Leaven
Volume 8
Issue 3 Theology and Ministry
Article 5
1-1-2000
The Doctrine of God
John Mark Hicks
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven
Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology
and Philosophy of Religion Commons
Recommended Citation
Hicks, John Mark (2000) "The Doctrine of God," Leaven: Vol. 8 : Iss. 3 , Article 5.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol8/iss3/5
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Religion at Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been
accepted for inclusion in Leaven by an authorized editor of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information,
please contact Katrina.Gallardo@pepperdine.edu, anna.speth@pepperdine.edu, linhgavin.do@pepperdine.edu.
Hicks: The Doctrine of God
118
L e a v e n , F a ll 2 0 0 0
The Doctrine
of God
ihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
BY JOHN M A R K H IC K S
T h is p a p e r w a s p r e p a r e d fo r th e " T h e o lo g y
th e C h u r c h "
s e m in a r
th e 1996 C h r is tia n
w ith
in S e r v ic e o f
h e ld o n J u ly 17-18 in c o n ju n c tio n
sion in a form ula,
structures
S c h o la r s C o n fe r e n c e , N a s h v ille ,
T ennessee.
reduced
piety
of the true church,
to the form s
and relegated
the fringes of hum an
experience.
part in both creation
and redem ption,
and
G od to
G od has done his
it reasoned,
and now w e m ust do ours.
Where Are We Today?
Secularized
O ne of the m ost significant
vision
of G od com m only
influences
held am ong
Christ has been the secularization
secularization
upon the
Churches
of our culture. By
I m ean the desacralization
tions, the transposition
of institu-
of religious functions
secular dom ain, and the differentiation
into the
of sacred and
secular so that the sacred loses its overarching
This secularization
scendence
of his w orld,
through
spiritual and providential
only rem em ber
the view s
w as
deeply
of Jam es A . H arding
on rule keeping
takes precedence.
of Christianity
to religious
is
equated
Further,
w ith
it entails
w ithin
the
activity of G od is restricted
the regularity
w ords like "accident"
It
or-
of nature.
to
Consequently,
and "luck" are m ore a part of
than is the biblical phrase "Lord w ill-
are w ell know n,
rather
cluding
religion,
as an ideological
tive, characterized
Churches
of Christ
tw entieth
century.
Secularization,
particular
form in our m ovem ent.
perspec-
of the m id-
how ever,
took a
believed
the divine
to
of the Stonite perspecdynam ics
w hose
Stonite
and
roots
that G od had a dynam ic,
static, relationship
nation. A ccording
ordering
w ith his w orld,
through"
in-
of civil w ar w ithin
a
to Lipscom b, G od" tolerat[ ed] and
ordain[ ed]" the evil of slavery in order to punish
South
G od's
battle-axe,"
the
the N orthern
arm y.'
The Cam pbell
w ing of our heritage
in a solidly Reform ed
G od's
ing."
than
influence
D avid
involved
activity. O ne need
Lipscom b,
cosm os; the perceived
Secularized
but
view s of spiritual
or dog-
and
lives. G od w as not on the
fringes
providence.
and its institutions.
our vocabulary
of hum an
of the conversion
tive on subsequent
the loss of a sense of divine im m anence
m aintaining
transform ation
view
entails the loss of a sense of tran-
Christianity
ecclesiology
heritage. The Stone w ing of our m ove-
had a dynam ic
note the pow erful
entails the reduction
ganizations;
our authentic
m ent
claim .'
in the life of faith; a pragm atic
m atic em phasis
of
religion, how ever, does not represent
cussed
involvem ent
perspective
in the w orld.'
today, Cam pbell's
the w orld w as dynam ic:
about his kingdom .
w as rooted
on providence
and
W hile rarely dis-
view of G od's
activity
G od acts in history
H is ow n m ovem ent,
in
to bring
he believed,
It focused conver-
Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 2000
1
Leaven, Vol. 8 [2000], Iss. 3, Art. 5
T h e o lo g y a n d M in is tr y
w as a w ork of G od that w ould usher in the m illennial
has been w ritten out of our hym nbooks
kingdom .
H oly, H oly"). I have no vested
But as the Churches
centrated
of Christ increasingly
on the plan of salvation
and church order,
w here the concerns w ere prim arily
m an activity, our ow n vision
ingly influenced
con-
centered
on hu-
of G od w as increas-
by the cultural dynam ic
of secular-
119
(as in "H oly,
interest
in the term
m yself. W here m y interest lies is in a com m unitarian
understanding
of G od. W hat I m ean by "Trinity"
the divine com m unity
that created
is
the cosm os and
redeem ed
a fallen people.
redeem ed
a people for him self through
The Father
created
and
the Son by
ization. Failing to reflect specifically on the doctrine
the H oly Spirit. Ever since Barth's C h u r c h D o g m a tic s
of G od as the transcendent
and Rahners
O ne, w e unconsciously
and subtly rem ade our doctrine of G od in the im age
revival
of our ecclesiology and culture. O ur polem ics against
decades,
the direct
trinitarianism
operation
of the H oly
Spirit,
against
W hat
there has been a
I s th e T r in ity ?
of trinitarian
theology,
and in the last tw o
there has been a revival
over against
of Eastern
W estern
social
trinitarianism ,
m iracles, and against the special and specific provi-
w hich em phasizes
dential w ork of G od had the tendency
of social trinitarian ism is one of the m ost significant
transcendence
of G od
ecclesiological
secularized,
to our
to reduce the
hum an-focused
issues. W e tended,
developm ents
then, to adopt
a
deistic vision of G od.
Currently,
trem endous
characterizes
about w hether
to believe
G od
sovereign
prem odern
thought, the deistic w atchm aker
ern thought,
enthroned
or the divine
ferer that characterizes
W e are uncertain
partner
theology.'
how our doctrine
ought to im pact our lives-w hether
pect to experience
of m od-
and fellow suf-
som e postm odern
about
of G od
w e should
G od in the daily m om ents
or only in the pages of scripture.
of
W e are uncertain
about how to reflect upon the life and character
G od-w hether
w e should
etistic, or pluralistic
ex-
of life,
follow m etaphysical,
m odels. W e are uncertain
of
pi-
about
ship betw een
theology." It fosters
understanding
of G od over against
understanding
of the relation-
the Father, Son, and Spirit.
Social trinitarianism
created
of G od. This revival
in contem porary
a com m unitarian
a m ore individualistic
confusion
our doctrine of G od. W e are uncertain
is the
the m onarchy
a com m unity.
affirm s
that a com m unity
The Father
through
the Son
and by the Spirit created m ale and fem ale as a com m unity
that w as to reproduce
ation. The hum an
itself through
com m unity
w as to m odel the cre-
ative act of the divine com m unity.
created
procre-
Just as the Trinity
in order to share the love of their com m u-
nity, so parents have children in order to share their
love
w ithin
com m unity.
fellow ship
k o in o n ia - a
nity of G od to envelop
W hen
the hum an
G od
is interested
in
that flow s out of the com m uthe hum an
com m unity
com m unity.
fell, the divine
how the love and holiness of G od ought to m old our
com m unity
lives. W e are uncertain
tends to have a people for him self, am ong w hom he
institutional,
or m ystical
about w hether
experience
to be expected. W e are uncertain
trine of G od should
a personal,
of G od ought
about how the doc-
m old our vision of the church,
w hen w e have for so long perm itted
our ecclesiology
took the initiative
can dw ell-a
com m unity
w here
nity intends
k o in o n ia . A holy com m unity
to redeem
of the
offer three directions
for thinking
about G od in our
fellow ship.
w hat has fallen.
The created
and
redeem ed
called to im age the trinitarian
of G od. H um anity
Directions for the FutureZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
w as redeem ed
T h e T r in ita r ia n
takes the initiative
com m unities
com m unity
The m odel for hum an com m unity
C o m m u n ity
o f H o ly L o v e
Trinity has not been a popular
term in our fel-
low ship. Cam pbell and Stone both rejected it, and it
https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol8/iss3/5
it intends
w as created, but it fell,
profound
thinking, dialogue, and application
can be his
to dw ell w ith a com m unity;
and now the H oly Com m unity
of G od in the life of the church. I w ish to
they
G od in-
people and he can be their G od. The H oly Com m u-
to m old our vision of G od. Clearly, w e need som e
doctrine
to redeem .
are
of G od.
is the com m unity
w as created to im age G od. Israel
as a people of G od w ho w ould repre-
sent G od in the w orld. The church is called to em ulate the com m unity
and unity of the Father and the
Son. Jesus offers the relationship
betw een
him self
2
Hicks: The Doctrine of God
120
Leaven, Fall 2000
heaven.
The church
holy com m unity
ought
to be the im age
of God's
on earth.
A communitarian
D o x o lo g ic a l U n d e r s ta n d in g
o f G o d 's A ttr ib u te s
understanding of God
As I surveyed
recent writings on the subject of
God, I was struck by the incessant
and persistent
rejects the highly
problem -solving"
approach to our understanding
individualistic and egoof C od.' W hile there are som e notable exceptions,
our
discussions
of God have tended to focus on cercentered character -of
tain problem s
regarding
his attributes.
Given our
Western, and particularly
rationalistic,
as well as m odern
(that is, scientific),
American, culture.ihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
m ethodologies,
we tend to approach
God as an ob/I
ject to be dissected,
theodicy).
and the Father as the m odel
ships am ong his disciples
how the com m unity
how it m odels
servitude,
m odels
m utual
initiative,
how
interdependence
intent
understanding
for theology
servations
rejects
It provides
derstand
which
k o in o n ia ,
share
through
com m unitarian
practice
with
of God
or reindi-
Second,
we ought
we are to em ulate
a
Holy
Spirit.
understanding
to be
m odel
a com m unity.
a
the
Our
with a com m u-
that im ages
God in
ought to be a holy one. The holy k o in o n ia
be m anifested
on earth
Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 2000
we want to know
This
concept
how
God's
his creation
om nipotence
approach-whether
Aristotelian
or from
that
m odern
believes
how describe
is possible
those
and
(perhaps
attributes
delim ited
theism -ascan
the lim its of what
that the attributes
as they are revealed
in scripture.
as well as in
God. This approach
tributes
approach
to rationality,
but
of God's
it understands
relation
rather
them by hum an
of
as
the at-
in scripture
to his creation.
of God revealed
than delim iting
I want
to the attributes
m its to the attributes
to
and ap-
does not call for irrationality
of God as they are revealed
expressions
in
only
I want
way of understanding
to call for a doxological
ratio-
can som e-
that they can be known
in the way they are revealed
of
be truly
by hum an
rationality
prescribe)
known
revi8
of the attributes
for God. W hile I believe
I also believe
opposed
such
m etaphysics
free-will
that hum an
of God can be truly
scripture,
process
understanding
processed,
is
arising
tradition
or from a well-intentioned
in neo-evangelical
known,
om ni-
at all.
rationalistic
a realist
in
of free crea-
a classic scholastic
as Aquinas,
how
with his activity
to know
with
Our ra-
the sort of thing
propriating
these attributes of God.
of ZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
Over
against
a rationalistic
fram ework,
we
Third,
of God grounds
within
Or, we want
is consistent
consis-
and determ in-
attributes.
is consistent
call us to a different
within those
and in which
with God is a fellowship
m ust
science
nality. It assum es
of God helps us un-
nity of light, and the com m unity
this world
God.
us the definitive
of holy discipline
fellowship
the world.
God
of God rather than
to an institution
im m utability
sum es
lines.
ought to function
the
God's
sionism
Am erican,
salva-
of com m unities
It provides
that God can be. For exam ple,
such as Hartshorne,
It conceives
understanding
com m unities.
of God
in favor of som e personal,
and how relationships
to delim it
a few ob-
than individual,
in the nature
ecclesiology
the kind
of God's
functions
(as in
the logical
exploring
tional inquiry
a m eaningful
for social redem ption,
rather
W e seek to m aintain
of our God through
justified
tures. Or, we want to know whether
ego-centered
particularly
relationship
com m unitarian
vi-
im plications
and
redem ption.
ecclesiology
vidualistic
and state-a
understanding
a vision
It roots ecclesiology
jecting
it
and
ing the logical relations
from
and
com m unal,
reducing
how
to give hu-
m e to m ake
individualistic
as well as personal
sim ply
self-
this line.
of W estern,
tion along
ought
of God has trem endous
the highly
culture.
holiness,
church,
a com m unitarian
character
love,
for them ." This com m unitarian
and life. Perm it
along
First,
self-giving
how it m odels
it m odels
m an com m unities-fam ily,
sion of God's
relation-
(John 17:21). Consequently,
of God m odels
gracious
risking
of com m unity
tency
analyzed,
as
It sub-
in scripture
rationality.
It
3
Leaven, Vol. 8 [2000], Iss. 3, Art. 5
T h e o lo g y
calls for understanding
of redem ptive
the attributes
history
instead
lasticism . The doxological
in the context
of A ristotelian
approach
terventionism
scho-
is a confession
nature,
w orld
of G od's rela tionshi p to us ra ther than a thesis for
debate.
of Jack Cottrell's
m eans,
eschew s
philosophical
abstraction
gical contem plation.
the contem plative
tradition
scholastic tradition
the church
G od's
It understands
character
w e w orship
com m unity
cal grids;
his attributes
plum bed
w ith respect
the doxological
w ith the praise
and m etaphysi-
are praised
rather
than
to their logical relations.
approach,
of G od that contain
w e w or-
G od is sought in w orship/
encounter rather than in rationalistic
rational
or constrain
ten regarded
has joined tw o concepts
as m utually
ereign over everything
exclusive:
ner. I understand
that are of-
(1) G od is sov-
in the w orld, and (2) G od is
G od as sovereign
dynam ic m anover the w orld
The doxological approach
is a confession of
God's relationship to us
rather than a thesis for
debate.
In
understandings
through
in the explicit sense that G od can do w hatever
and en-
pleases
(Pss 115:3; 135:6). W hatever
scripture,
experienced
in life's situations,
countered
in corporate
G od could have caused it to happen
w orship. ZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
does w hatever
D y n a m ic , A c tio n
of
has no com m on
agreem ent
on
he
does happen,
otherw ise.
he desires, according
poses. But I also understand
relationship
G o d -in th e W o r ld
O ur m ovem ent
in the theo-
G od are replaced
of the G od w ho is know n
T h e S o v e r e ig n , b u t R e la tio n a lly
in the
that
the revealed G od rather than
the G od of speculation.
action
discussion
involved in the w orld in a relationally
in our relationships.
calls us to be like the one w hom
ship-and
w ith
of Bernard than w ith the
of Aquinas.r
is first of all a w orshiping
that im ages
W orship
and exalts litur-
It has m ore in com m on
The
G o d th e R u le r ."
of divine
is a hotly contested
121
logical arena."
M y heading
The doxological approach to the attributes of G od
and extent
a n d M in is tr y
G od
to his ow n pur-
that G od has a dynam ic
w ith the w orld
in such a w ay that the
future is open; G od is interactive
w ith his creatures,
the nature, m eans, and extent of divine action in the
and he values their freedom . Prayer is a genuine dia-
w orld.
logue w hereby
W e can find w ithin
the tw entieth
w ide range of understandings,
tic notions
of natural
understandings
Lipscom b
lam ented
that"
m en."!' Contem porary
tive interpretation
no question
...
needs
theology is in no better shape.
narra-
of E. Frank Tupper in A S c a n d a lw hich rejects interventionism
and
that G od is doing the best he can w ith the
understanding
of a classic Reform ed
by Paul H elm in his recent book T h e
tw o view s are the com patibilist,
form ed, understanding
w hich
eignty and hum an
end of the future, or G od's goal, w hich
dom , is not open, but certain. G od is ultim ately
ereign, and he w ill accom plish
the
is his kingsov-
his purposes.
O f course, in these few lines, I do not have space
to explain this understanding
perhaps
a few com m ents
understanding
of divine
action. But
on the practicality
w ill illum inate
m y vantage
of this
point.
First, G od is fully engaged in actively w orking w ithin
his w orld tow ard the goal of bringing
dom . G od is not on the sidelines.
ated the gam e-and
set up its rules-is
H e cares for his creatures
about his king-
The G od w ho crealso a player.
(1 Pet 5:7); bears their bur-
dens daily (Ps 68:19); and acts on their behalf w ithin
history, through his m ighty acts (Ps 107), and w ithin
to balance
freedom
play of divine and hum an actions. N evertheless,
these
betw een
of D . A . Carson in H o w L o n g ,
attem pts
the future is created out of the inter-
but less rigidly Re-
P r o v id e n c e o f G o d .1 3 O n the continuum
L o r d i"
by
of G od's dealing w ith
w orld he has, to the exposition
a
advocated
range from the postm odern,
o u s P r o o id e n c e ,"
counsels
extrem e
M aybe this is w hy, in 1880, D avid
study m ore than the principles
U nderstandings
a
from explicitly deis-
law to the so-called
of divine providence
Jam es A . H arding."
century
divine
sover-
and the occasional
https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol8/iss3/5
in-
their ow n existential m om ents, by his pow er (1 Thess
3:11-13). Second, G od is sovereign
of evil in the w orld. A lthough
over the m ystery
theodicy is som etim es
4
Hicks: The Doctrine of God
122
L e a v e n , F a ll 2 0 0 0
a necessary
ihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
and useful task as w e think through
faith, it m ust alw ays be secondary
that G od is sovereign,
ceive the consequences.
W e m ust not perm it our fi-
to underm ine
even if it soothes
the conscience
rienced)
to the confession
no m atter how w e m ay per-
nite bew ilderm ent
ultim ately
our
G od's sovereignty,
of faith. W e m ust
confess w ith Job, w ho had "seen" (expeG od in the w hirlw ind,
"I know
that you
can do all things; no plan of yours can be thw arted"
(Job 42:2 N IV ). It is precisely G od's sovereignty
evil that grounds
the prom ise of eschatological
and the confidence
O ur vexations
that good w ill trium ph
w ith the presence
but
that is not the G od of scripture.
Conclusion
The doctrine
of G od is the beginning
of our the-
ology. O ne w rong turn here w ill have serious im plications for w here w e end up. Consequently,
ology begins
m easured
cording
w ith G od, and all theology
all them ust be
by w ho G od is and w hat he has done, acto how he has revealed
him self.
over
hope
over evil.
of evil and suffer-
ing in the w orld m ust not underm ine
w ho values self-reliance rather than subm ission,
JOHN M A R K
H IC K S
versity G raduate
at H arding
U ni-
School of Religion, M em phis,
teaches theology
Ten-
nessee.
the sovereignty
of G od. Rather, w e m ust confess G od's sovereignty
Notes
and trust his purposes.
I See Karel Dobbelaere,
"Secularization: A M ulti-Dim ensional Concept," C u r r e n t S o c io lo g y 29 (sum m er 1981): 1-213.
,
Third, the first tw o convictions
dent, bold theology
ground
of prayer. The future
to us, and nothing is predeterm ined
a confilies open
except w hat G od
2
J
w ill bring
planned
about
eschatologically
specifically
Prayer engages
or w hat
he has
to do (as in the death of Christ).
G od through
praise, and thanksgiving
intercession,
petition,
as it calls upon him to act
on behalf of his people. It calls for divine activity in
our m inistries
(as in 2 Thess 1:11), and it calls for
divine presence
in our w orship
It is our confidence
that G od cares and that he
can act on our behalf-both
strated
through
pow er, boldness,
of w hich he has dem on-
his m ighty
acts-that
and confidence
62 reflects this tw ofold
ist confesses
(Ps 141:1).
confidence
fuels
of prayer. Psalm
w hen the psalm -
that his soul can find rest in G od be-
cause he know s that G od is both" strong"
ing" (Ps 62:11-12). H is strength
dem onstrated
of Israel's
the
through
his m ighty
confidence
and "lov-
and love have been
acts. The source
is G od's revelation
of him self
through his m ighty deeds. That revelation has taught
Israel to depend
upon
G od's
activity
in the w orld
for both rest and salvation.
A m erican
culture
daily dependence
relational
confidence,
sense of
disposition,
the w orld w ill underm ine
of
the
as w ell as the self-help strat-
egies, of A m erican Christians.
ages self-reliance
a refreshing
upon G od. A n understanding
G od's actions w ithin
self-reliant
needs
A deistic G od encour-
and self-help, but the sovereign/
G od of scripture
encourages
and trust. A m ericans
subm ission,
m ay w ant a G od
Published by Pepperdine Digital Commons, 2000
David Lipscom b, "God Uses the Evil as well as the Good,"
22 (30 Septem ber 1880): 634.
Alexander Cam pbell, "Providence, General and Special,"
G o s p e l A d v o c a te
M ille n n ia l H a r b in g e r
26 (1855): 601-8; "Chance: Observations
on the Term s Chance, Accident, Lucky, Unlucky," M ille n n ia l
H a r b in g e r 22 (1851): 615-21.
4
These categories are taken from Philip Dale Krum rei, "The
Relevance of Secularization for Interpreting and Nurturing Spirituality in Dutch Churches of Christ: An Analysis ofthe Relation
of Pre-M odem , M odem and Post-M odem Paradigm s of Faith
and the Practice of Prayer" (D.M in. diss., Harding University
Graduate School of Religion, 1992), see appendix 7. His survey
of congregants is enlightening. It dem onstrates that the people
in the pew are thoroughly confused about God's relationship
life.
S
A good theological history of contem porary
to
thought on
the Trinity is Ted Peters, G o d a s T r in ity (Louisville: W estm inster/
John Knox, 1993). The contrast between the East and W est m ay
be seen in Catherine M owry LaCugna, G o d fo r
U s : T h e T r in ity
Harper & Row, 1991).
6 I would recom m end Stanley Grenz's recent system atic the-
a n d C h r is tia n
L ife (San Francisco:
ology, T h e o lo g y fo r th e C o m m u n ity
o f G o d (Nashville:
Broadm an, 1994), especially pages 92ff., as an illustration of
how com m unitarian
them es should shape our system atic under-
standing of God. I would also recom m end Catherine LeCugna's
G o d fo r U s , especially pages 377ff., for insights into how
trinitarianism should im pact practical life.
7 M y survey was an unscientific
perusal of the index to Restoration periodicals over the last decade or so.
s As, for exam ple, in Clark Pinnock et aI., T h e O p e n n e s s o f
G o d : A B ib lic a l
C h a lle n g e to th e T r a d itio n a l
G o d (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity,
9
Here I would recom m end,
U n d e r s ta n d in g
of
1994).
as an exam ple,
Donald
G.
Bloesch, G o d th e A lm ig h ty : P o w e r , W is d o m , H o lin e s s a n d L o v e
(Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1995).
5
Leaven, Vol. 8 [2000], Iss. 3, Art. 5
T h e o lo g y
ihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
See J. A. Harding and L. S. W hite, ZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
T h e H a r d in g - W h ite
15 Jack Cottrell,
10
(Cincinnati:
II Lipscom b, 634.
D is c u s s io n
12
F. L. Rowe, 1910).
P r o v id e n c e :
123
W h a t th e B ib le S a y s a b o u t G o d th e R u le r
(Joplin, M o.: College Press, 1984).
16
E. Frank Tupper, A S c a n d a lo u s
a n d M in is tr y
T he Jesus
G o d (M acon, Ga.: M ercer Univer-
See, for exam ple,
Henderson,
Brian Hebb1ethwaite
and Edward
eds., D iv in e A c tio n : S tu d ie s I n s p ir e d b y th e P h ilo -
sity Press, 1995).
T h e o lo g y o f A u s tin F a r r e r (Edinburgh: T & T Clark,
1990); Thom as F. Tracy, ed., T h e G o d W h o A c ts : P h ilo s o p h ic a l
13 Paul Helm , T h e P r o v id e n c e
o f G o d , Contours of Christian Theology (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1994).
o n S u ffe r 14 D. A. Carson, H o w L o n g , 0 L o r d ? R e fle c tio n s
E x p lo r a tio n s (University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1994); and M aurice W iles, G o d 's
A c tio n in th e W o r ld : T h e B a m p to n L e c tu r e s fo r 1 9 8 6 (London:
in g a n d E v il (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990).
SCM Press, 1986).
S to r y o f th e C o m p a s s io n a te
https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol8/iss3/5
s o p h ic a l
a n d T h e o lo g ic a l
6