The Attributes of God

Most faith traditions or denominations tend to emphasize a particular Biblical attribute of God and make it their primary lens or through which the see and experience God. My thought is that the origin behind this is usually rooted in some historical dynamic and/or cultural milieu.

I think this usually involves a particular spiritual leader, during a particular time in history, who personally resonates with a specific attribute of God's. Interestingly, whichever attribute most resonates with that leader, often correlates with how the surrounding culture responds to Christ. The emphasis of specific attributes ebb and flow according to the spirit of the age and the leaders who rise up and articulate them. That particular leader, and subsequent followers, build around their selected "attribute" a theological system and eventually an ecclesiastical structure - which almost always evolves into a relatively narrow religious subculture. At which point relationally emerges the dynamic of the authentic Christian: known as the "us" and the inauthentic Christian: known as "the others...." -Functionally regarded as: Real vs. False, Obedient vs. Disobedient, Informed vs. Uninformed, Elect vs. NonElect, godly vs. worldly, mature vs. immature, discipline vs undisciplined, orthodox vs. unorthodox, faithful vs. unfaithful... In essence: True Christian vs. False Christian...

I think it obvious that while all attributes of God are equal and historically transcendent, not all attributes of God speak to all people in the same way, at all times and in all places. Wesley emphasized holiness (as part of his "method") because of the decadence of England, Calvin elevated sovereignty [Its not what we do, but what God does] over the dogmatic tradition of Roman Catholicism. The sterile nature of Modernity mandated the use of God's love as being the foremost attribute for the great evangelist Billy Graham. Pentecostalism with its emphasis on the gifts and Holy Spirit power is blazing through much of the third and two-thirds world because those particular cultures tended to be heavily "[darkly] spiritual" and animistic. Today, the Post-Modern/Post-Enlightenment condition of our culture tends to emphasize (some times disastrously so) Immanence over Transcendence, Love and Grace more than Truth and Law and Mystery over Revelation/Dogma.

There is much more that could be said, but my point is that most denominations and faith traditions emerged because the cultural context called for primarily a particular attribute of God's to be used to convey who He is. Later they privileged and institutionalized that attribute above all others. In essence, the attribute that acted as a lens to make known the sacred, became a sacred lens that can blind those to what is really sacred.

In like manner, many denominations and faith traditions die because their primary message, predicated through a attribute of God, no longer speaks convincingly - the language is different and the spirit of the time has changed. For example, Fundamentalism rose during and in response to Modernity; and since Modernity has faded so has Fundamentalism; and those who are highly Reformed have discovered that a Post-Modern culture is highly offended by the perceived "exclusivity" of the gospel.

Metaphorically speaking the attributes of God are like the facets on the face of a perfect round-cut diamond. Each facet EQUALLY proportioned... collectively working together to project a uniform and brilliant white light. No one facet contributes to the overall nature of the diamond than any other. Some facets only APPEAR to be bigger or brighter, depending on the angle, place and time with which you observe them. (1) So it is with how we understand the attributes of God - all speak... some speak better than others in different places and at different times to different people. To hold any one attribute above all others, at all times and in all places to all people is to mis convey who God is and how God works.

This being said, those Christians who say then: "if you REALLY want to know God well, you must see Him through primarily ________________ (fill in the blank)." They are not only risk communicating God as irrelevant; but also limit the God who is (Historically this is known as heresy). Do we really want to say, based on the Biblical evidence of His known and communicable attributes, create a tradition that stipulates GOD IS REALLY MORE OF THIS, THAN HE HIS OF THAT? I guess we can... but if we do, then we do it not only to the peril of others, but to our own as well.

(1) The ONLY facet that might be larger would be the one in the middle - and it would be named "mystery."