I väntan på Jesus

Ekoteologen Lars Larsens blogg

From Hannah Whitall Smith's book "The Unselfishness of God And How I Discovered It" (1903) (Part 6, the final post)

Publicerad 2023-07-02 00:14:00 i Amorism och kärlek, Barmhärtighet och medkänsla, Frälsningen, Gud, Guds försyn och omsorg, Guds löften, Hannah Whitall Smith, Helgelserörelsen, Universalismen, eller läran om allas slutliga frälsning,

(continuation of this blogpost)
 

Since I had this insight of the mother-heart of God, I have never been able to feel the slightest anxiety for any of His children; and by His children I do not mean only the good ones, but I mean the bad ones just as much. Are we not, distinctly told that the Good Shepherd leaves the ninety and nine good sheep in order to find the one naughty sheep that is lost, and that He looks for it until He finds it? And, viewed in the light of motherhood, has not that word "lost" a most comforting meaning, since nothing can be a lost thing that is not owned by somebody, and to be lost means only, not yet found. The lost gold piece is still gold, with the image of the King upon it; the lost sheep is a sheep still, not a wolf; the lost son has still the blood of his father in his veins. And if a person is a lost sinner, it only means that he is owned by the Good Shepherd, and that the Good Shepherd is bound, by the very duties of His ownership, to go after that which is lost, and to go until He finds it. The word "lost" therefore, to my mind, contains in itself the strongest proof of ownership that one could desire. Who can imagine a mother with a lost child ever having a ray of comfort until the child is found, and who can imagine a God being more indifferent than a mother? In fact I believe that all the problems of the spiritual life, which are often so distressing to conscientious souls, would vanish like mist before the rising sun, if the full blaze of the mother-heart of God should be turned upon them.

Moreover I saw that, since it was declared we were created in the image of God, we were bound to believe that the best in us, and not the worst was the reflection of that image, and .that therefore things which to us in our best moments looked selfish, or unkind, or unjust, or self-seeking, must never, no matter what the "seeming", be attributed to God. If He is unselfish, He must be at least as unselfish as the highest human ideal; and of course we know He must be infinitely more.

All the texts in the Bible revealing God's goodness shone with a new meaning, and I saw that His goodness was not merely a patronizing benevolence, but was a genuine bona fide goodness that included unselfishness and consideration, and above all justice, which last has always seemed to me one of the very first elements of goodness. No unjust person could ever, in my opinion, lay the slightest claim to being good, let their outward seemings of goodness be as deceiving as they may. I had in short such an overwhelming revelation of the intrinsic and inherent goodness and unselfishness of God that nothing since has been able to shake it. A great many things in His dealings have been and still are mysteries to me; but I am sure they could all be explained on the basis of love and justice, if only I could look deep enough; and that some day I shall see, what now I firmly believe, that His loving kindness is really and truly over all His works.

I do not mean to say that all this acquaintance with God came to me at once; but I do mean to say that when I had that revelation on the tram-car in Philadelphia that day, a light on the character of God began to shine, that has never since waned in the slightest, and has only grown brighter and brighter with every year of my life. It is enough for me to say "God is" and I have the answer to every possible difficulty.

The amazing thing is that I, in company with so many other Christians, had failed, with the open Bible before me, to see this; and that all sorts of travesties on the character of God, and of libels upon His goodness, can find apparently a welcome entrance into Christian hearts. To me such things became at this time well-nigh intolerable. I could listen patiently, and even with interest, to any sort of strange or heretical ideas that did not touch the character of God, but the one thing I could not endure, and could not sit still to listen to, was anything that contained, even under a show of great piety, the least hint of a libel on His love or His selfishness.

I shall never forget a memorable occasion in our own house, when a celebrated Preacher from Boston , was visiting us. The conversation at the breakfast table turned on the subject of God's love, and this Preacher declared that you must not count on it too much, as there were limits as to what His love could endure, just as there were limits to a mother's love; and he went on to declare that there were certain sins a daughter could commit which the mother never could forgive, and which would forever close her heart and her home against her child, and he asserted that it was just so with God, and that he considered it was a grandmotherly religion that taught anything different.

I have no doubt his object was to combat my views on Restitution, although we were not talking on that subject; but he evidently wanted to convince me that God was not quite so foolishly loving as I thought. It was more than I could endure to hear both mothers, and the God who made mothers so maligned, and although the speaker was my guest, I broke forth into a perfect passion of indignation, and declaring that I would not sit at the table with any one who held such libelous ideas of God, I burst into tears and left the room, and entirely declined to see my guest again. I do not say this was right or courteous, or at all Christlike, but it only illustrates how overwhelmingly I felt on the subject. The honor of God seemed to me of more importance than any ordinary rules of politeness. But I see now that I might have vindicated that honor in an equally effectual but more Christlike way.

Still to this day, the one thing which I find it very hard to tolerate, is any thing which libels the character of God. Nothing else matters like this, for all our salvation depends wholly and entirely upon what God is; and unless He can be proved to be absolutely good, and absolutely unselfish, and absolutely just, our case is absolutely hopeless. God is our salvation, and, if He fails us, in even the slightest degree, we have nowhere else to turn.

 

(from this page at Tentmaker.org)

Om

Min profilbild

Lars Larsen

Född 1984 i Finland. Norrman, bor i Stockholm, Sverige. Poet, ekoteolog och ekofilosof (dock inte en akademisk någondera, fastän han studerade teologi i nästan tre år vid Åbo Akademis universitet), kallas också allmänt "Munken" (han är munk i en självgrundad klosterorden, "Den Heliga Naturens Orden"), han kallar sig själv "Skogsmannen Snigelson" och "Lasse Lushjärnan" på grund av vissa starka band till naturen och djuren, grundade bland annat genom många år av hemlöshet boende i tält, kåta, grotta och flera hyddor i Flatens naturreservat, Nackareservatet och "Kaknästornsskogen" utanför Stockholm. Han debuterade som poet 2007 med "Över floden mig", utgiven av honom själv, han har även gett ut ett ekoteologiskt verk, "Djurisk teologi. Paradisets återkomst", på Titel förlag 2010. Han har gett ut diktsamlingen "Naturens återkomst" på Fri Press förlag 2018 tillsammans med sin före detta flickvän Titti Spaltro. Lars yrken är två, städare och målare (byggnader). Just nu bor han på Attendo Herrgårdsvägen, ett psykiatrisk gruppboende för mentalsjuka i Danderyd, Stockholm. Hans adress är: Herrgårdsvägen 25, 18239 Danderyd, Sverige. Man kan nå honom i kommentarsfältet på denna blogg. Hans texter på denna blogg är utan copyright, tillhörande "Public Domain" Han är författare till texterna, om ingen nämns.

Till bloggens startsida

Kategorier

Arkiv

Prenumerera och dela