Justification Debate
Piper and NT Wright are to big wigs in theology and they had a disagreement i few years ago. After reading them I want to comment on the main point of their disagreement. I realize I am like three years late on this debate , I feel like a guy going to the prom for the first time at age 23, always the thinker never the theologian.. ho hum..
First we will look at some things this debate is not. It is not a liberal vs. conservative debate, both men are far from Bultmannian in their thinking. They agree on many things, like “Theo-centrality of everything”, “God’s passion for his glory” are ideas central to the thinking of both men. Further, they agree on personal acquisition of salvation by individuals, along on things like the importance of church covenant, and the second coming, they all matter to both men.
Between them there seems to be some confusion over what the other believes.
There are some cultural differences like the way Wright Implying Piper is man centered, Wright could not be more wrong and a bit silly. But I am sure that Tom was just going on cultural assumptions about American’s doing theology. To understand Piper’s thought on justification as a doctrine that just answers the question am I righteous enough for God? It is clear he has not read much of piper. His works such as “Let the nations be glad” speak to the big picture of justification.
The debate circles around two points of contention the first is the defining of righteousness and role of Christ’s Obednace. The other is answering the question “what is reckoned to the believer in justification?”
For Wright the righteousness of God’ mean, essentially, ‘God’s covenant faithfulness’, For Piper it is ‘God’s commitment to act in accordance with his character and glory’. Piper understands the righteousness of God as ultimately grounded in God’s commitment to uphold his glory. (See first chapter of “Let the nations be glad” for a good explanation) Wright sees righteousness as God’s commitment to keep his promises in line with the covenant to Abraham. The shorthand way of understanding Wright’s view is God’s righteousness = God’s ‘covenant faithfulness’.
The two men give different answers to the question, “what is reckoned to the believer in justification?” Piper says the death, resurrection and righteousness of Jesus and Wright says just the death and resurrection of Jesus. In short, Wright does not believe in imputation. Now before you gather a lynch mob to go heretic hunting. Wright does affirm part of Jesus’ mission was to offer the obedience Israel could not, and that union with Jesus means we have what he has, and that a positional righteousness is given to all who belong to Jesus. (“Justification” pages 83, 82, 180) This is not far from Piper’s description of imputed righteousness.
Why does Wright drop imputation from his definition of justification? Wright understands imputed righteousness to be a confusion of categories. It only answers the question. “Am I righteous enough for God?” (Pipers) Without answering what he thinks is the question Paul was dealing with in teaching justification “am I a Christian? And am I a part of the church?” So he drops it from justification as not part of Paul’s thinking on the matter.
A clear difference in Wright and Piper is the role of Christ’s obedience plays in justification. Wright sees it as obedience of the cross and resurrection but not obedience to the law. As for Piper obedience covers Jesus’ entire life. I think Piper wins this one for Jesus did the Father’s will moment by moment, all you need do is read the gospel of john (not john piper but john the dude who hung with THE BIG DUDE JESUS). Further, Romans 5:10 says,” For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” A life lived fully in the moral will of God, it is not law keeping but life rhythms, worldview vision, and the love pull of heaven; you know the stuff “faith” is made of!! (yes my two cents, below is a little more change for ya)
Let me begin (to end) with some Rhetorical questions:
If Jesus has perfectly obeyed the Father’s will, and if what is true of him is true of us because we are united with him … don’t we receive his righteousness? And the answer is YES!
Don’t we have his obedience, faithfulness and righteousness, and death and resurrection, given to us on the basis of faith? … Wait for it.. bam.. YES!
the unsaid elephant in the room
The real issue is not as much their differences in justification significant as they are? Three real debate is over prolegomena and perspectives the men bring with them. It is a debate as old as Methuselah and as circular as, “who came first the chicken or the egg?” I am speaking of systematic theology vs. Biblical theology. In academic circles, the two schools are often at odds over who is better, that is first.
One theologian has defined biblical theology as "that discipline which sets forth the message of the books of the Bible in their historical setting. Biblical theology is primarily a descriptive discipline. It is not initially concerned with the final meaning of the teachings of the Bible or their relevance for today. This is the task of systematic theology. Biblical theology has the task of expounding the theology found in the Bible in its own historical setting, and its own terms, categories, and thought forms. It is the obvious intent of the Bible to tell a story about God and his acts in history for humanity’s salvation." (1)
In academic theology today you can get an education in one camp and never realize the dynamic interaction the two forms give each other. A biblical studies department (biblical theology) focus’ on the text’s meaning and exegesis with proper hermeneutics this includes reading the text in light of its historical setting to get at the authors intent. The stress on historic clarity is paramount. Its definitions are often textual and flatly within the text. A Systematic theology department seeks to teach a set of doctrines and formulate and articulate a comprehensive worldview. They often begin from a creed or confession or Christian idea that is off the page but formulated by scripture. In the case of Wright vs. Piper we have a hung jury (lol – little justification joke). Behind each man is a different school of theology, biblical (Wright) - Systematic (piper). There definitions of righteousness clearly show this to be true. Piper begins with God’s nature (a systematic concept) and Wright dogmatically holds to the text (more precisely, the covenant narrative). The difference in starting points makes all the difference and as the logic plays out the implication grow till imputation is a footnote of medieval anxiety.
You could say one wants to read their Bible's historically and “the others” (yes it is a ‘LOST’ reference) wants to read the Bible theologically but that is a little simplistic a summary of both. If your still a little fuzzy, here is a dose of “DA” CLARITY. D. A. Carson writes on the distinction between systematic and biblical theology so you can get a better idea:
“Although both are text based, the ordering principles of the former are topical, logical, hierarchical, and as synchronic as possible; the ordering principles of the latter trace out the history of redemption, and are (ideally) profoundly inductive, comparative and as diachronic as possible. Systematic theology seeks to rearticulate what the Bible says in self-conscious engagement with (including confrontation with) the culture; biblical theology, though it cannot escape cultural influences, aims to be first and foremost inductive and descriptive, earning its normative power by the credibility of its results. Thus systematic theology tends to be a little further removed from the biblical text than does biblical theology, but a little closer to cultural engagement. Biblical theology tends to seek out the rationality and communicative genius of each literary genre; systematic theology tends to integrate the diverse rationalities in its pursuit of a large-scale, worldview-forming synthesis. In this sense, systematic theology tends to be a culminating discipline; biblical theology, though it is a worthy end in itself, tends to be a bridge discipline.” (2) (3)
Imagine if you will, two men stand before a ordination committee they are both asked one question? What is your authority for faith and practices? One answers “my authority is Scripture and I am willing to affirm a Confession in so far as it coheres and comports with Scripture, as I see it". The other responds “my authority is Scripture as understood by the Confession (insert denomination of choice)". Both men are ordained. Both go on to fruitful ministry. But this is not a comedy it is a tragedy, for after a season of fruitfulness both end up walking off the narrow way. One in the Wright ditch and to the opposite side, in a ditch deep and dogmatic. Both blindly following and forgetting a needed remedy. The first one to the Wright said “ as I see it.” He had forgotten the gravity and trepidation of saying something new and the humility of second guessing ideas in light of opposition. Such remembrance can go a long way in keeping you in the way. The other? Although oh so dogmatic he is neck deep in dirt. Yet even in the ditch he still treats his Creed and Confession like a Mishnah of the Rabbis or a Magisterium hot from Roman. All narrow roads have two dangers, two ditches - we all need humble orthodoxy. (4)
In no way, should this be a denouement of either man. I think both men are brilliant theologians. Yet I do believe there is a little something to learn about Moral formation. Israel was known for fighting among itself during peace time but when there was an enemy from without it battled as one army. In theology there is a difference between reordering categories and heresy. The new perspective on Paul (Wrights’ Camp) plays at this line but I believe (among the more faithful branch is within orthodoxy).
Sinners like me and you have a tendency to draw lines where there is no line. We make enemies out of sparing partners, much like the tribes of Israel. We must remember our identity comes from who we believe in not the tribe we follow. We are Jesus people first and foremost. Pride is like a virus it gets in everything especially a desire for the truth. So protect yourself, know your place and the dynamics of theology in all its dimensions or know pride and the ditches it leads people too.
Balance is the holding of two valid extremes
End Notes
________________________________________________
1.) George E. Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, revised ed. (Eerdmans, 1993), p. 20.
2.) Systematic theology and biblical theology,” in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, Downers Grove: IVP, 2000, p. 102-103)
3.) For futher study on the dynamic interaction of systimatic ans biblical theology see, http://www.upper-register.com/papers/bt_st.html
4.) In case you missed it the story gets at the pride that infects both dogmatic conviction and deep independant thought.
Showing posts with label spiritual. Show all posts
Showing posts with label spiritual. Show all posts
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Enduring grace and the Courage needed to be.
Enduring grace
When life is hard, when we feel we cannot fight anymore, where does the strength come from? When we hurt and the world tells us to say down how do we get up? How do we just do it? The answer is grace, empowering , enduring grace!
Derek Redmond is an example of enduring grace. Derek is an Olympic runner and a good one. In 1988 he made it to the Seoul Olympics but just 10 minutes before he was due to race injury forced him to back out. Four years and eight operations later he was in Barcelona and favored to win the 400meters. Yet while running in a semi-final heat Derek heard something pop as he felt sharp pain run up his leg. Hurt and watching his hopes and dreams run away before him, he made a choice that now defines him. Here is a clip of the race.
In his moment of truth, He got up and continued on! In His words,
Everything I had worked for was finished. I hated everybody. I hated the world. I hated hamstrings. I hated it all. I felt so bitter that I was injured again. I told myself I had to finish. I kept hopping round. Then, with 100 metres to go, I felt a hand on my shoulder. It was my old man.”
Jim Redmond Derek’s father, wearing a T-shirt that asked “Have You Hugged Your Foot Today?”, runs on to the track,. He slows his son back to a hobble and throws a supportive arm around him. As Redmond is helped down the home stretch of the track, he begins to cry. In Derek’s words, “It was the last thing I was expecting. … I told him just to help me get back into my correct lane. ... He said, We would finish the race together.”
They finished together a hurt and fallen child leaning on the strength and love of His Father. That is a picture of enduing grace.
So What Of Courage
Some may ask but wasn’t Derek courageous? What of his personal courage? It is true he was courageous but not the courage born of self-sufficiency. The courage Derek shows us rises from humility. It is courage not to give up because it is courage to let yourself be helped. It is the courage to receive. Such courage understands the helplessness of doing it alone and thankfully receives the grace to make it one more step. Four thoughts come to mind.
1. Courage is found in humility. It takes great courage to look honesty at yourself. The courage to stand before our Majestic Father, in the light of his holiness and see who we are in his light takes courage.
2. Such courage is embodied in dependence on one who will see us through all the way to the end. Any time we fall me must get up. To continue on in grace is courageous given the epic nature of our sin and his holiness.. It is courageous trust in enduring grace to walk away from where we have fallen because the blood has changed us and we believe that sin’s presence may plague us but its power has no hold in God’s forgiving grace.
3. Humility is the poster and power of enduring grace. Many people live life with hands full of stuff or clinched in defiance; humility is the poser of open hands and a clean heart. Such a poster places us in a position to receive from God.
4. The embodying of such grace is not lost on the observers of it. Such enduring grace inspires and changes those around us. Prior the 1992 Olympics, Redmond had a hostile relationship with fellow British runner Linford Christie, the 100 meter gold medal winner. The two athletes criticized each other publicly, and Redmond was quoted to comment on Christie as "He's a well-balanced athlete; he has a chip on both shoulders" But as Redmond was leaving the field after his heroic semi-final race, he was approached by Christie. The two men embraced and cried together. "He has a heart," Redmond said. "I've changed my views of him completely."
When life is hard, when we feel we cannot fight anymore, where does the strength come from? When we hurt and the world tells us to say down how do we get up? How do we just do it? The answer is grace, empowering , enduring grace!
Derek Redmond is an example of enduring grace. Derek is an Olympic runner and a good one. In 1988 he made it to the Seoul Olympics but just 10 minutes before he was due to race injury forced him to back out. Four years and eight operations later he was in Barcelona and favored to win the 400meters. Yet while running in a semi-final heat Derek heard something pop as he felt sharp pain run up his leg. Hurt and watching his hopes and dreams run away before him, he made a choice that now defines him. Here is a clip of the race.
In his moment of truth, He got up and continued on! In His words,
Everything I had worked for was finished. I hated everybody. I hated the world. I hated hamstrings. I hated it all. I felt so bitter that I was injured again. I told myself I had to finish. I kept hopping round. Then, with 100 metres to go, I felt a hand on my shoulder. It was my old man.”
Jim Redmond Derek’s father, wearing a T-shirt that asked “Have You Hugged Your Foot Today?”, runs on to the track,. He slows his son back to a hobble and throws a supportive arm around him. As Redmond is helped down the home stretch of the track, he begins to cry. In Derek’s words, “It was the last thing I was expecting. … I told him just to help me get back into my correct lane. ... He said, We would finish the race together.”
They finished together a hurt and fallen child leaning on the strength and love of His Father. That is a picture of enduing grace.
So What Of Courage
Some may ask but wasn’t Derek courageous? What of his personal courage? It is true he was courageous but not the courage born of self-sufficiency. The courage Derek shows us rises from humility. It is courage not to give up because it is courage to let yourself be helped. It is the courage to receive. Such courage understands the helplessness of doing it alone and thankfully receives the grace to make it one more step. Four thoughts come to mind.
1. Courage is found in humility. It takes great courage to look honesty at yourself. The courage to stand before our Majestic Father, in the light of his holiness and see who we are in his light takes courage.
2. Such courage is embodied in dependence on one who will see us through all the way to the end. Any time we fall me must get up. To continue on in grace is courageous given the epic nature of our sin and his holiness.. It is courageous trust in enduring grace to walk away from where we have fallen because the blood has changed us and we believe that sin’s presence may plague us but its power has no hold in God’s forgiving grace.
3. Humility is the poster and power of enduring grace. Many people live life with hands full of stuff or clinched in defiance; humility is the poser of open hands and a clean heart. Such a poster places us in a position to receive from God.
4. The embodying of such grace is not lost on the observers of it. Such enduring grace inspires and changes those around us. Prior the 1992 Olympics, Redmond had a hostile relationship with fellow British runner Linford Christie, the 100 meter gold medal winner. The two athletes criticized each other publicly, and Redmond was quoted to comment on Christie as "He's a well-balanced athlete; he has a chip on both shoulders" But as Redmond was leaving the field after his heroic semi-final race, he was approached by Christie. The two men embraced and cried together. "He has a heart," Redmond said. "I've changed my views of him completely."
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Prophets with a little p.
Intro to a prophet ...
Have you ever known anybody you would call eccentric? Those people that natural effortlessly walk outside the line to the song of some other land. People that would rather be faithful than safe, that don’t give up easily. People that see things by a clear double vision: as things are and as they should be. People marked by a since of the ominous. A mystery that is greater than personality making them both attractive and suspect. Mostly, without articulation, we merely see them as special. Once in a life time people that by the force of who they are affect us radically for the good.
We used the word prophet to label such a person. They are people blessed with a burden of an inescapable calling to bare the weight of knowing thats not for them to know. ominous Knowledge full of gravity, but never whole, never complete, never ending. They are magnificent contradictions: People of paradox and passion.
The Authority of a prophet ...
Walter Brueggemann describes prophets as “uncredentialed spokesmen for God.” They don't have any authority in the world but the word of faith. A prophet, almost by definition, doesn't fit into the categories you expect, which is what gives them bite, and clarity, and the sense of grabbing us by the scruff of our neck, and saying, "Listen to this: this is truth, this is what's going on." The whole authority of prophets comes not from what people say about them or the credentials that they have, it's from the truth of what they are saying. This is true of the Biblical prophets and of prophetic voices all through history.
Prophets are graced with a vision that is rooted in the reality of other people. Here we find the unbreakable social passion, and the effort that they go to speak to people of influence in order to try to convince them that pain and suffering and impoverishment are the responsibility of those who are in positions of influence and power.
The Beauty of a prophet ...
Prophets are divine metaphors. Their lives are made to be divine metaphors. like Nature is prophetic in that it illustratives God’s character. So to are the lives of those marked to live in a short leash. They are made to illustrate, illuminate and often demonstrate "Divine-Pathos"(1).
Prophets don't have anything that Christ hasn't given them. They embody lives cut from the rock of suffering or the cradle of privilege. Some of them find a vocation that is apart from the visible Church, maybe by accident or maybe deliberately or maybe not intentionally. But they are following the Spirit in some unarticulated way. Sometimes I think God has to find a person who isn't carrying a lot of baggage or bad religion with them. A John the Baptist, for example, where did he come from? He didn't fit the categories of the first century. Other time I think God likes to make them home grown, from within the church, letting them nurse on all the half-truth till in one sick moment, enough is enough. There's honesty in them, Fallen broken honesty. They are not saying things that people want to hear to help them escape from their ordinary lives. They push us back into the conditions in which we have to live as people before a greater reality. The beauty of the prophet is the God of his call, and how He brings about all things to mold both the man and the message into one divine movement.
The gift of a prophet...
The prophet doesn't seem to be calculated in what they are doing. It just comes out of who they are, and maybe that's why people respond to them, because they are so unconventional. I think they started out pretty confused and kind of just messing around. When looking from heaven or even just in hindsight, I think they must be as surprised about all that has come about through them, as we are of there accuracy. A prophet often knows 1/5 of the truth that he spits. They just know they should say it! A fire driving them to speak they just have to say it or they will explode. They can’t be themselves unless it is let out, truth has captured them like a trap. This is what they have to teach us. Not just want is real but what is authentic. When we're living with any kind of authenticity, we don't know what we are doing until, suddenly, moments of clarification -- catalytic moments -- and we see suddenly this is what I am, this is what I'm doing. But in the spiritual life, calculation doesn't work.
Some may ask, Why not? Well it's because most of it is about the Holy Spirit, not our spirits, and we're in on something much, much bigger than we have any idea of. If we try to contain it, or try to work with our boundaries or containers that we understand, we miss 98 percent of it. Most live asleep. And to wake up is to stop our calculating. Then we awaken to what is real and what has been before us all along. We come alive to the fact that we're working in the realm of God and relationships, of goodness and evil, and so suddenly like a bursting, God gets through our defenses and we're listening to something that is very, very important to us but that we've insulated or inoculated ourselves against. We learn to hear the real. Few live in the silence between the sound where God smiles and we hear. The place we take in new life and experience the freshness of approach that directs and molds all things.
This is the spiritual life to be gleaned from the prophet. A life under providential control, burning in both light and heart, emanating discourses laden with the full counsel of beauty truth and goodness. Such a life is an opening. There is a deep commonality of spirit when people are open to the beauty and the truth and the goodness of God that communicates itself to us. And if it's the genuine thing you can put a name to it: it's religious, it's spiritual, it's God. Not everybody puts the name to it but it doesn't mean they don't participate in it someway or other. The experiences of countless art lovers attest to this truth. Whether we name it rightly or name it not we participate in this reality ever time we experience or enter into creativity. The prophetic release of beauty truth and goodness often accompanies powerful works of creativity.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) In his book The Prophets, Abraham Joshua Heschel describes the unique aspect of the Jewish prophets, according to Heschel the Hebrew prophets are characterized by their experience of what he calls — God turning towards humanity. Heschel argues for the view of Hebrew prophets as receivers of the "Divine Pathos," of the wrath and sorrow of God over his nation that has forsaken him. ”Prophecy is the voice that God has lent to the silent agony, a voice to the plundered poor, to the profane riches of the world. It is a form of living, a crossing point of God and man. God is raging in the prophet's words.” (Abraham Joshua Heschel, The Prophets Ch. 1)
Have you ever known anybody you would call eccentric? Those people that natural effortlessly walk outside the line to the song of some other land. People that would rather be faithful than safe, that don’t give up easily. People that see things by a clear double vision: as things are and as they should be. People marked by a since of the ominous. A mystery that is greater than personality making them both attractive and suspect. Mostly, without articulation, we merely see them as special. Once in a life time people that by the force of who they are affect us radically for the good.
We used the word prophet to label such a person. They are people blessed with a burden of an inescapable calling to bare the weight of knowing thats not for them to know. ominous Knowledge full of gravity, but never whole, never complete, never ending. They are magnificent contradictions: People of paradox and passion.
The Authority of a prophet ...
Walter Brueggemann describes prophets as “uncredentialed spokesmen for God.” They don't have any authority in the world but the word of faith. A prophet, almost by definition, doesn't fit into the categories you expect, which is what gives them bite, and clarity, and the sense of grabbing us by the scruff of our neck, and saying, "Listen to this: this is truth, this is what's going on." The whole authority of prophets comes not from what people say about them or the credentials that they have, it's from the truth of what they are saying. This is true of the Biblical prophets and of prophetic voices all through history.
Prophets are graced with a vision that is rooted in the reality of other people. Here we find the unbreakable social passion, and the effort that they go to speak to people of influence in order to try to convince them that pain and suffering and impoverishment are the responsibility of those who are in positions of influence and power.
The Beauty of a prophet ...
Prophets are divine metaphors. Their lives are made to be divine metaphors. like Nature is prophetic in that it illustratives God’s character. So to are the lives of those marked to live in a short leash. They are made to illustrate, illuminate and often demonstrate "Divine-Pathos"(1).
Prophets don't have anything that Christ hasn't given them. They embody lives cut from the rock of suffering or the cradle of privilege. Some of them find a vocation that is apart from the visible Church, maybe by accident or maybe deliberately or maybe not intentionally. But they are following the Spirit in some unarticulated way. Sometimes I think God has to find a person who isn't carrying a lot of baggage or bad religion with them. A John the Baptist, for example, where did he come from? He didn't fit the categories of the first century. Other time I think God likes to make them home grown, from within the church, letting them nurse on all the half-truth till in one sick moment, enough is enough. There's honesty in them, Fallen broken honesty. They are not saying things that people want to hear to help them escape from their ordinary lives. They push us back into the conditions in which we have to live as people before a greater reality. The beauty of the prophet is the God of his call, and how He brings about all things to mold both the man and the message into one divine movement.
The gift of a prophet...
The prophet doesn't seem to be calculated in what they are doing. It just comes out of who they are, and maybe that's why people respond to them, because they are so unconventional. I think they started out pretty confused and kind of just messing around. When looking from heaven or even just in hindsight, I think they must be as surprised about all that has come about through them, as we are of there accuracy. A prophet often knows 1/5 of the truth that he spits. They just know they should say it! A fire driving them to speak they just have to say it or they will explode. They can’t be themselves unless it is let out, truth has captured them like a trap. This is what they have to teach us. Not just want is real but what is authentic. When we're living with any kind of authenticity, we don't know what we are doing until, suddenly, moments of clarification -- catalytic moments -- and we see suddenly this is what I am, this is what I'm doing. But in the spiritual life, calculation doesn't work.
Some may ask, Why not? Well it's because most of it is about the Holy Spirit, not our spirits, and we're in on something much, much bigger than we have any idea of. If we try to contain it, or try to work with our boundaries or containers that we understand, we miss 98 percent of it. Most live asleep. And to wake up is to stop our calculating. Then we awaken to what is real and what has been before us all along. We come alive to the fact that we're working in the realm of God and relationships, of goodness and evil, and so suddenly like a bursting, God gets through our defenses and we're listening to something that is very, very important to us but that we've insulated or inoculated ourselves against. We learn to hear the real. Few live in the silence between the sound where God smiles and we hear. The place we take in new life and experience the freshness of approach that directs and molds all things.
This is the spiritual life to be gleaned from the prophet. A life under providential control, burning in both light and heart, emanating discourses laden with the full counsel of beauty truth and goodness. Such a life is an opening. There is a deep commonality of spirit when people are open to the beauty and the truth and the goodness of God that communicates itself to us. And if it's the genuine thing you can put a name to it: it's religious, it's spiritual, it's God. Not everybody puts the name to it but it doesn't mean they don't participate in it someway or other. The experiences of countless art lovers attest to this truth. Whether we name it rightly or name it not we participate in this reality ever time we experience or enter into creativity. The prophetic release of beauty truth and goodness often accompanies powerful works of creativity.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) In his book The Prophets, Abraham Joshua Heschel describes the unique aspect of the Jewish prophets, according to Heschel the Hebrew prophets are characterized by their experience of what he calls — God turning towards humanity. Heschel argues for the view of Hebrew prophets as receivers of the "Divine Pathos," of the wrath and sorrow of God over his nation that has forsaken him. ”Prophecy is the voice that God has lent to the silent agony, a voice to the plundered poor, to the profane riches of the world. It is a form of living, a crossing point of God and man. God is raging in the prophet's words.” (Abraham Joshua Heschel, The Prophets Ch. 1)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)