Benjamin Chung May 15 at 7:52am
Hi Becky:
You have a fabulous mind, so please comment on this concept about the one God: henotheism.
(henos, Gk for one, but not in an exclusive term, it may refer to the worship or devotion of one god, but not to the exclusion of others).
I have begun to explore the possibility of devotion of one god but not to the exclusion of others. Here what I see, the OT esp. touching the oneness of God is not mutually exclusive to the existence of other gods. "Thou shalt no other gods before me" and yet the term God - elohim is plural. The Genesis term is plural "let us make men after our image." It seems to me this irrational jealousy of Hebraic God points to the possibility of so many others, and this exclusion of these is either by migration (ie. Abram had to move out of his home town Ur), or by war (total destruction of Chemosh, Ashdod, or El in the act of genocide by invading Israelites, assuming the biblical record is accurate). The henotheistic Israelites were accredited to their demise and exile. It was suggested that after that post-exilic Jews were strict on monotheism (one god, but totally excludes others).
This is what I term as my way or the high way approach.
I think this monotheism creates a tremendous problem with early Christians since the founder Jesus also affirms this doctrine, but he hints his divinity , even quotes Psalms where God is seen in saying to the assembly of Gods, "ye are gods." God is seeing here to acknowledge other gods, and this was used to justify possibility of other gods.
I do believe that it is even much emphasized in the Christianized Roman empire, assuming the imperial cult to Emperor worship to the one Christian god, and his son Jesus. In the Imperial edict of Nicene-Constantinopleton Creed, AD 325-341, the language of exclusion has applied to the worship of strictly one God, maker of all visible and invisible realms. Anyone who went against such is dead, or would be dead.
I am not sure applying Roman laws to justify a theological speculation is "Christian." Calvin had a play in the hanging of Severtus In Geneva. What a Christian act, simply because he denied trinity.
If one shifts carefully through the Jewish text, I do believe, that earlier concept of god, is that he isnot the only one, . He shares his glory with others, with those "the sons of gods" in Genesis (or sons of God-elohim), and that Elohim is often mixed with El such as in Jacob's ladder, "El, elohi-Israel", singular term of a unknown God to him, but he tried to define this one God (henos), from others, so he could worship this one, in that context, if this god saves him, leads him safe back to the land he is leaving, this is his God and the place shalt be called Beth-El. He is not a strict monotheistic person as theologians would have painted him as one. His god is El, which is the Canaanite god El.
You can explain this by using progressive revelation, but it makes little sense to me, that God Elohim is incapable of explaining the most basic tenants that became the unshakable foundation of all three monotheistic religions.
Maybe this deity is not exclusive as we painted him to be. Perhaps this cult of devotion on to Jesus and his personalistic salvation may have to be examined, in this light,. God has reveal his nature and being to so many other cultures, and that Christian missionaries cannot and should not take away their understanding of God or gods,. but merely add to that,. This is in the light that we can better help the people to come to understanding of Jesus not this cumbersome evangelical theological exclusionism,. And by doing so, not to annihilate the others culture or faith, but adds to theirs.
As it was taught by the Saviour, "he who is not against us, is for us." His teaching is universal in the golden rule, love others as yourself. The practice of that, would definitely be Christian.
So this would be my henotheistic missiology .
You have a fabulous mind, so please comment on this concept about the one God: henotheism.
(henos, Gk for one, but not in an exclusive term, it may refer to the worship or devotion of one god, but not to the exclusion of others).
I have begun to explore the possibility of devotion of one god but not to the exclusion of others. Here what I see, the OT esp. touching the oneness of God is not mutually exclusive to the existence of other gods. "Thou shalt no other gods before me" and yet the term God - elohim is plural. The Genesis term is plural "let us make men after our image." It seems to me this irrational jealousy of Hebraic God points to the possibility of so many others, and this exclusion of these is either by migration (ie. Abram had to move out of his home town Ur), or by war (total destruction of Chemosh, Ashdod, or El in the act of genocide by invading Israelites, assuming the biblical record is accurate). The henotheistic Israelites were accredited to their demise and exile. It was suggested that after that post-exilic Jews were strict on monotheism (one god, but totally excludes others).
This is what I term as my way or the high way approach.
I think this monotheism creates a tremendous problem with early Christians since the founder Jesus also affirms this doctrine, but he hints his divinity , even quotes Psalms where God is seen in saying to the assembly of Gods, "ye are gods." God is seeing here to acknowledge other gods, and this was used to justify possibility of other gods.
I do believe that it is even much emphasized in the Christianized Roman empire, assuming the imperial cult to Emperor worship to the one Christian god, and his son Jesus. In the Imperial edict of Nicene-Constantinopleton Creed, AD 325-341, the language of exclusion has applied to the worship of strictly one God, maker of all visible and invisible realms. Anyone who went against such is dead, or would be dead.
I am not sure applying Roman laws to justify a theological speculation is "Christian." Calvin had a play in the hanging of Severtus In Geneva. What a Christian act, simply because he denied trinity.
If one shifts carefully through the Jewish text, I do believe, that earlier concept of god, is that he isnot the only one, . He shares his glory with others, with those "the sons of gods" in Genesis (or sons of God-elohim), and that Elohim is often mixed with El such as in Jacob's ladder, "El, elohi-Israel", singular term of a unknown God to him, but he tried to define this one God (henos), from others, so he could worship this one, in that context, if this god saves him, leads him safe back to the land he is leaving, this is his God and the place shalt be called Beth-El. He is not a strict monotheistic person as theologians would have painted him as one. His god is El, which is the Canaanite god El.
You can explain this by using progressive revelation, but it makes little sense to me, that God Elohim is incapable of explaining the most basic tenants that became the unshakable foundation of all three monotheistic religions.
Maybe this deity is not exclusive as we painted him to be. Perhaps this cult of devotion on to Jesus and his personalistic salvation may have to be examined, in this light,. God has reveal his nature and being to so many other cultures, and that Christian missionaries cannot and should not take away their understanding of God or gods,. but merely add to that,. This is in the light that we can better help the people to come to understanding of Jesus not this cumbersome evangelical theological exclusionism,. And by doing so, not to annihilate the others culture or faith, but adds to theirs.
As it was taught by the Saviour, "he who is not against us, is for us." His teaching is universal in the golden rule, love others as yourself. The practice of that, would definitely be Christian.
So this would be my henotheistic missiology .
No comments:
Post a Comment