The two Gods of Christianity

[Lucretius]

Is everything we know about God a “personification” to some extent; i.e., something that the human believes should be true about God?

Nope.

Furthermore, personification isn’t something a human believes should be true about God, but rather something true about God expressed in a humanlike way so that we would understand it.

Christi pax.

 

[Tomdstone]

Furthermore, personification isn’t something a human believes should be true about God, but rather something true about God expressed in a humanlike way so that we would understand it.

When Scripture says that the Heart of God was broken, what truth about God is being expressed?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

When Scripture says that the Heart of God was broken, what truth about God is being expressed?

How terrible people are. How badly they treat one another and how they don’t honor God, who gave them life and happiness. The person who wrote this was expressing how he felt God’s heart would be broken when he saw the wickedness and ungratefulness of humanity.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

Nope.

Furthermore, personification isn’t something a human believes should be true about God, but rather something true about God expressed in a humanlike way so that we would understand it.

Do the “back parts” of God in Exodus 33:23 symbolize anything specific?

 

[Wesrock]

Do the “back parts” of God in Exodus 33:23 symbolize anything specific?

The key point is that Moses did not see God’s “face.” That is, he did not see God in his entirety, or in his fullness. It would overwhelm any sinful man. And it speaks to God’s divine nature being incomprehensible. There is actually a lot written regarding this specific passage and Jesus, the new Moses, who truly sees God “face to face”, or in his entirety. Also, in God being made visible in Jesus, that is, that those who have seen Jesus have seen the Father, and Jesus being the way into that fullness of an encounter with God. I haven’t written very well here, but it really is a much spoken of passage within Christian tradition, and is given a Christological meaning.

 

[Mike_from_NJ]

The key point is that Moses did not see God’s “face.” That is, he did not see God in his entirety, or in his fullness. It would overwhelm any sinful man. And it speaks to God’s divine nature being incomprehensible. There is actually a lot written regarding this specific passage and Jesus, the new Moses, who truly sees God “face to face”, or in his entirety. Also, in God being made visible in Jesus, that is, that those who have seen Jesus have seen the Father, and Jesus being the way into that fullness of an encounter with God. I haven’t written very well here, but it really is a much spoken of passage within Christian tradition, and is given a Christological meaning.

I get and appreciate the symbolism of seeing God’s face. My concern is that it’s unnecessary (assuming this is all symbolic) to add the section regarding Moses seeing God’s back parts after God pulls away his hand. It gives the apperance that it is to be read literally, but if not then we have one or more elements in the chapter which are not true in any of the four senses of Scripture.