I wonder what they will be thinking as they are being banished with the words “I never knew you”:
Those are words I hope to never, ever hear directed towards myself! Nor would I want them to be directed towards any of my family or friends. That would be the worst fate of all --thinking you were serving God your whole life, only to come to realize you were serving a false concept.
This too was food for thought:
One thing she said didn’t sit well in my Spirit. She said “His heart aches when He sees us doing evil to one another, even if it's nothing more than a harsh word. His heart breaks over every unkindness and every evil that proceeds out of us.“ The phrasing implies that we have the power to do injury to God by rebellion – like teenagers so frequently do to get even with their parents for perceived slights. But God’s response to rebellion (and self righteousness) is righteous judgment...
I understand your concern! It seems as if this woman's testimony conflicts with that of the docrtine of God's impassibility --which is God's inability to suffer. According to my theological dictionary:
God is impassible because there is no created power which can overpower him. Suffering involves subjection to an oppressive force, and God could not experience this without losing sovereignty over his creation. But this is not to say, as many of those who object to the notion of divine impassibility do, that God is incapable of understanding his people's suffering.Alexander, T. Desmond, ed. New Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2000. 517
Well, assuming that the theologians are correct about God's impassibility, then how does one explain a passage like the following:
The Lord saw how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time.The Lord was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain.
So the Lord said, “I will wipe mankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—men and animals, and creatures that move along the ground, and birds of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them.”
But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.
(Genesis 6:5-8 NIV)
The Bible clearly states that God does indeed suffer when we are rebellious! The above quote from Genesis is the most famous example, but if I had more time I'm certain I could find more passages that demonstrate that God is truly hurt when we are in rebellion. It seems as if God feels the pain of the rebellion first, then brings forth judgment second (if called for).
But I disagree with the theologian's propostion that because God can literally feel pain, that makes him less than soveriegn! No where does the Bible say that God is controlled by this pain we cause Him, nor is he controlled by any other emotion. He is still able to function and think clearly, even in the midst of feeling pain. He's not like us!
Yet when you read the Bible, especially the OT prophets and Psalms, one comes to the inescapable conclusion that God is a very emotional being! We don't find some cold, hard, impersonal diety that hands out orders like some giant mainframe computer in the sky. Rather, we see someone who has all the emotions and feelings we do, yet is never controlled by those emotions.
Now, to get back to the issue of ego and sanctification, we find that God himself provides the ideal that we need to emulate: to be able to feel, without being controlled by our emotions! This is not easy to do, even for the most "spiritual" of people. And it requires something that is rarely valued by the church, especially the Protestant, evangelical community: a well developed sense of reason. And by "reason" I do NOT mean intellect; perhaps what I mean would be better described by the term 'super-reason.' Our innate logic and reason are incapable of controlling our emotions, but not incapable of understanding them. If we can understand them, perhaps we can, at least, not be controlled by them.
But how to get to that place of understanding? That's the issue. That's what sanctification needs to be about, understanding ourselves, and coming to the realization that we are not defined by our emotions, intellect, or environment. We are defined by a standard that surpasses them all, and only when we realize this, can we truly come to the place of living death--death to self, death to the ego. This is where "super-reason" comes in.
Anyway, it's one of those things that's difficult to explain, but desperately needs some explanation!
What also needs explanation is why so many of the people I know who have some of the most powerful insights into God and His word are also some of the most emotional people I know! But their emotions are unlike anything I've ever seen --they have a purity and an authenticity and a power to them that surpasses any explanation. Also, most of these people are women, but not exclusively. If I were to try and summarize what is about them that makes them so different, it would be a genuine sense of love and compassion--not something forced or contrived, but a love that comes from the very depth of their being.
Perhaps instead of studying the "attributes" of God unto death, maybe it would be a better idea for theologians to do a biblical survey of the emotions of God....
FWIW...
Perhaps that Scripture came to mind because His righteous judgment in reaction to the rebellion of some was to accept many others. (Psalms 118:22, Matthew 21:42)
With regard to the theology definition, I agree with you that the operative point is that God is not controlled by His own emotions.
I would add that He cannot be manipulated. Mortals may sometimes take advantage of a loving person, tempt them to do something they wouldn’t otherwise do in return for love, or gain by putting them on a “guilt trip”. These emotional games are non-starters with God. He is Truth.