The Story of God
For the few that follow my blog, you will have noticed that I took about a six month hiatus from posting; and that was no accident. The last year has been, more so than is usual, a time of immense doubt and skepticism; and I still occupy that place. However, as I complete the semester, I have been tasked with composing an essay depicting the narrative through which I understand theology. The next few posts will be excerpts from that essay, the first of which was my post on the Trinity.
What follows is the beginning of my theological narrative. In order to avoid the typical identification of God as male, which I would conjecture is a false understanding of God’s character, I have here coined the pronoun “yh.” It may seem a bit silly upon first reading; but I would note that it is interesting the frequency with which, if God were to be call “him,” “he,” or (for the more progressive) “her”, this theological reflection would reinforce the notion that God would correspond to either gender. If anything, both genders embody something about the character of God; but neither is fitting to become the exclusive identifying pronoun. And any pronoun is less cumbersome to read than the title “God” used in every instance (For God so loved the world that God gave God’s only son…).
God is the ground of all being. All existence and truth finds identity and purpose in its origin, which is its creator: God. Yh is the only purely-creative being—meaning God alone is without origin and has eternally been yh-self. Thus God’s identity and purpose are contingent to nothing: Yh will be who yh will be (or yh is who yh is). This is the self-described identification of God (Ex. 3:14). Through history, God has revealed yh-self as relational. This appears to be the driving impulse for not only creation but also one of the central tenets of who God existentially is.
These, then, are the two most certain principles of theology: 1.God is; 2. God exists in relationship. In regards to the first principle: To say that “God is” is not a claim about the certainty of the reality of God, in an ontological sense. It will be assumed here that God is “real.” Thus the claim that yh “is” relates to the idea that yh is not only part of reality, but that yh’s very nature is reality: reality derives its “isness” from the substance of God. Regarding the second principle: the reason for God’s desire for relationship is not clear (yh will be who yh will be), but it appears that God is only yh-self in the context of relationship. In this sense, God’s absence from relationship could not be, as 1. God, by yh’s very nature, must exist (thus there is no way to speak of God as not existing at any given time, existence is yh’s very essence), 2. and God must exist in the context of relation to yh-self. For God to exist, which yh must , yh must be present to relationship at all times.
The next section is about the Trinity in the story of God.