Interventionist God or Non Interventionist God?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!


Right, but by being in relationship, God can't help but be intervening. God may not be in control, but God is definitely taking action. "Luring" is still intervention.

One could argue that if the "luring" doesn't produce an action - then the intervention is powerless......... Often due to our past experiences of life, which influence us, we are not able to respond to God's lure.
One of the things that appeals to me about Process Theology is that the loving God will present us with another opportunity to contribute to the common good. Isn't it nice to know that, even if we give up ourselves, God's unconditional love means God never gives up on us?
 
I can accept that to the extent that you say that "God doesn't intervene." In other words, it's a divine choice. But where you go from there (this is not a criticism, by the way, just an observation of the differences between us) is why I cannot be a follower of Process theology. I believe that God can intervene directly and decisively if God chooses to, and I believe that God has at times and in some situation done so. I would also say that "luring" or "influencing" is a form of divine intervention, which leaves it to the person being lured to make the decision of whether or not to be lured. Thus, free will. I did think that these words:



are a good summary of what I would consider quite mainstream Christian faith. God lures, God calls, but God does not coerce. I believe God's plan is more of a "big picture" plan that will be worked out and that God is directing, but I do not believe that God micromanages our lives or creation. In effect, God has created conditions that will lead to a certain and definite outcome, but there are variables in terms of how that outcome comes about.

I liked your two posts, even if I didn't completely agree with the second. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

See, revdd, we can get on with each other, if we try, can't we? ;)
I was very impressed with the way you conducted Carter Hansen's funeral and subsequently disappointed (Pissed off, actually!) when you got stuck into me for daring to criticise my minister.
Howsomeever, that's water under the bridge now..........

Yes, we will have to agree to disagree about an Interventionist God.

Why would a loving God not intervene more often, if He could, the world sure needs some help?

I can't accept that, whilst God might lure, God directs. The idea of a directing God sounds too much like being a human manager to me.....
 
Yes, it's lovely. Reminded me of Cohen.

Did Cohen know how to extend myths in a stretch of song as hung ... on arias even ... eve in dark fabric as Gabriel ...

Myths that will be the death of meis and I hope to go out with a giggle ... at least a'rift of humus with Daisy taking root ... a devilish flowering if you were planting poppies for comfort of the pained ... the blossoming code of numblyNess? Mire blight to sensations! But if you read into it ... it's deeper ...
 
As a Harry Potter fan, I can only say: Harry will live on forever ! (Together with Elvis, Donald Duck and so on- not sure about Justin)

In your mind ... but then if the mind is dis believable as the non-substance of sol' ... is this God's nothing zone/Zoan where something can be put into it as intervening power of psyche moderate?

Are heat and light something you can grasp in weight and volume ... then is the darkness ... abstract delight as creation? Yah Hoo Dah thunk t as a depressive sinking in ... now about Yah Hoo Dah ... and the Hebrew Luring with that Touring crowd of outside thinkers ... something beyond the process of institution cards and gambling over the common people. Then there is the question of the label on the great fisherman ...

Trump is a singular people ... bi rites? Or was it something he had to sell t win ... like a'sol to the deviate?
 
I agree that the authors and the translators and the fans make discussing Christianity fascinating to me. But the popularity and personal fascination doesn't make it true, no matter how much you wish it would. And most people here get that. They may have other reasons for believing it, but they realize your argument is a dead end.

But if it helps, I bet unsafe is totally on board.

Theis populace elected the Trump Card ... or did they?
 
See, revdd, we can get on with each other, if we try, can't we? ;)
I wasn't aware that we couldn't.

PilgrimsProgress said:
I was very impressed with the way you conducted Carter Hansen's funeral and subsequently disappointed (Pissed off, actually!) when you got stuck into me for daring to criticise my minister.
Howsomeever, that's water under the bridge now..........
Thank you for the compliment. It was a very difficult service for a number of reasons. I thought it went as well as could be expected given the circumstances. As to you being "pissed off" with me, well, you're not the first. I remember the basic issue; I confess that I don't remember the details. I do remember that I strongly disagreed with you about something. That's OK. I strongly disagree with lots of people about lots of things. Generally, I don't hold grudges because of it. Yes - water under the bridge.

PilgrimsProgress said:
Yes, we will have to agree to disagree about an Interventionist God.
Yes. No problem. Different strokes for different folks.

PilgrimsProgress said:
Why would a loving God not intervene more often, if He could, the world sure needs some help?
I believe God is intervening all the time in various ways. Even natural revelation is an intervention. Perhaps God doesn't intervene in the way or as quickly or as decisively as we would like God to intervene. God intervenes through people. But God doesn't solve the problems for us; God allows us to come up with the solutions. Personally, I wouldn't want it any other way - and, believe me, I've faced situations where I wish God had intervened more quickly and more directly, but I also see those times as growing points. I guess I'm very impressed by the faith of faithful Jews, for example - who have hung on to their faith, their rituals, etc., even through some of the worst persecutions in history. Something makes them understand the importance of faith in God even though faith in God has not made things easy for them.

PilgrimsProgress said:
I can't accept that, whilst God might lure, God directs. The idea of a directing God sounds too much like being a human manager to me.....
Directs only in the sense that there is some sort of plan being worked out; an outcome that is already determined. Many twists and turns lie in the road to getting there, however. An example from the natural universe: The sun has a lifespan of - what - 10-15 billion years. We know that. It's basically pre-determined. The earth will be burned to a crisp when it dies. We know that. It's basically pre-determined. But there's a lot happening before we reach that point, and the death of the sun will not be the end of the creation.
 
Last edited:
One more time Chansen, I'm not using the idea of passive intervention as a tool for belief. As for most people here realizing my argument is a dead end, that is complete conjecture on your part. For someone who is so insistent on empirical evidence, you're awfully quick to throw out terms like "most people" without a clue as to whether it's true or not.
[FONT=Open Sans, sans-serif]
I pretty much know what arguments for faith fly with the Christians here. I've been around for a while. The argument you used wasn't something most people here would jump on board with. You have unsafe and airclean and blackbelt cheering for you, though. And that's its own sort of Trinity.

[/FONT]
Now I know I'm going off-thread, but regarding my beliefs in general being a dead end, perhaps we could talk about the big bad world out there and evidence that is empirical. A major university study released this summer shows Christian churches who have a strong connection to God are growing and churches with a weak connection to God are declining. Maclean's magazine published a very interesting article on the study. The basic equations are not difficult: Christian Faith Community + God = Growing Faith Community. Christian Faith Community - God = Declining Faith Community. Of course I'm sure you'll just dismiss the folks in the growing churches as weak-minded lunkheads, not at all capable of reasoning and intellectual thought and fooled by hocus pocus. That there may be thoughtful, intelligent, intellectually astute Christian believers out there doesn't seem to be something you can accept. But it's true. And I'm not just trying to score points here. But what I can say with certainty is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, fully revealed in Jesus Christ, resonates with people. It always has. It always will.
With faith, formulas are never that easy. Gretta Vosper, who is your inspiration, has already wrecked one formula by growing West Hill in the absence of God in her church. Other, very faithful churches have failed. There is no simple math formula at work here.

I more suggest there is a recipe book, and different people will react more positively with different recipes within the book. Some will find a recipe they mostly like, but will want it personalìzed to their tastes. And for some, God is a bitter ingredient they can entirely do without.
 
An example from the natural universe: The sun has a lifespan of - what - 10-15 billion years. We know that. It's basically pre-determined. The earth will be burned to a crisp when it dies. We know that. It's basically pre-determined. But there's a lot happening before we reach that point, and the death of the sun will not be the end of the creation.

I bet it still won't be the end of my alarm company contract.
 
I bet it still won't be the end of my alarm company contract.

Does that raise stimulation ... or stimulus Eris 'n over the urges towards nothing? My grandfather told me love was nothing but something to draw some sense from once fallen into ... but he had a po' sense of wit ... quite staid and stoe-wick really ...

Good place to stoe thoughts so they wouldn't gow ah!
 
Hi Chansen, I'm sure unsafe has made some valid points here, your disagreement notwithstanding. He should, as WonderCafe2 requests, be treated with courtesy and respect.

Hi Dave. I agree with you that Unsafe is welcome on WC2 and should be treated with courtesy and respect as a human being and child of God.
But
There are many people who's posts I barely skim over and usually ignore for various reasons. Some I can't bother taking the time to try to understand because they are not written in sstandard English. Some I'm so tempter to correct, or make fun of, thee grammar that I miss the message, if there is one. Some I consider trolls. Some I find I can't talk to or reason with. So for various reasons I ignore their posts. Unsafe is one that I ignore.
I'm glad some people respond. SSometimees I find myself agreeing with the response, but often I am somewhere in the middle andd realize that I don't buy either side of the premise they are arguing.
 
Seeler, I predict there will be a biblical reference about relative sizes of intraocular debris from unsafe to you in the near future. I hope you are prepared.
 
That was dead serious. Here is what Dave wrote:

It's a similar argument to something I remember blackbelt or airclean using, to do with me supposedly believing in God because I write about God.

But that concept makes every fictional character real in that sense. Hey, if Christians want to put God in the same bin as Harry Potter, I'm not the one to stop them. But the point is serious, even if I use humour to drive it home.
Sorry to reach so far back into the thread, but I was dead serious as well.

Your point unintentionally touched on the place of mythology in faith. I have been giving some serious thought to the "reality" and "presence" of fictional characters. :)

This could be similar to the theology of Lloyd Geering as I understand it. I have never read Geering but his point of view was outlined for me by a certain clergyperson on the old CCPC website.
 
Sorry to reach so far back into the thread, but I was dead serious as well.

Your point unintentionally touched on the place of mythology in faith. I have been giving some serious thought to the "reality" and "presence" of fictional characters. :)

This could be similar to the theology of Lloyd Geering as I understand it. I have never read Geering but his point of view was outlined for me by a certain clergyperson on the old CCPC website.
Wasn't me you spoke to but I am somewhat familiar with Geering. He was essentially an early version of Vosper. Charged with heresy back in the 60's in New Zealand. I think he was Presbyterian. He denied the physical resurrection of Jesus and he denied a supernatural God who remains present in the world. If I remember correctly the charges against him were dismissed, but I don't really know much about the details of how it all went down. He's ordained, but he's a scholar more than a pastor; I believe a member of the Jesus Seminar. Long retired, of course. I'd guess he's close to 100 or maybe even older than that if he's still alive.
 
Wasn't me you spoke to but I am somewhat familiar with Geering. He was essentially an early version of Vosper. Charged with heresy back in the 60's in New Zealand. I think he was Presbyterian. He denied the physical resurrection of Jesus and he denied a supernatural God who remains present in the world. If I remember correctly the charges against him were dismissed, but I don't really know much about the details of how it all went down. He's ordained, but he's a scholar more than a pastor; I believe a member of the Jesus Seminar. Long retired, of course. I'd guess he's close to 100 or maybe even older than that if he's still alive.
Thanks for jumping in!

I have the same impression of Geering and I believe he influenced Gretta's thinking a fair bit. Ditto for Don Cupitt.

One of my frustrations with the Vosper controversy is that many who support her seem to think she is a Progressive Christian of the same ilk as Borg and Crossan.

Bishop Spong has me baffled. He has been very outspoken in his endorsement of Gretta and according to her, encouraged her to "go farther" than he was able to go. But in his early books, at least, he spoke of a very strong faith in God.
 
I was reflecting on this topic last night. When I was about 9 I strongly believed in an interventionist God -and that everything happened for a reason.
A friend at Expolorers had broken her ankle. We took the opportunity to borrow her crutches and learn to walk the 2 flights of stairs on them. I was certain that this was God's plan. and that I would break my leg soon as God had given me the opportunity to learn how to use crutches.

Didn't happen.

Now as an adult in my late 50's I mostly don't believe in an interventionist God and I know everything doesn't happen for a reason.
 
Is Geering up sort of like propping Trump ... or is that a cranked Jack ... sometimes referred to as demons in English myths ...

Thus devilish Jack O'bytes ... something to read about in some history books ... a people searching out freedom ... from oppression none-the-less!
 
I was reflecting on this topic last night. When I was about 9 I strongly believed in an interventionist God -and that everything happened for a reason.
A friend at Expolorers had broken her ankle. We took the opportunity to borrow her crutches and learn to walk the 2 flights of stairs on them. I was certain that this was God's plan. and that I would break my leg soon as God had given me the opportunity to learn how to use crutches.

Didn't happen.

Now as an adult in my late 50's I mostly don't believe in an interventionist God and I know everything doesn't happen for a reason.


Tabitha, didn't you recently hurt your ankle. Maybe this is the time God was preparing you for - get out those crutches and walk.
 
Back
Top