JUBILEE YEAR FOR LA PINARDIÈRE FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF CONVERSION (1975-2025) – “A SMALL BEGINNING OF ETERNAL LIFE” THEMATIC SUPPLEMENT : SOME KEY THEMES (B) 3. Biblical theism and other approaches to divine omnipresence
JUBILEE YEAR
FOR LA PINARDIÈRE
FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF CONVERSION (1975-2025)
– “A SMALL
BEGINNING OF ETERNAL LIFE”
THEMATIC SUPPLEMENT : SOME KEY THEMES (B)
3. Biblical theism and other approaches to divine omnipresence
discovered the Creator and His biblical revelation, I was fascinated by the beauty of creation, having climbed Mount Orford on September 20, at the very beginning of my new life with Christ.
Biblical teaching on God's
relationship with the universe, between the Creator and His creation, has
occupied my thoughts throughout my 50 years of faith. In this section, I will
attempt to summarize the main approaches that seek to explain this relationship,
highlighting their mutual differences, and finally show how biblical theism
adequately answers our questions about the relationship between God and the
universe.
This overview is only a
summary and by no means constitute a detailed treatment of each approach.
v
Monism
The term “monism” refers to a system of thought that
reduces all reality to a single “substance”, as opposed to dualism, which
contrasts two principles in the world (nature and spirit, good and evil, yin
and yang, etc.). There are materialistic monisms and pantheistic monisms[1].
o
Materialistic
monism
The term “materialism” is mostly used in everyday
language to refer to attachment to material things. This is called practical materialism, linked to ethics.
Here I will use the term “materialism” in its philosophical meaning. Philosophical materialism asserts that
reality can be reduced to matter[2]. It is a kind of monism in which reality is
reduced to only that which is material. There is no spiritual or transcendent
reality. This philosophy is similar to other related currents: namely,
positivism[3], atomism[4], naturalism[5] and atheism[6]. Tell me,
is there room for wonder with a materialistic, positivist, atomist, and atheist
philosophy? I don't think so. With the popularization of these reductionist
philosophies over the last few centuries, we have witnessed the “disenchantment
of the world[7]”, meaning
that there is no longer any room for the intervention of the supernatural or
the transcendent. The world has become a “closed system”, as philosopher
Francis A. Schaeffer put it[8].
o
Pantheistic
monism
The second main type of monism is pantheism.
Pantheism is a worldview in which reality is conceived as being one, but not as
matter, rather as spirit. Everything is God; nothing exists outside of God.
Everything that exists is God[9], and if
anything else seems to exist exister[10], then it
is an illusion[11]. No
distinction should be made, because all things are fundamentally one. There is
no distinction between God and the world. We know that since the 1960s, with
the influence of globalization and cross-cultural exchanges, Eastern religions
have spread to the West (transcendental meditation, Zen Buddhism, etc.), along with the worldview they convey,
as well as alternative medicine and psychocorporal practices (yoga,
meditation).
“Dualism” is defined as a religious or philosophical
system that uses “two heterogeneous principles[12]”. Plato's
philosophy in Greece was dualistic, as was Aristotle's. Chinese Taoism is
dualistic (Ying-Yang), as is Mazdeism (an ancient Persian religion) with the
fundamental opposition of the principles of good and evil that forms the basis
of its cosmology. Dualistic elements are also found in Hinduism. The Gnostic
movement was a heresy that emerged from Christianity. Its followers were
dualistic and opposed spirit and matter.
v
Deism
Another religious approach
is that of deism. Deism developed mainly towards the end of the 17th century
under the influence of rationalism[13].
« Deism » should not be confused with « theism ». Deism
teaches that God gave existence to the universe, but does not intervene in its
functioning, unlike theism, which teaches that God intervenes in his creation
after giving it existence (the doctrine of providence). Thus, in deism, the
transcendence of God – the fact that he is above
creation – is emphasized at the expense of his immanence (God in creation). On
the other hand, he is present in his creation through the laws he has
established. This is a different emphasis from that of pantheism. While
pantheism does not distinguish God from his creation, deism exaggerates the distance
between God and his creation. In fact, this distance is a separation one from
the other.
v
Biblical
theism and divine omnipresence
Creator of the cosmos (the universe and its content), and He is both transcendent and immanent. He is a personal God, in the sense that He is endowed with personality. As Francis A. Schaeffer used to say: God is infinite and personal, even tripersonal. For me, biblical theism is best expressed by what is called “classical theism[15]” or “Reformed theism[16]”.
On the one hand, to say that God is transcendent in relation to creation is
to affirm that He is so great that He is beyond creation: He is “greater” than
it.
But will God dwell indeed with man on the earth?
Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain
thee; how much less this house which I have built!
(2 Chr 6:18)
This can be compared to musical creation. An
instrument maker (luthier) makes musical instruments. He can build a guitar or
a violin. But, if he puts either instrument on the table, the instrument will
not work on its own. It needs a musician. If the maker is himself a musician,
then he will be able to play the instruments he has himself “created”.
The same is true of the universe. It is not enough
to have been created by God. The Bible teaches that it is God who, through
Jesus, sustains the entire universe with his almighty power. He makes
everything work perfectly.
« For
from him and through him and to him are all things. »
(Rom 11:36a)
« He is before all things, and in him all things
hold together. »
(Col 1:17)
« upholding the universe by his word of power. »
(Heb 1:3b)
This aspect touches on the subject that concerns us,
namely divine omnipresence.
o
Definition of
divine omnipresence
To begin with, we must
define what we mean by “divine omnipresence.” According to Wayne Grudem, divine
omnipresence is the “doctrine that God has no ‘size’ or spatial dimensions,
being present in totality at every point in space, even though he acts differently
in different places[18]”.
So we have the totality of his being and the totality of space.
He is not partially present everywhere, nor is he completely present in only a
few places. Omnipresence is God's infinity in the context of spatiality. But
since God is incorporeal (he is spirit), his presence in the space of the
universe cannot be described quantitatively, but rather qualitatively[19].
He is infinite in space, that is, he is perfect in his relationship to
spatiality. This is what Greg Nichols calls his “spatial supremacy[20]”.
o
Biblical
basis
First, we must emphasize the biblical basis for the doctrine of divine omnipresence. We will cite only a few passages.
Whither shall I go from thy Spirit?
Or whither
shall I flee from thy presence?
8 If I ascend to heaven, thou art there!
If I make
my bed in Sheol, thou art there!
9 If I take the wings of the morning
and dwell
in the uttermost parts of the sea,
10 even there thy hand shall lead me,
and thy
right hand shall hold me.
.
(Ps 139:7-10)
The psalmist was aware that
there was no place in the universe where God was absent. For the guilty sinner,
there is no escape from God. For the sinner who has been forgiven and
regenerated by the Spirit of God, he is safe, for God is present everywhere to
protect and comfort him.
Another Old Testament
passage attests to this concept:
“Am I a
God at hand, says the Lord, and not a God afar off?
Can a
man hide himself in secret places so that I cannot see him? says the Lord. Do I
not fill heaven and earth? says the Lord. “
(Jer 23:23,24)
those who prophesy lies. He sees it because his presence is not limited to a few places. He is a God who is present everywhere, who sees everything, hears everything. In fact, he fills the heavens and the earth. There is no place in the universe where he is not.
Herman Bavinck quotes St. Augustine to give a
practical application of the doctrine of divine omnipresence:
When
you want to do something bad, you withdraw from the public and hide in your
house where no enemy may see you; from those parts of the house that are open
and visible you remove yourself to go into your own private room : But
even here, in your own private chamber you fear guilt from some other
direction, so you withdraw into your heart and there you meditate. But he
is even more deeply inward than your heart. Hence, no matter where you flee, he
is there. You would flee from yourself, would you? Will you not follow yourself
wherever you flee? But since there is One even more deeply inward than
yourself, there is no place where you may flee from an angered God except to a
God who is pacified. There is absolutely no place for you to flee to. Do you
want to flee from Him? Rather flee to Him[21].
Theological
Reflection
We have outlined a general
picture of the concept of divine omnipresence. Many aspects have not been
addressed, including the different modes of divine presence. The format of this
article does not allow us to do so. The theological aspect I wish to address
now is this: the material limitations that do not apply to God, who is spirit[22].
When we say that God is
present everywhere, it is easy to imagine God present in free space: either in
the air or in water, but it seems difficult to imagine God present in solid
matter, for example, in a table or in a rock. Why is this difficult?
a)
Because we unconsciously impose on God the physical, material limitations
to which we ourselves are subject, we who are beings made of flesh and bone.
However, we must remember that God is spirit and does not have a body like us.
He cannot be limited by the spatiality or materiality of his creation in any
form whatsoever: gas, liquid, or solid[23].
b)
Another conceptual element that hinders our acceptance of God's
omnipresence is the fear of falling into pantheism. We unconsciously say to
ourselves: "God cannot be present in this rock! To accept such an idea
would be tantamount to pantheism, a deification of the rock!"
I will respond to this objection as follows:
-
We must not confuse the mode of divine presence specific to pantheism
(Eastern or Western type) with the mode of divine presence specific to biblical
theism. As the Baptist theologian
Augustus H. Strong rightly pointed out in his Systematic Theology, in Christian theism, God's presence in the
universe is a free presence where God
is not bound to or identified with his creation. In pantheism, on the other
hand, the universe is identified with God, and God's presence in his creation
is a necessary presence[24].
-
in it. It is not a necessary presence. On the other hand, the steering wheel or the mirror are part of the car.
-
This is also true of God's relationship with the universe and each of its
parts, whatever they may be. He is present in all its parts without any
physical or material limitation. But it is a free presence. He is not confined or enclosed within the universe.
He penetrates it in everything and everywhere, and He overflows it, for He is
both transcendent and immanent.
The late Pierre C. Marcel,
founder of the Revue réformée, clearly
expressed this principle mutatis mutandis
when discussing visible reality and invisible reality:
The Bible tells us that God has placed and maintains
visible reality within invisible reality; that the visible world cannot exist
outside the invisible world that permeates it on all sides and in which it is
immersed. The interpenetration and complementarity of these two realities
provide us with the key to interpreting Revelation, its signs (or miracles),
the real presence of Christ, the mystery of life, and the scientific
intelligibility of the world[25].
Based on the context, Dr.
Marcel speaks of God by referring to « invisible reality ». There is,
of course, an invisible created reality (angels), but it is God (uncreated
visible reality) who permeates all visible reality with his presence.
CONCLUSION
In these two articles
entitled “Thematic Supplements: Some Key Themes,” I have attempted to outline
the biblical themes that have most occupied my thoughts: 1. The freeness and
assurance of salvation, 2. Effective and irresistible grace, and in this section,
3. Biblical theism and other approaches to divine omnipresence.
The Lord allowed me to
continue my studies at university and granted me the grace to work as a pastor
for a few years in Gatineau (Aylmer), while earning a living as a translator in
Ottawa.
When I look back on these 50 years, I can only be grateful to my God for his mercy
toward me, and for the joy of serving him, albeit imperfectly.
My wish and prayer is that
many of those who read these lines will also respond to the call of Jesus, who
said:
"Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I
am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.
For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”
(Matt 11:28-30)
Let us listen to the voice
of the Good Shepherd, and come to him for full forgiveness and complete
reconciliation with God.
"For you were straying like sheep,
but have now returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls."
(1 Pet 2:25)
fifty years in retrospect pics
1975
1977
1978
1979
1980
1983
1984
1985
1987
1989
1990
1991
1994
2003
2006
2008
2009
2014
2017
2018
2022
2023
2024
2025
See
our blog for other articles! 😊
[1]
Didier Julia, Dictionnaire de la
philosophie, Paris: Larousse, 1997, p. 176; Michel Blay (ed.), « Monisme », in Grand
dictionnaire de la philosophie, Paris: Larousse, 2012, pp. 685-688.
[2]
Michel Blay, « Matérialisme »,
in Grand dictionnaire de la
philosophie, Paris: Larousse, 2012, pp. 650-653; Didier Julia, Dictionnaire
de la philosophie, Paris: Larousse, 1997, p. 166.
[3]
Michel Blay, « Positivisme », in Grand dictionnaire de la philosophie, pp. 834-835; Didier
Julia, Dictionnaire de la philosophie,
Paris: Larousse, 1997, p. 166; Emmanuel Pourgeoise and Jean-Michel Ridou
(dir.), « Science et philosophie : Le positivisme », in Panorama de la philosophie, Alleur: Marabout, 1996, pp. 548-551.
[4]
Michel Blay, « Atomisme », in Grand dictionnaire de la philosophie, pp. 75-77.
[5]
Michel Blay, « Naturalisme », in Grand dictionnaire de la philosophie, p. 704.
[6]
Michel Blay, « Athéisme », in Grand dictionnaire de la philosophie,
pp. 74-75.
[7]
Michel Blay, » Désenchantement du monde »,
in Grand dictionnaire de la
philosophie, pp. 264-265.
[8]
Francis A. Schaeffer, https://promesses.org/le-combat-de-francis-schaeffer/.
[9]
Stanley J. Grenz, David Guretzki and Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, InterVarsity Press: Downers
Grove, 1999, p. 88.
[10]
Aaron Kayayan, « Théisme ou panthéisme » https://www.ressourceschretiennes.com/article/th%C3%A9isme-ou-panth%C3%A9isme.
[11] James W. Sire, The Universe Next Door : A basic world view catalogue, Downers
Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1978, pp. 132-133.
[12]
Clara da Sylva-Charrak, « Dualisme », in Grand dictionnaire de la philosophie, ed. Michel Blay, p. 314.
[13]
S.N. Williams, « Deism », in New
Dictionary of Theology, Downers Grove, InterVarsity Press, 1988, p. 190.
[14]
On Theism, see Gerald Bray, La doctrine
de Dieu, Cléon D’Andran: Éditions Excelsis, « Collection
théologie », 2001, pp. 38-48;
James W. Sire, The Universe Next
Door : A basic world view catalogue, Downers Grove: InterVarsity
Press, 1978, ch. 2 : « A Universe charged with the Grandeur of God : Christian
Theism », pp. 20-42.
[15]
Paul Wells, « Dieu et le changement – Jürgen
Moltman à la lumière du théisme réformé », in Hokhma, no 43, 1990, pp. 49-66.
[16]
Paul Wells, « Dieu et le
changement – Jürgen Moltman à la
lumière du théisme réformé », in Hokhma, no 43,
1990, p. 49-66.
[17]
Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation
Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. Three: The
Divine Essence and Attributes, Grand Rapids: Baker Academics, 2003, p. 343;
he quotes saint Augustine.
[19]
Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, Vol.
2, God and Creation, Grand Rapids:
Baker Academics, 2004, p. 160. See also Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. Three: The Divine Essence and Attributes, Grand Rapids: Baker
Academics, 2003, p. 343.
[20]
Greg Nichols, Lectures in Systematic
Theology, Grand Rapids: Grace Immanuel Reformed Baptist Church, 2017, pp.
223-232.
[21]
Wayne Grudem, Théologie systématique,
Charols: Éditions Excelsis, 2007, p.
176, quoting Herman Bavinck, Reformed
Dogmatics, Vol. 2, God and Creation, Grand Rapids: Baker
Academics, 2004, p. 170. From Augustine,
Expositions on the Psalms, Ps. 74.
[22]
Greg Nichols, Lectures in Systematic
Theology, op. cit., pp. 224s.
[23]
Ibid, p. 224.
[24]
Augustus H. Strong, Systematic Theology,
Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1993, p. 282. See also Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. Three: The Divine Essence and
Attributes, Grand Rapids: Baker Academics, 2003, p. 338.
[25]
Pierre C. Marcel, Face à la
critique : Jésus et les apôtres : Esquisse d’une logique chrétienne,
Genève/Aix-en-Provence, Labor et Fides/La Revue réformée, 1986, p. 109.
Commentaires
Enregistrer un commentaire