Is it a new decade or just a new year? Does it really matter? You have to mark off your time somehow, but I'm not sure that numbers are particularly better than, say, the moon. And apparently, this month is a blue moon month. Two full moons in one month. See what I mean? Numbers versus nature. It's the standard versus metric argument.
Anyway, I think I've decided to stop letting my evangelical-Revelations-interpretation past from influencing my present decisions/thoughts about world events anymore. It's not been at the forefront of my thinking for some time, that evangelical intrepration history, but it's still in there at the back of things. In a phrase, it's not a good idea to let prophecy influence your decisions. Prophecy will work itself out in its own time and way. You have to work yourself/situation out regardless. Still, I'm surprised at how the interpretations of Scripture from my youth still figure largely into my thinking/acting at the age of 30. I've spent lots of time thinking about Scripture and life and interpretation and the fact that there are still significant holdovers from my growing up, while normal, comes off as surprising to me. Kids, learn this lesson: adult's views on the world are often no more thorough or long-sighted than your own viewpoints. Learn to understand the differences between thorough and true; not thorough and true; not thorough and not true; and thorough and not true. Also, understand that thorough is a matter of gradients and nothing is ever truly thorough enough.
Do people who aren't religiously Christian understand that within Christianity there are significant differences in understanding of God, Scripture, and how to live life?
I have also been thinking about this statement that Jesus made to the religious leaders of Israel during his lifetime: "You diligently search the Scriptures, thinking that by them you have life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me. Yet you refuse to come to me to have life." I've been thinking lately that this underlying concept should gird all Biblical interpretation. I have to admit that I've been a bit frustrated/bitter at the conservative Christians in my life for putting (what I now feel is) more emphasis on scriptural "adherence" than actual relationship with God. (As a not of fairness, the liberals have the opposite problem: relationship without adherence.)
Similarly, two things: Christians don't seem to understand the Bible as set of literary documents and the following idea: there are no answers only processes. This is similar to the concept that everything is dynamic, nothing is static.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
finally, another person who can communicate similar thoughts of mine...and to think this came from a family member *mind explodes*
hey...i wanted to say "right on." there is, as there always seems to be, a push-pull in our communication and on such topics. I almost feel capable enough to respond to you and these sentiments adequately in as profound and as meaningful a way as you have presented them, and then in the speaking it is lost, and I'm swept back out to sea. So in the end, right on. Your articulation shure is good...shucks....
I'd say that adherence stems from relationship, but lack of relationship doesn't necessarily excuse a lack of adherence.
I've found that it is very easy to substitute legalism for relationship, but I've also noticed a disturbing trend in American christianity to excuse lack of adherence under the mistaken concept that God is who we make him out to be...
Wow!!! Comments... I should check this more often...
Ken - See... that's something that bothers me... I agree that adherence stems from relationship. And it's true that "lack of relationship doesn't necessarily excuse a lack of adherence". It'd be easier to say that lack of adherence stems from lack of relationship. That would be the appropriate corollary, right? My beef is that if you can't have adherence without relationship, can you really focus on one?? Can you even prioritize one over the other?
RE: "God is who we make him out to be" - There is significant difference in scriptural interpretation in Christianity. A lot of that interpretation is self-centered or self-purposed, including my own and yours. I think that has to be addressed and investigated before the outcome of these differences can really be understood. I'm not saying there's not objective reality, but I receive grace for my broken interpretation in my relationship with God and he transcends that brokenness. It would be disrespectful to God to not give the same as I receive. Both to those I understand and disagree with and those I don't understand.
Sirena - Thanks for the kind words. Feel free to let your thoughts loose. And yeah, it's clear now.
Rachelle - ! Good to hear from you.
On adherence v relationship... lack of adherence could be caused honestly by genuine ignorance of God's calling... as to which is 'better,' so to speak, I lean toward adherence, as I think the Bible makes clear that obedience enables relationship.
As to our perception of God, the calling is to genuinely seek God's face, honesty seeking in prayer, Scripture, and Godly counsel what God's person and will are like. I think the big differences are how Biblical principles should be applied, i.e., the question is "what should a Christian look like?"
My frustration is with those, largely of my generation, who make little if any attempt to seek the character or presence of God and in exchange serve a vision of God that is patently unbiblical.
I know this is a simplistic comment, but to answer the question you posed, I'm pretty sure most people outside the Christian faith are non-Christian/non-believers specifically because of the divergence and incoherence between the approx. 10,000 cults (denominations) of Christianity.
Anyway, glad to just discover you blog, man!
Post a Comment