This is my first thought in reading chapter one of HG. I haven't finished the chapter and am doing my best to take it very slowly, so my initial reaction will be more informed later (and therefore may change later) when I finish the chapter and/or the book.
On p 16, Willard says that he comes to recognize a "characteristic thought and impulse" as God's speaking. This seems to me to be in line with what we are taught as Christians to assume that God's voice is, but I feel that this is somewhat dim/disappointing. I am guessing that this "thought and impulse" is supposed to be a deeper form of conversation (like ESP - a direct communication to the brain and/or heart). But supernatural as conversing with God must be, I would expect it would be more satisfying and real than having a human to human conversation.
I think that I know what Willard means by these "thoughts and impulses." I too have had moments where for no deeply held reason, I felt convicted that I should make a certain decision (like choosing to go to Samford over Bham Southern for college); and these are moments of enlightenment that I have attributed to God showing me His will.
But am I wrong to feel that this is not nearly satisfying enough? Is imperfect communication part of God's design - so that we remember to continually yearn for heaven, when we will be in constant communion with God? Going back to God speaking to Moses face to face as a man to his friend, am I wrong to find that far more preferable to some often-inscrutable, but persistent thought or impulse that leads me with no words said?
No comments:
Post a Comment