Slices of God

Einstein theorized that time is a dimension quite like our spatial dimensions. The entire dimension of time, including its past, present, and future, simply is. We are the ones stuck at a particular location in space-time. While some find this concept disconcerting, I find it quite comforting. 

Jesus said, “Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.” (Matthew 6:34, NIV) Taking the liberty to paraphrase, I believe it means, “Don’t worry about tomorrow; tomorrow is already history.” If you are not content (or comfortable) with Einstein’s theory, follow me along a theological path that is “less travelled” . . . 

Many, if not most, theologies believe in an infinite God that is not confined to time. If this includes you, read on! If God is not confined to time, does this mean he “knows” the future or that he is inthe future (just as much as we are in the present at this moment)? I am convinced that God is fully in the past, present, and future. These designations are simply different locations in space-time and God permeates them all. 

Here’s the kicker: if God’s future is more than knowledge, then it is a very real future. In essence, it is a future that includes you and me. Not the idea of you and me, but the actual you and me. If God’s future is as real as his past and present, we are already there! We just don’t remember it yet. 

When this concept first entered my psyche, I experienced a profound release of anxiety. Worry is only compatible with the present. However, once we realize that time is but an illusion, worry has no stronghold. 

Friend, let go of your confinement to the present. The future is as real as any moment in time. Soak it in. As faint as the memories of the future are, try to remember . . . and let go of the worries. 

– Sam Augsburger

Recently I gave a talk to a group of retired academics. Given the freedom to choose a topic from my book, Slices of God, I chose to talk about the Trinity. The long and the short of it is Trinitarian doctrine is relatively new (300’s CE), not clearly outlined in either the Old or New Testaments, and questioned by many theologians, including some of the Radical Reformers (1500’s CE). For more information on this controversy, see chapter 3.12 in the book.^[1] For now, however, I want to focus on a question addressed to me during the Q and A period that followed the talk. 

A psychologist in the back row asked, “Whom do you pray to?” Acknowledging I had just highlighted issues with the Trinity, I said, “After all the processing and questioning I have done, I still find myself talking with Father. It is comforting for me.” Having said that, I quickly admitted the Father image is not a positive image for everyone. Some individuals I have met find it revolting instead of comforting. Others are indifferent about it. Either way, to whom can father-fearing, but God-believing individuals relate? 

In the Old Testament, we find one scriptural text that says God is a “father to the fatherless.”^[2] Such a statement begs us to question the issue further. What is God to the motherless? What is God to the childless? What is God to the spouseless? What is God to the friendless? What is God to the lifeless? Have we limited the ways in which God can and does present himself to us, given our human brokenness? (And yes, I caught the fact that I just said, “himself.” It is natural for me.)

In The Shack, William P. Young portrays God as a wise, strong, comforting, and compassionate woman.^[3] I find the character portrayal incredibly warm and welcoming. I understand that Jesus taught his disciples to pray to “our Father in heaven,”^[4] but it was also in a culture that was strongly patriarchal. Jesus was notorious for meeting individuals on their terms and often in ways that were taboo for that culture.^[5] 

So how should we address God? God, being infinite, has no insecurities to motivate a slap on the face for misaddressing “him.” God, in God’s infinite grace, just wants time with us; conversation with us. If no other designation works, then perhaps you can pray, “Our Friend in heaven, you are whole, and I long to connect with you.” 

God cares more about the connection than the conduit.  

– Sam Augsburger

www.slicesofgod.com

^[1]See the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy at https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/trinity/trinity-history.html

^[2]Psalm 68:5

^[3]William P. Young, The Shack(Newbury Park: Windblown Media, 2007)

^[4]Matthew 6:9-13

^[5]John 4

-Sam Augsburger

One of my Facebook friends recently posted the question, “Why is religion such a hard subject to talk about?” Perhaps it is because religion is so messy. But, why is religion messy?  

The fact that religion is difficult and messy is evidence supporting the argument that religion is of human origins. Yes, religion is human-made. God does not make chaotic and messy things. Humans do. God does not need anything from us: especially religion. God is infinite and infinity has no needs. Religion defies God’s infinitude. (For more on God’s infinitude see Slices of God, chapters 2.02 – 2.04.) It is we who are in need, not God. But, instead of turning to God alone in faith, we turn to human constructs that we believe will lead us out of our brokenness and back to God. Religion is born when humans inform God how we are to escape our chaos and return to his favor. The reverse is faith. 

However, there is good news for those of us entrenched in messy religion. God, in God’s infinite mercy and grace, meets us where we are. God meets us in religion. That is infinitude at its best. Jesus did just that. He was infinitude in the flesh: an extension of God in our domain. Jesus rejected human-made religion and offered hope, freedom, healing, and forgiveness to people with broken hearts held captive by religion.

Contrary to religion, God loves brokenness that knows it cannot restore itself. It is there that the God-become-flesh meets us in love. In the Apostle John’s words, “To all those who envelop the God-become-flesh, he gives the gift of becoming God’s children — children not made by religion, but by God’s love.” (John 1:12-13, SFA paraphrase.)

-Sam Augsburger

-Sam Augsburger

-Sam Augsburger