"God in a Box" or God As He Has Revealed Himself?

Today, if you happen to be conversing with a group of CHRISTIANS and you boldly, confidently, and succinctly talk about God and His characteristics, attributes and what He has done you are very likely to be accused of "putting God in a box"?

One of these Christians might even throw a Rob Bell quote or two in your face and tell you that you need to not be so arrogant and should adopt a more humble hermeneutic. According to Bell, "The moment God is figured out with nice neat lines and definitions, we are no longer dealing with God. We are dealing with somebody we made up." (Velvet Elvis, Page 25)

Poppycock!

In the scriptures we have God's revelation of himself and that divine self-revelation gives us some very hard neat lines and definitions about who God is, what He is like, what He has done and what true worship of Him entails. Those neat lines about God do not have their origin in the human imagination. Instead, their origin is God Himself (2 Tim 3:16, 2 Pet 1:20-21) . In other words, God wants us to know who He is and what He has done so that we will worship Him in spirit and in TRUTH. But, we must always be careful to not allow our imaginations to go beyond what God has revealed about Himself in his word. That which God has not revealed about himself is still mystery.

Ambrose said it this way:

“The things which God wishes to be hidden are not to be examined; and the things which He has made manifest are not to be rejected, lest we as ingrates be improperly curious toward the former and damnably ungrateful for the latter.” (De Vocatione Gentium, Bk. 17)

The Apostle Paul put it like this:

"For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I KNOW in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known." (1 Cor 13:12).

Notice that Paul didn't say that we "can't know" but that we only KNOW IN PART. But, that part that we do know is sure and certain and has neat lines and clear definitions. Here are just some of those neat lines and clear definitions that we glean directly from God's Holy Word about the One and Only True God, The Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit:

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, And of all things visible and invisible:

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God; Begotten of his Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of very God; Begotten, not made; Being of one substance with the Father; By whom all things were made: Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, And was incarnate by the Holy Spirt of the Virgin Mary, And was made man: And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried: And the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures: And ascended into heaven, And sits at the right hand of the Father: And he shall come again, with glory, to judge both the livign and the dead; Whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Spirit, The Lord, and Giver of Life, Who proceeds from the Father and the Son; Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; Who spoke by the Prophets: And I believe one Christian and Apostolic Church: I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins: And I look for the Resurrection of the dead: And the Life of the world to come.

Amen.

This confession about God contains neat lines and clear definitions. Yet, none of it pertains to a 'god' that we've made up. Instead, it richly, beautifully and poetically summarizes the God who has revealed Himself to us in the Holy Scriptures.

Comments

[Brian of the Hill People]

The whole God-in-a-box argument is really an argument to remove the truth and authority of scripture. If God isn't Who He says He is, His attributes are not what He claims they are, and His will isn't what He revealed it to be, how do I, being a finite, little, and evil thing, have any way at all to know anything about God other than brilliant intellect and power as evidenced by the creation itself? And even then, am I putting God in a box? I mean, can't a Being be stupid and make all this if He wanted? How dare I assume His intellect be an inferno? Maybe it's just a glowing coal.

This is purely and simply an attack on Sola Scriptura.

[Ann]

Thank you for giving us some backup Chris. I get so weary of these situations. love in Christ

[Paul L.]

People who talk about not putting God in a box assume that because we can't know *everything* about God that we therefore can't know *anything* about God--or at least not know anything with certainty. A logical fallacy.

[waf]

Then how do they know we can't know anything with certainty? lol!!!

[Tim the Cyanide-Gargling Faith Gladiator]

Did God really say?

[Bill Klein]

Nice article. When I have people approach me saying that I am limiting God by understanding Him and His ways ONLY from the Word of God, I tell them, "Going by God's Word does not limit God, but rather He is limiting us." We are the ones that have the fanciful imaginations and emotional experiences that we want to attribute as being from the Spirit of God. God has only revealed to us what He wants us to know about Him; He also limits us so that we will not go beyond what God has revealed about Himself through Jesus Christ.

[Chris Rosebrough]

Bill,

Brilliant point!

[Dennis Peskey]

Chris - This whole "putting God in a box" is real annoying. My standard response is to ask whomever asserts this, "Tell me that Christmas story again, please." Make them keep retelling it until they realize they put God in that box called a manager.

For the "rest of the story" remind them we not only put him in a box, then we nailed him to a tree. Not a very nice way to treat our God - but that's one of the many reasons He is God and we're not. For bonus points, ask, "Who nailed God to the accursed tree?" If they do not reply "It is I, Lord" you have a bit of catechesis to do.

[Kelly]

My friend Larry from WT recently pointed out that especially in matters pertaining to discerning what is appropriate conduct within a given church setting or program, Christians are fond of using the arguments (in order, from mild to increasingly hostile): "God can use anything he wants"; "You can't put God in a box"; "You don't care about the lost"; and "What have YOU done lately?"

He points out that what that Christian means to say is "*I* can use anything I want to justify my end" and "you can't put ME in a box." An apt observation. Christians can have this complex where they think that any ridiculous idea that comes into their heads-- if they're sincere enough and seems to generate some temporary desired results-- is obviously the work of the Holy Spirit, and that to criticize them (or their favorite popular speakers) is to oppose God.

[Kantor B.]

Observation: It wouldn't surprise me in the least that some of those who accuse us of "putting God in a box" are actually doing the same thing ... in their prayer life.

For many people, concerning prayer, do put God "in a box," a box much like a "Jack-in-the-box." You see, they keep God in that "God-in-the-box," nice-and-tidy up on the top shelf of their library shelving. They never bother with Him, hardly dust Him off ... until some crisis comes into their life. They get sick. They lost their job. They lost a loved one. Then they quickly take down their "God-in-the-box," dust off the box a little, release the latch, and crank the crank a whole bunch of times; then out pops their "God-in-the-box." They pour out their souls to Him, hoping that something good will come out of their hardships. He answers their pleas ... maybe not ... but then, after a while, they stuff "God-in-the-box," close the latch, put Him on that top-shelf, and then never mind God until the next crisis comes along.

Yet another way people put "God-in-the-box."

(Pardon the interruption on the theme of this thread, but this thread reminded me of this illustration that I have used for years when teaching the Lord's Prayer [and prayer in general].)

Now back to your regularly-scheduled thread:

This is a fascinating subject, and yet another example of people not believing the truth of Scripture, nor believing in its power to bring people to the one true faith.

[Mike Ratliff]

Amen Chris! Well said brother!

[Michael]

The whole "God in a box" defense is used by professing Christians that do not want limits placed on their lives by God through His Word. It's another form of LAWLESSNESS! These same professing Christians also love using other defenses to justify not submitting and surrendering themselves to a crucified life:

LEGALISM: The legalism defense is often used to counter any inquirey as to why they are not changing and being conformed to the image of Christ.

THERE IS NO PERFECT CHURCH: This is one of their favorites. Although NONE of the churches that Jesus Christ rebukes in Revelation 3 use this defense in response to His dealing, it's used often by modern day apostate American pastors to explain why carnality and worldliness is rampant in their churches, but can we at least strive to be a scriptual church?

Evangelistic Relavance: This too is used to justify conformity to the world,unequally yoked friendships and going places that Christians should not be seen in. I wish Christians would realize that Witness is a noun and not a verb although being a witness will cause us to witness. Are we to be like them to win them? It is my contention that we live in a hour when the way of truth is being evil spoke of by professing Christians within the church.

SINNERS LIKE JESUS BUT NOT CHURCH: This is used by some as one of many defenses for changing the way they do church. Jesus is the Head of the church and the church is His body.So it is impossible to hate the body (how they have church according to the Bible) and like the Head at the same time. We live in a time when church is to be hip and pastors are to be cool as they dress like teenagers in their jeans and tieless shirts and "preach" from a platform that looks more like a seminar stage than a place where believers gather to hear the Word of God through a vessel that has been sanctified and purified by the Holy Ghost!

The modern day emergent and seeker friendly movements are those who are truely guilty of putting God in a box as they call it. They are haters of sound doctrine and are foriegn to the WAY OF TRUTH as outlined in scripture. May God open the eys and spiritual understanding of his holy remnant so that they can see, discern and avoid these wolves!

[Ben Mordecai]

Arguement: You can't put God in a box
Response: What do you think the arc of the covenant was?

NEXT!
(thank you Phil Johnson)

[Truth Unites... and Divides]

(Found this post via Slice of Laodicea).

Thanks for penetrating through the high-minded fog of phony sincerity to uncover the woodchoppers axing away at the truth and Authority of Scripture

[Quote Quote No Name]

I think that this is more of an attack on basic common sense. I believe the Emergents, Neo-Pentecostals, Charismatics and those like them that have a faulty epistemological world view believe that we shouldn't use the logic and common reasoning God gave us and that we need to make up our own version of God that suits our fancies. I pray that those in these false worldviews be delivered by the power of Christ unto salvation.

[Chris McReynolds]

In case it is not clear to everyone, the "God in a box" comment is absolutely intended to imply that the scriptures are not just unreliable, but pure myth.

Rob Bell and others use "The Jesus Seminar" and other secular "Christians" (non-believers who dub themselves "Christians" because they think he was a wise man) who declare that "we" can't know because no person or generation has any better idea about who God is or was, than the present or the next generation.

The absurd metaphor that Rob uses for his book, "Velvet Elvis" is him saying that each generation "creates" its own myths. He IS clearly saying Christ was or is a myth, and now it is "our" (meaning "Rob's) turn to "create" the "myth" of Christ and Christianity.

He thinks Christ was just an earlier version of Rob, who spun some inspirational stories. Now Rob is the new "savior".

If I am wrong, than it must be even worse. It could be Satan himself. Nothing good can come of any of his so-called "Emerging Christianity.

I just can not understand how a single person is fooled. I just don't get it.

This is no joke.

[Shawn G]

When I read Bell's comments about figuring God out, I think about it in another way. When I say that God is love (which scriptures supports, time and again) I think of my definition of love. So "God is love" is limiting because it is my definition and experience of love. I am married, I am a son, I am a brother, I have friends - these are my experiences with love. I am not a father, so I have not experienced love like that - I do not know that experience of love. I can imagine what it would be like, but I simply don't know - so my definition of love does not include that. Therefore my definition of love is limiting and finite. Where as God being love is beyond what I can imagine or could ever experience. I can say that God is love, but I don't truly know or understand what that means. I only know my experience with love.

Also, I understand that Rob Bell is an easy target, but questioning his faith based on a book makes me sad. If you've ever heard him preach, you would know that he affirms the gospel and that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. I am by no means a Rob Bell fan, but I don't think it is our duty to call into question his faith or anyone's faith for that matter based on limited experience of that person.

[Joel Sattler]

God has a manager?

[John]

Wow. Must be nice to have such gifting with scriptures that you can distill it down to bite sized pieces of truth for other Christian dummies to be able to safely digest. Hows it going arguing everyone who differs from your handle on scriptural truth into your "correct" theology? God gave us one mouth and two ears, dude. Meditate on that for a while and see if the HS might have a Word for you.