When God Becomes Flat

As I've tracked and engaged the writings of the late Stanley Grenz and his theological comrade John Franke, I've tended to use them as dialogue partners primarily with respect to issues of theological methodology and epistemology. However, it's been intriguing as of late to mull over their statements on the doctrine of God. In his Theology for the Community of God, Grenz makes this assertion:

In that God is love apart from the creation of the world, love characterizes God. Love is the eternal essence of the one God. But this means that it is not merely one attribute of God among many. Rather, love is the fundamental "attribute of God." "God is love" is the foundational ontological statement we can declare concerning the divine essence. God is foundationally the mutuality of the love relationship between Father and son, and this personal love is the Holy Spirit....Because throughout eternity and apart from the world the one God is love, the God who is love cannot but respond to the world in accordance to his own eternal essence, which is love. Thus, this essential characteristic of God likewise describes the way God interacts with his world. "Love," therefore, is not only the description of the eternal God in himself, it is likewise the fundamental characteristic of God in relationship with creation (p. 72).

Love as the "fundamental" divine attribute is picked up in Franke's new book Manifold Witness: "In seeking to know the character of God in response to the action of divine self-revelation, we must seek to understand the fundamental biblical assertion that 'God is love'" (p. 56, emphasis mine). I must add that I have been reasonably optimistic about the methodological progress Franke makes in this book. He seems less insistent on buying into hard linguistic constructivism and focuses more on the notion that the truth of the gospel demands to be set forth in multiple heuristic models (hence the book's title). However, I'm wondering what to do with the thought of combining the claims that love is the fundamental divine perfection and that theological reality should be rendered polyphonically.

It seems to me that Grenz and Franke flatten out the divine essence and so pass up the opportunity to stress one vital way in which the testimony of theology should be pluriform. Those of a more classically theistic bent can say, "Yes, love is God's essence. But his righteousness, immutability, aseity, faithfulness, and so on are equally his essence. Each of the divine perfections just is God's essence considered under some aspect." However, it seems to me that Grenz and Franke lose sight of an important piece of the Christian tradition and at the same time shoot down a potentially illuminating feature of doing theology in a multiple-models manner. In short, I would like to hear more on why not only, say, the atonement but also the multi-aspectival divine nature deserves a pluriform theological witness.

I also have questions about the biblical case for the centrality of the divine attribute of love. To be sure, the apostle John teaches us that God is love, but the same teaches also that God is spirit and God is light. Why not argue that God's spirituality is his fundamental perfection? Here Grenz and Franke would probably appeal to their doctrine of the Trinity, but that is an issue for another day. Any thoughts on this?

Weinandy Waxes Eloquent

Thomas Weinandy's Does God Suffer? has been, for me, a gem on the doctrine of God.  Here are some of his reflections on the teaching of the OT:

"The Old Testament never conceives of God's transcendence in opposition to his immanence, as if that which makes God wholly other is different from that which allows him to be a personal God who lovingly acts in time and history.  For the Bible, transcendence and immanence do not describe two divine modes of being or two sets of distinguishing qualities - one as God is apart from the created order and another as he is in relation to the created order.  For God to be transcendent in the biblical understanding means that he is wholly other than the created order but not apart from the created order.  That which makes him divine, and thus wholly other and so transcendent, is that which equally allows him to be active within the created order and so be immanent.  There is no opposition between God's transcendent being and his immanent activity" (p. 56).  

I may post something on Weinandy's take on impassibility itself, but any thoughts for now?

Calvin Contra Caricatures of Classical Theism

It is quite fashionable in some sectors to claim that the classical Christian description of God inherently renders him immobile and disconnected from the world. Calvin, critical of some aspects of Scholastic theology but operating broadly within the classical theism tradition, has this to say about the thought of an immobile, detached God:

"And truly God claims, and would have us grant him, omnipotence - not the empty, idle, and almost unconscious sort that the Sophists imagine, but a watchful, effective, active sort, engaged in ceaseless activity."

Institutes 1.16.3

Critical Doctrines for Pastoral Ministry

If done prayerfully, all theological reflection has bearing on our lives and ministerial labors. However, there are, in my mind, some doctrines to which pastors must pay special attention. Here are a few suggestions for now. Anything you would tweak or add to the list?

1) The Doctrine of Sanctification. Without a good understanding of how people grow in holiness, teaching, preaching, implementing spiritual disciplines, and so on will lack clarity and direction.

2) The Doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints. Can Christians turn away from Christ and forfeit their salvific blessings? Do true Christians actually do this? Pastors need to be able to exegete what is happening with parishioners who are moving away from God and to give wisdom to their people who have loved ones and friends doing the same. See the post below for my thoughts on this doctrinal issue.

3) The Doctrine of Justification. The church needs to hear the doctrine of justification by faith expounded for the sake of their spiritual rest and humility before God and others. Furthermore, Christians need to hear a thick explanation of the relationship between faith and works. Without this, they can wallow in the muck of legalism or libertinism. (We must offer more than the common comments about how we should feel a gratitude toward God that produces good works.)

4) The Doctrine of God. There are many facets of the doctrine of God that are absolutely crucial for ministry, but I'll mention here only the question of classical theism and revisionist proposals on offer today. Does God change? Does God suffer? How do we balance divine transcendence and immanence? If these questions seem disconnected from pastoral ministry, consider whether or not you would tell someone who is suffering that God is suffering right along with them. Believe it or not, your response betrays your position in a vast debate in modern theology. (Suffice it to say, I resonate with those who are hesitant to discard classical theism. See esp. Thomas Weinandy's Does God Suffer?)

5) The Doctrine of Last Things. Will we ever be rid of books about how every detail of current Middle Eastern political happenings can be found in biblical prophecy? Will our preachers take a stand against silly eschatological speculation? Will we give exhortation in faithfulness through trials and hold out the great hope of the new heavens and the new earth over against the all too common eschatology that forgets that, while we go to heaven for a time (intermediate state), heaven ultimately comes to earth?