsense. The truth is the truth on earth because it is the truth in the mind of God. Some have asserted that parallel lines may intersect in heaven—after all, God is above logic (supra-logical); seems harmless enough, even humble. It’s also an easy method to explain away difficulties in theology; we have a problem, we merely consign it to a supra-logical God. But we must realize that the reason parallel lines don’t intersect on earth is due to the fact that they don’t intersect in heaven (if by heaven we are speaking of the economy or rules of God). Allow me to bring this closer to home. If parallel lines intersect in heaven, we must acknowledge that God can be a God of contradictions. If God is a God of contradictions, “yes” may mean “no” and “trust” may mean “doubt”; “believe and be saved” to us may mean “believe and be damned” to God. We established the Bible to be our starting point of knowledge. Since God is the author of the Bible, it makes Him our starting point of knowledge. The Scriptures declare that “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge” (Proverbs 1:7). The Apostle Paul writes of “the Father and of Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:2, 3). Implicit in these statements, and the hundreds like them in Scripture, is the assumption that knowledge proceeds from God and that we can have access to that wisdom and knowledge. It is no wonder that the serpent’s initial assault on humanity was “Indeed, has God said” (Genesis 3:1)? A Reasonable Quest So Many Disagreements Now to our second point, this, my friends, is the ultimate quest of humanity—to know God. A common argument against organized religion (as?if?unorganized religion has any less difficulty) is that there is so much disagreement regarding what the Bible teaches about God. Just recently I was discussing some theological disagreements with a Christian friend within earshot of a non-Christian friend. My non-Christian friend commented, “It’s amazing how the church still disagrees on so many things” (again, as if the non-churched all see things eye to eye). The tenor of his statement betrayed his thoughts on the futility of pursuing something of which no one can seem to agree. But we should not be discouraged by the fact that there are disagreements in the church. There is a great deal of disagreement on how we should approach treating cancer and heart disease; this does not mean these pursuits should be abandoned. I once had a coach who had instructed numerous world record holders and gold medalists in track and field. His knowledge of the sport far exceeded the boundaries of both my intellect and talent. Would it have been reasonable for me to fire him because I was so inept? What kind of tortured logic would compel me to dispose of such genius due to my own ignorance and inability? It?is unreasonable for humanity to abandon its mission to know and serve God simply because we are poor at coming to the correct conclusions. All this to say that God can be known; it is a promise made by God Himself. “I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently will find me” (Proverbs 8:17). God is Good A Truncated View of God My final point is that God is good. This seems so blatantly obvious that it?is hardly worth arguing the point. But, as a remedial Christian, I even found my notion of viewing God as good to be lacking. The primary defect in my thinking was that I had a notion of God on one hand, a separate notion of good on the other hand, then came to the conclusion that they matched up okay. Allow me to explain. God has often been portrayed as a sort of George Burnsish, kindly old man who is seeking to keep the world in good working order. We all like this kindly old man. We thank him at the Golden Globes and Emmy’s. But as we read the Bible we see that He demands our allegiance, and even worship. He is a?jealous God who exacts His judgments on those who refuse to acknowledge His Godhood. This alter-ego side of God is downplayed in the church. All of a?sudden, George Burns seems more like Saddam Hussein. This God is sexist, homophobic, pro-war, and against a woman’s right to choose. He also sends people to hell because of sin. That God will never be given a chair, or mention, at?the Academy Awards. The problem lies in viewing God as a mere part of creation; he generally makes the right decisions and picks things that are good. Sometimes, however, people feel He oversteps His boundaries and arbitrarily calls things good which may be evil. It is not uncommon for those in the academic world to question the decisions of this militant, overbearing God. But God does not pick things, or make laws, because they are good (as if?they were good out there all on their own) nor are they good because He arbitrarily decides to say they are good. Goodness itself is defined by the character and nature of God. The old confessions put it this way. God hath all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of Himself; and is alone in and unto Himself all–sufficient…He is the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things. Hating God=Hating Good The Psalmist writes, “You are good, and do good” (Psalm 119:68). The Apostle Paul put it this way, “For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen” (Romans 11:36). In other words, in order to actually say that something is good, it must be in harmony with the character of God. To offend God is to offend goodness. To hate God (a popular saying these days) is to hate goodness. Notice in Proverbs that God equates Himself with life. For whoever finds me finds life, and obtains favor from the Lord; 36?but he who sins against me wrongs his own soul; all those who hate me love death (Proverbs 8:35, 36). To hate God is to hate life. Life, truth, beauty, purity, goodness, justice, and love are not merely qualities that God happens to be good at, or is capable of?defining; these things are defined by, and flow from, the very character of God?Himself. I remember, when examining whether or not I wanted to be a Christian, scrutinizing whether or not the Christian faith was really ethical—did it have its act together? Was the God of the Bible truly worthy of my devotion? Was He good? Hopefully now we can see the hubris of such a disposition. Essentially what I, in my over-inflated view of self-importance, was seeking to do was determine whether or not goodness was actually good; and I was the personal oracle of judgment over the essence of goodness and God. Sounds crazy! But it is pretty much the norm of man’s thinking. Seeking to Know a Good God According to the Scriptures there is a good God who is knowable by man. There is no greater or nobler pursuit than to seek after this God. He is the sprocket to which all spokes connect. When God is left out of the equation, all things—familial, governmental, relational, ecclesiological (church) crumble. Jesus taught, “Therefore do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32 For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. 33 But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you” (Matthew 67:31-33). And God is not merely good but the fount of goodness itself. To abandon the notion of God is to abandon the notion of good; and have we not seen this to be the case? .God is Good, We are Not I would be remiss in my duties, at this point, if I did not direct our minds to something painfully clear to us all. Though God is good, we are not good. Jesus states the obvious, “No one is good but One, that is, God” (Mark 10:18). The righteousness, holiness, and goodness of God are so above us that this quest for knowing God in a certain sense, quite frankly, becomes a fool’s errand. There is simply no tower of excellence or ladder of righteousness that man can build to find God. Isaiah teaches us what we already suspected, “But we are all like an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6). So what hope have we? Our hope lies not in us finding God but in God finding us. He finds us by extending His love toward us through His Son Jesus,…who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross (Philippians 2:6-8 NASB). How clear this should be to us. The only way man can know God is by?God extending Himself to us. Jesus, God the Son, became a Man, He emptied?Himself, He became sin, He humbled Himself to the point of death that?we might have life—life that is found only in union with God. It is by faith in Christ, and Christ alone, that men have hope of reconciliation with God who is good. May God grant us vision to see this truth and may we ever call upon the name of the Savior. Questions for Study 1. What are the dangers of over-emphasizing God as our friend (page 1)? 2. How would you respond to the assertion that God is not knowable (pages?1, 2)? 3. Does God’s incomprehensibility mean He can’t be known at all? Explain (page 2)? 4. Why is it important to understand that God is logical or reasonable, as we understand logic and reason (pages 2, 3)? 5. What was the serpent’s initial assault on humanity? What, do you suppose, was his reason for this (page 3)? 6. Are disagreements in the church a reasonable motive to avoid seeking after God (pages 3, 4)? 7. Discuss the relationship between God and goodness (page 4). 8. What someone says they hate God, what are they actually saying(pages 4, 5)? 9. If God is good and man is not, what is the answer to this dilemma(pages 5, 6)? |
