“There is no greater love than this; that a man would lay down his life for his friends.” -Jesus of Nazareth
Perhaps some of you are already filled with rage at the entertaining of a Heretical notion ill defined but perceived- and rightfully perceived. I mean no disrespect, or sowing of discord; All I want to do is to speak the truth. I want to live the truth; to be true, and rightous and pure. It’s rather difficult to do that depending on how one veiws God. I want to see God’s face, so this case against tradition will be pondered for the sake of Him who is constantly seeking my best. And shared for the pure in heart.
Now to prepare for the heresy; the euthyphro dilemma: Is something good because God wills it, or is it good because God himself submits to it. If we say the former, than ethics are arbitrary, and God coerced them. If we say the latter, then they exist apart from God… And God isn’t maximally great because he isn’t truly independent.
It therefore follows that God’s nature defines “The Good” or what’s good, or goodness itself. He is Good, and there is no goodness that isn’t grounded in Him.
Now, it gets very controversial; Either ethics and Love are different attributes of God or they are one and the same; so God’s ethical nature exists apart from his nature of Fatherhood, or else they exist together as one nature. If they are seperate nature’s then God can treat one situation two different ways, each compromising another if choosen. For instance: God loves us so thuroughly and definitely that even in our sin he would save us. Yet, traditionally, our debt needs payed for. His love would forgive us, but his moral compass drives him a different course.
Now you may say that Christ saved us by taking this debt, but is that debt truly paid on your account because God choose to take that anger our on his son as a punching bag? Even though Christ choose to take this debt that by no means makes it invalid; for the wrong done has been seperated from the one who did wrong; and even if the debt is paid, it hasn’t been justly delt (George MacDonald). Wouldn’t changing my heart and asking for honest forgiveness and what I could do make up for the wrong be even better?
This point is so difficult to express because it is exactly what is preached. So let me ask this: If Justice is doing to someone as they deserve, how is Christ’s sacrifice justice? We aren’t getting what we deserve; what has altered is that The Debt of sin is seen more as some itch in God’s character to strike someone- and doesn’t love bare all burdens?
So, if God is both loving and Just, he can’t fully be either. Should we then accept a God whose character is a combination of love and Justice, but neither fully? No; God is love. Not only that, but our ethical values are grounded in Him; so, it is therefore the case that God’s love is the ground of Justice. What God does is Just; because Justice stems from Love.
This ursups a terrible amount of difficult questions, but, as far as I can see, there is no faulty logic. I’ll have to get to those another time. Any thoughts?
Thoughts implimented from:
- Plato’s Euthyphro and William Lane Craig’s Response
- Reference to William Lane Craig’s Ontological Argument (Maximally Great)
- George MacDonald’s Unspoken Sermons; On Justice