Thank you unthinker. I'm often happy to discuss different perspectives, but I'm not interested in arguing, proving or defending articles of faith. I really find that counter-productive. Just saying, for the record.
Anyway, here is the perspective from which I understand and interpret these things.
God's providence of salvation is His work of restoring his children and his vision/ideal for them from the fallen condition that arose due to the mistake of Adam and Eve. This restoration necessarily involves recovery of the relationship between God and Man. From the perspective of relationship, Man became God's enemy when the fall occurred. Becoming slaves to Satan, we became the enemy of God.
To even begin recovering the original relationship of parent-child that God created man for, God needed to bring us to a point where we are not enemies. That's everything that took place prior to Abraham. In Abraham's lineage, God established a loyal lineage that he could relate to as his servants. Everyone else outside that lineage remained in the position of God's enemies. This is why God stood on the side of the Israelites against everyone else.
From the viewpoint of the heart, the Israelites were in a position of servants to God, but not yet his children. A servant is connected, but nowhere as close in heart as a child.
It was only once Jesus arrived that a higher level of relationship could open up. Jesus was the one to open it. He revealed to the Israelites the truth on a much more profound level, teaching them that not only is God their Lord, he is their father.
Accordingly, prior to the coming of Jesus, men, in the position of servants, were not above the angels, and their potential to stand closer to God than the angels was not yet restored. However, also, because the Messiah had not yet come, God the Father had no restorated form in which he could directly appear to humanity. Thus, he appeared via angels and spiritual representations, such as the burning bush.
If an angel stands as the emissary of God to the servants of God, then humbling oneself to that emissary is not bowing down to the emissary, but to him who sent the emissary, the one the emissary represents.
This all changed once Jesus arrived. Notice how the scripture in the New Testament consistently reveals a relationship between man and angels that is different to the dynamic in the Old Testament era.
Your quotes regarding angels being servants etc, are from the NT. And, as Paul explains, we humans are in fact originally in a position to judge the angels.
Your apology (Sorry) is an interesting addition. I think there is some validity to your view that "God is not on our side", but I think it adheres far too closely to the view that humans are trash, and only trash. It adheres to the view that the separation between God and Man is inherent, rather than acquired.
In fact, we are contradictory beings, having both God's seed and nature inside us, but also inherited and acquired fallen nature. But which is our true self? It is the nature that God created us with.
Thus, from this view, God is always on our side, but we are not always on God's side, and we are not always on our own side. This should be clearly, clearly obvious. When a person sins, is he helping himself, or harming himself? Whenever we act in a way that contradicts God's nature within us, we are hurting ourselves and can truly be said to "not be on our own side".
"For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world, but loses his soul?"
No one is suggesting that God is in anyway "ours to command", but in a relationship of love, partners are free to respond. Can God respond to us? Yes, surely. Does he want to? I would say most emphatically yes. God wants us to do that which is good for us, and coming closer to our Father is always good for us. The separation from God is what is not good for us.
I fully agree with you that "knock and the door shall be opened" is about us seeking God, engaging with God. Most assuredly so. But it also clearly shows that God is more than willing to respond to us, when we make the right moves. I think it's fair to say that in this scripture, Christ is telling us:
"Hey, the ball is in YOUR court. All you have to do is knock. If you do, then the door will be opened (by God)."
An overly doctrinal adherence to preexisting theologies can limit one's ability to relate in heart with the Father. Why? Because all the theologies up until today have been developed by persons of limited understanding and with an as-yet limited relationship to the Father.
"For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known." 1 cor 13:12 (as I am sure you know!)
Even Paul himself recognized that his grasp of the truth was limited, and that at some point in the future, he, and we, are destined to understand more fully. Thus, a flexibility in not adhering too much to existing theology is an important stance. Otherwise, we might well be stuck in the same way that the religious leaders of Jesus' time were unable to recognize the new level of understanding that he brought. T
They rejected him, because they were stuck on their existing theologies, instead of being open to him in heart. Who was open to Jesus in heart? Paul, Andrew and those that responded to him. Not because of theology, but because of heart and the spirit. However, Jesus also continually pointed out how existing scripture actually pointed to him, if but understood in the right way.
If one considers that the entire purpose of the truth is to guide us how to recognize the Messiah, and re-establish our relationship with God, and restore our relationship with him, many profound elements of truth emerge from scripture.
On that note, I would point out that your idea that the one who appeared to Joshua is the 'pre-incarnate Christ' is an interpretation. In other words, it is a view adopted by looking at scripture and coming up with an interpretation that seems to fit the scriptural content, as you read it. That's fine. What else can one do? However, it's important to recognize that such interpretations are in the end beliefs, and interpretations and beliefs are not scripture itself. This distinction is important, because when we think that our belief = scripture, we are no longer able to recognize that "now we see in a mirror dimly". I mean, nowhere in the scripture that I have read are the words or expression "this is the pre-incarnate Christ" found!!!
Please note: I am not attempting to say you are wrong, or that your beliefs are wrong. I'm just sharing my perspective.
When we recognize that, as children on the path to a complete restoration some time in our future, we are compelled to read and then adopt an understanding of God's word, we become more flexible to seek the relationship, rather than the religion. We can tune in more effectively to the Spirit, instead of grasping onto and getting affixed to the Law.
Thank you for your long reply setting out your position.
I note however that you do not address that key factor that Joshua - at the start of his time of leadership was told as Moses was - at the start of his time of leadership to take off his sandals because this was Holy Ground.
Yes, I accept that they were in the presence of God. That is what made it holy ground, because of course, originally, ALL ground is holy ground.
As God appeared to Moses and spoke to him through 'a burning bush'. Was the bush literally burning? Was it a spiritual phenomena in that Moses spiritual sense were opened by God's grace so that he could experience FELLING in God's direct presence?
Aren't we always in God's presence? Isn't the real issue that we are unable to perceive that, to experience that, because of the muddying effect of our spiritual condition? I'm inclined to think so.
But in certain instances, God can provide a grace that strips away all the artificial barriers generated by our spiritual condition. I think that was the case in the instances of Moses and Joshua. Then, God the Father, who is invisible, appeared to them through the agency of an angelic being.
In my view, having a clear grasp of the nature of spiritual reality, how the spirit world works, under what laws, etc., these are quite important when one is striving to interpret and understand what the scriptures are describing.
Thank you unthinker. I'm often happy to discuss different perspectives, but I'm not interested in arguing, proving or defending articles of faith. I really find that counter-productive. Just saying, for the record.
Anyway, here is the perspective from which I understand and interpret these things.
God's providence of salvation is His work of restoring his children and his vision/ideal for them from the fallen condition that arose due to the mistake of Adam and Eve. This restoration necessarily involves recovery of the relationship between God and Man. From the perspective of relationship, Man became God's enemy when the fall occurred. Becoming slaves to Satan, we became the enemy of God.
To even begin recovering the original relationship of parent-child that God created man for, God needed to bring us to a point where we are not enemies. That's everything that took place prior to Abraham. In Abraham's lineage, God established a loyal lineage that he could relate to as his servants. Everyone else outside that lineage remained in the position of God's enemies. This is why God stood on the side of the Israelites against everyone else.
From the viewpoint of the heart, the Israelites were in a position of servants to God, but not yet his children. A servant is connected, but nowhere as close in heart as a child.
It was only once Jesus arrived that a higher level of relationship could open up. Jesus was the one to open it. He revealed to the Israelites the truth on a much more profound level, teaching them that not only is God their Lord, he is their father.
Accordingly, prior to the coming of Jesus, men, in the position of servants, were not above the angels, and their potential to stand closer to God than the angels was not yet restored. However, also, because the Messiah had not yet come, God the Father had no restorated form in which he could directly appear to humanity. Thus, he appeared via angels and spiritual representations, such as the burning bush.
If an angel stands as the emissary of God to the servants of God, then humbling oneself to that emissary is not bowing down to the emissary, but to him who sent the emissary, the one the emissary represents.
This all changed once Jesus arrived. Notice how the scripture in the New Testament consistently reveals a relationship between man and angels that is different to the dynamic in the Old Testament era.
Your quotes regarding angels being servants etc, are from the NT. And, as Paul explains, we humans are in fact originally in a position to judge the angels.
Your apology (Sorry) is an interesting addition. I think there is some validity to your view that "God is not on our side", but I think it adheres far too closely to the view that humans are trash, and only trash. It adheres to the view that the separation between God and Man is inherent, rather than acquired.
In fact, we are contradictory beings, having both God's seed and nature inside us, but also inherited and acquired fallen nature. But which is our true self? It is the nature that God created us with.
Thus, from this view, God is always on our side, but we are not always on God's side, and we are not always on our own side. This should be clearly, clearly obvious. When a person sins, is he helping himself, or harming himself? Whenever we act in a way that contradicts God's nature within us, we are hurting ourselves and can truly be said to "not be on our own side".
"For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world, but loses his soul?"
No one is suggesting that God is in anyway "ours to command", but in a relationship of love, partners are free to respond. Can God respond to us? Yes, surely. Does he want to? I would say most emphatically yes. God wants us to do that which is good for us, and coming closer to our Father is always good for us. The separation from God is what is not good for us.
I fully agree with you that "knock and the door shall be opened" is about us seeking God, engaging with God. Most assuredly so. But it also clearly shows that God is more than willing to respond to us, when we make the right moves. I think it's fair to say that in this scripture, Christ is telling us:
"Hey, the ball is in YOUR court. All you have to do is knock. If you do, then the door will be opened (by God)."
An overly doctrinal adherence to preexisting theologies can limit one's ability to relate in heart with the Father. Why? Because all the theologies up until today have been developed by persons of limited understanding and with an as-yet limited relationship to the Father.
"For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known." 1 cor 13:12 (as I am sure you know!)
Even Paul himself recognized that his grasp of the truth was limited, and that at some point in the future, he, and we, are destined to understand more fully. Thus, a flexibility in not adhering too much to existing theology is an important stance. Otherwise, we might well be stuck in the same way that the religious leaders of Jesus' time were unable to recognize the new level of understanding that he brought. T
They rejected him, because they were stuck on their existing theologies, instead of being open to him in heart. Who was open to Jesus in heart? Paul, Andrew and those that responded to him. Not because of theology, but because of heart and the spirit. However, Jesus also continually pointed out how existing scripture actually pointed to him, if but understood in the right way.
If one considers that the entire purpose of the truth is to guide us how to recognize the Messiah, and re-establish our relationship with God, and restore our relationship with him, many profound elements of truth emerge from scripture.
On that note, I would point out that your idea that the one who appeared to Joshua is the 'pre-incarnate Christ' is an interpretation. In other words, it is a view adopted by looking at scripture and coming up with an interpretation that seems to fit the scriptural content, as you read it. That's fine. What else can one do? However, it's important to recognize that such interpretations are in the end beliefs, and interpretations and beliefs are not scripture itself. This distinction is important, because when we think that our belief = scripture, we are no longer able to recognize that "now we see in a mirror dimly". I mean, nowhere in the scripture that I have read are the words or expression "this is the pre-incarnate Christ" found!!!
Please note: I am not attempting to say you are wrong, or that your beliefs are wrong. I'm just sharing my perspective.
When we recognize that, as children on the path to a complete restoration some time in our future, we are compelled to read and then adopt an understanding of God's word, we become more flexible to seek the relationship, rather than the religion. We can tune in more effectively to the Spirit, instead of grasping onto and getting affixed to the Law.
Thanks.
Thank you for your long reply setting out your position.
I note however that you do not address that key factor that Joshua - at the start of his time of leadership was told as Moses was - at the start of his time of leadership to take off his sandals because this was Holy Ground.
They both met the Holy God.
Thanks Unthinker.
Yes, I accept that they were in the presence of God. That is what made it holy ground, because of course, originally, ALL ground is holy ground.
As God appeared to Moses and spoke to him through 'a burning bush'. Was the bush literally burning? Was it a spiritual phenomena in that Moses spiritual sense were opened by God's grace so that he could experience FELLING in God's direct presence?
Aren't we always in God's presence? Isn't the real issue that we are unable to perceive that, to experience that, because of the muddying effect of our spiritual condition? I'm inclined to think so.
But in certain instances, God can provide a grace that strips away all the artificial barriers generated by our spiritual condition. I think that was the case in the instances of Moses and Joshua. Then, God the Father, who is invisible, appeared to them through the agency of an angelic being.
In my view, having a clear grasp of the nature of spiritual reality, how the spirit world works, under what laws, etc., these are quite important when one is striving to interpret and understand what the scriptures are describing.
I appreciate the reply. A blessing on your day.