If I would have giving any thought to the sequence of these posts I likely would have put a theology of sound before a theology of sight. There is a type of primacy to sound in the Bible. Creation is given form and existence by the word of God. Christ himself is not the sight of God but the word of God. Has God approved our encounter of him by sound but not by sight? The OT appears to be somewhat inconsistent as there were apparent "face-to-face" encounters with God. However, God's voice finds much more clarity than God's image. Think of Moses on Mt. Sinai or Job's encounter or Isaiah in the Temple. Visually there is chaos and sensory overload and yet in the midst of this there appears to be a clarity of voice that is achieved. Is there theological significance to this? To be honest I don't have an insightful response to this observation. I will have to leave this hanging for now.
Monday, February 19, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
How about places in the NT where Christ is said to be the image (icon) of God:
"The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God" (2 Cor. 4:4).
OR
"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation" (Col. 1:15).
Post a Comment