Thursday 16 April 2020

God the Father -- some valuable insights from Richard Cocks

Excerpt:

...The Good Father wants his son to be his own man. He hopes the son will be good and kind. That he has a mind of his own, that he is productive and realizes his talents, and hopes to be surprised by his choices and his thoughts. A Good Father would be extremely disappointed were his son to become a fanatic – either ideological or religious – and God forbid, gets into planes and murders strangers imagining that he is doing the Father’s will.

The Good Father hopes his son will be creative. But to command creativity is a self-cancelling affair. He patiently awaits the son’s creative response to life and reality that reflects in some way the Father’s own loving, creative, engagement. There is the revelation of the Father to the son, and the son’s revelation to the Father. This will partly be a matter of what the son chooses to be interested in. No proper Father wants his son living in the basement playing video games wondering why women are not interested in him and becoming resentful.

In strongly paternalistic cultures, the son does not get to be his own man until the father dies. Since God the Father is definitely not dying we better hope God does not subscribe to authoritarianism. In the rather good book Being Mortal, the author describes a pater familias who lived to be over one hundred years old. Every day he would get on his horse and survey his property. His sons were in their seventies and eighties, all waiting to get out from under the thumb of this horrible, never-dying tyrant; waiting to be their own men in charge of their own lives. 

It is important that the son be his own man. What father would respect a simpering idiot and want one for a son? It takes two to have a relationship. It takes two for love. The father lets the son tell him who he is, rather than setting up a template and measuring the son by that standard...

By Richard Cocks. Read the whole thing at The Orthosphere


Note: I was particularly struck by the observation that the fact God our Father does not die goes-with the distinctively Christian ideal that we are children of God - and children that God wants to grow-up.  Jesus Christ is the example of a fully grown-up Man.

And - with that as the aim - this goes-with our condition as mortals, here on an earth; each in a situation that provides the kind of experiences we most need to learn-from.

This is the nature of our relationship with God. It would not help us grow-up if God contually stepped-in to save us from the consequences of our choices. Neither would it help if he prevented or over-rode those choices. God as a tyrant or dictator demanding obedient submission would not allow us to mature into that full spiritual adulthood he hopes us to achieve.

The first line for God is always to allow us to work-thing-out for ourselves; to let us muddle-through by trial-and-error. Of course, God is always present and (as creator) can do things for us or bail us out of trouble whenever that is for our eternal benefit: so miracles do happen...

Thus, God the ideal Father is the best metaphor to help us understand our relationship with Him - but we must remain to take account of the fact the God, and we ourselves, are eternal - and our relationship is intended to be eternal.

And that makes a difference. Some situations might suffice for the short-term, in specific circumstances of mortal life on earth - but would not be desirable in the context of Heavenly life everlasting.
  

4 comments:

Epimetheus said...

God as Loving Father rather than Tyrant Father. Somehow this line of thought provides a powerful sense of relief!

Epimetheus said...

I was thinking lately that God is not only the most powerful being in existence, and not only a creative artist type, but He must also the most emotionally sensitive being in existence. This might make sense of the emotionally-charged jilted-lover God of the Old Testament.

Maybe God is a highly sensitive person? If He's connected by intimate love to everyone who exists, how could he be otherwise?

Epimetheus said...

I was thinking lately that God is not only the most powerful being in existence, and not only a creative artist type, but He must also the most emotionally sensitive being in existence. This might make sense of the emotionally-charged jilted-lover God of the Old Testament.

Maybe God is a highly sensitive person? If He's connected by intimate love to everyone who exists, how could he be otherwise?

Bruce Charlton said...

@Epi - I always read the Bible with the assumption that all understanding had to be refracted and filtered through the person of the specific author (including subsequent copyists and scribes) in that time and place.

I don't think it was possible for an Old Testament Prophet to understand the nature of God in the way that New Testament authors could, having known Jesus personally (in the case of the Fourth Gospel), or having experienced contact with the Holy Ghost and recording the effect on witnesses (the Synoptic authors), or by spiritual contact (Paul).

This is one of the reasons for the priority of the New Testament over the Old in terms of authority. Christianity is, after all, a religion located In Time, with an historical sequence of events - before and after Jesus, primarily. I am always surprised and dismayed at the amount of effort expended by theologians in denying this (surely?) obvious fact.