So there are alot of things to talk about with Miles so I guess it is just an issue where to begin. Some things I have noticed and please feel free to comment further on anyone or all or interject your own!
1.) An overarching theme of God as incredibly human, possesing human emotions almost (or entirely) and reading this has given me new thoughts on the idea of all of us being created in God's image. Miles walks a fine line between just raising possibilities of God's motives, reactions and making an argument that God is really confuzed at times.
2.) Of course Miles is able to do this because he is taking a literary biography of God and, let's be honest, the Bible is not very clear on one, two or possibly even three things (joke). But the vagueness of the Bible does open itself to this type of literary hypotheticals that Miles puts forth. I would think if you flip this around on its other side it might become a question of how much is really in the Bible? How much room is there for interpretation of possible core doctrines of not just Mormonism and Christianity but possibly all Abrahamic faiths? Hopefully later on I will maybe introduce some specific issues in Miles (ie. creation and the fall of man to be specific).
3.) We have talked about enternal progression and "man is as God once was". Of course both of these ideas can mean many things but they both practically point to the possibility of God being able to eternally progress (since we are made in God's image and we are able to eternally progress) and possesing some of the same emotional and mental characteristics of man (since as man is, God once was). When these are combined it does not make Miles correct in all his hypothesis and arguments, but does it open the door a little more on them?
Now everyone pray for the Rockies to win the World Series.
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This is an interesting question, I think - can we think about God the same way Miles does? Does he intend to be presenting a coherent theological viewpoint, or does he want us to learn something through his artistic interpretation?
Go Sox.
Post a Comment