Scripture and God in Christianity

Paula Fredriksen argues that "After the introduction of Galileo's map of the universe, the technological
advances of the Scientific Revolution, and the social and cultural revolutions that followed
in its wake, modern culture no longer looks to Plato. More current systems of thought- anthropology,
psychology, psychoanalysis, phenomenology, existentialism, evolutionary science,
medicine- now provide the meaningful constructs that in turn effect theological ideas of personhood.
Modern Christianity, in consequence, must search for new ways to express its ancient faith
in Jesus Christ as true God and true man." 791
Richard Swinburne tries to express the ancient Christian faith in modern terms by emphasizing
the analogical and metaphorical nature of many terms used in the New Testament. He argues that
"While the divine predicates-'good', 'wise', 'powerful'- are used of God in their literal senses,
there seem to me plenty of words which are used (in my sense) analogically of God." 792 For instance,
God is said to be 'angry', loving etc. the words which imply passion. "But traditional
Christian theology has affirmed vigorously and constantly that God has no body, and has no inclination
to act contrary to reason; and hence the use of such words in official Christian pronouncements
must be so interpreted that they do not carry these latter elements of meaning." 793 In
the same manner "God is a person, yet one without a body, seems the most elementary claim of
theism." 794 Swinburne further argues that "despite the fact that clearly theology supposes him to
be a person in much the same sense of 'person' as human are persons, he cannot be a 'person' in
quite the same sense. 'Person' must be being used analogically with respect to God." 795 Moreover,
theology like other disciplines makes use of metaphors and "Talk in all creeds of the first person
of the Holy Trinity as 'the Father' and the second person as 'the Son', who was `begotten' by 'the
Father', 'not made', may also be classified as metaphorical; although this use of 'Father' was perhaps
sufficiently well established and clear in Jewish thought to be regarded as analogical." 796 He
contends that the earlier Fathers clearly recognized the inadequacy of human language and some
of them recommended non-literal interpretation of some of the biblical passages. "There developed
however from the sixth century onward a movement which coloured much Christian theology
for the next five centuries, the via negativa. This, very loosely, claimed that all that could be
said about God was what he is not, and what were the effects of his actions in the world. We
could know nothing about what God was like in himself; and so all cradle claims and prayers
were to be read with this restriction." 797 He somewhat agreeing with this negative or apophatic
approach, concludes that "sentences of human language can tell us quite a bit about God; but that
they are very inadequate tools for the job." 798
Has Swinburne introduced something new into age long traditional Christian theology? Did the
assertions of Clement and Origen made in the second century about the ineffability and transcendence
of God stop the later Fathers and Christianity from crucifying the Person of God? Does
emphasis upon apophatic or via negativa theology solve the issue at hand or make the Christian
message more intelligible? There could be many questions of the same nature. The answer to all
these thorny questions seem to be no! Despite some very innovative and positive contributions
here, Swinburne is not bringing some very innovative elements into Christian theology.
Pseudo-Dionysius, the unknown author of the so-called Areopagitic writings: a person who had
long been mistakenly identified with a disciple of St. Paul-Dionysius the Areopagite, 799 divided
98