This was taken from the excellent book featured to the left: Heretic's Guide to Eternity.
Burke quotes a web journalist Tim Boucher as saying:
Religions are our attempt to give form to the Divine because we suck at contemplating infinity.
Burke adds: Religions are the nets we cast in hopes of catching God. But it's like trying to catch the sea with a net. It's much more likely that we'll just get ourselves tangled up, and god will slip through. I think god wants us to follow and imitate him as he playfully slips our nets and challenges us to reach new levels and understanding of love.
What a great image of God slipping our nets. It's like as soon as we want to trap him into any form or make up some kind of law regarding his nature, or determine that god is like... God finds a way to slip of that confine and show us that he is still in fact God. I wonder today what confines I have that he has already slipped out of as I still hold my net?
7 comments:
I'm not sure that I totally grasp Burke's comments, but the quote reminds me of Barth's description of God as a bird in flight...whenever we try to describe Him He's no longer there, or in another place he (i.e., Barth) compares us trying to describe God to walking around a mountain...each time you go around you see something new and different...its all about the balance I guess...transcendence and immanence...mystery and revelation...we struggle with balance more times than not, at least I know I do...thanks for the thoughts J
I like to think of it like Moses as God passes by... At best Moses got to see God's "backside" as it is hebrew or his "passing by". Moses, one of God's most cherished, got to see God's butt (as my eldest daughter put it). I think Burkes point is that our (humanities) theological trappings (nets) do not a "God" make.
Thanks for pointing this out. I just finished reading the book but completely forgot about this image! This is really good!
I hope to read more of your thoughts about this book. Personally, I found a lot of value in the book.
Adam,
Thanks for the post. It really was a good book. He presents much to think about in the area of grace, most of which I am still grappling with. I found much influence by N.T. Wright and Brian McLaren. Not new for the emerging conversation, but with the power of theooze.com website behind him he presents a strong arguement for those who have been hurt by the traditional church and those needing to "reimage" God. These are the strengths of the book in my opinion. It's weakness is the case he doesn't make for his "unique" view of universalism. Much could have been drawn from C.S. Lewis in this regard as he and Lewis share somewhat similar views. What were your thoughts here?
In regard to the universalism discussion, personally I was glad they didn't spend more time on that subject. I agree with you that there could have been more done with it but I think perhaps that is another book. I wanted a little more in this book related to practically how this all works out in the life of the church (especially outside of or along with the institutional church). However, I think the book was good and I was glad it brought up a number of good things to talk about (one being their ideas of universalism).
On another note, you mentioned C.S. Lewis' views regarding universalism/heaven/hell, etc. Have you read any George MacDonald? He is my favorite and has influenced me a lot. He influenced Lewis much and some of Lewis' thoughts of heaven/hell are from MacDonald (though tempered).
Anyways, I sugged reading MacDonald.
on a slightly related note...I just made a pot of chili (it's hot too...that's the connection!) and thought of you man. if you lived a little closer, I'd bring you some. If you're in the Jenison area in the next day or so, swing by and I'll send you home with some.
Post a Comment