Process vs. Instant
Another recycled piece:
A recent event in our family brought to my attention once again our western technical view of Christianity in general and the salvation experience in particular. The specific instance I'm thinking of was a relentless hammering of the need to know an instant in time when a person was saved. Some do have a date to affix to this, but I believe based on what I've run into talking to believers in various cultures in other parts of the world that "process" is probably a better descriptor than "instant." At the far side of the process one ends up with a set of embraced beliefs based on scriptural truth and fruits of the holy spirit that are the verification of what has happened. This can crystallize in an instant to which one can fix a date, but I don't think this is necessary or even normal. I'm inclined to think that this concept is a western overlay. Believers I have interfaced with in other cultures haven't come away from scripture with this concept at all. And their salvation experience, from what I observed, is often much more solid and absolute than many others I have observed who point to an instant in time as if a magic trick had been performed.
Along with the birth metaphor scripture also gives us the darkness to light metaphor many times as well. Dawn is a steady, undeniable process that happens in a knowable envelope of time, but one can't pinpoint a moment when night changes to day. God certainly has the power to change a person in an instant, magic-like way. But it seems that God's default style, if you will, of transformation, observable in all creation, is gradual and organic without hard edges. And along the organic line, birth is a moment as is conception, but the nine months in between is a wondrous process. Based on the conservative Christian stand on abortion, it's arguable that our annual celebrations of individual life should be done on our conception day rather than our birth day. But that's a lot harder to pinpoint, isn't it? Even the birthday of Jesus is celebrated on an arbitrarily chosen date. The important thing is not knowing the instant that the thing happened, but knowing the fact that it did happen. I believe that focusing on process vs. "the instant" postures us much more effectively for living out Christ to those around us. It makes us much less likely to give up on someone for whom "the instant" is lost in our judgment.
How I wish there was a simple way to filter human construct out of scriptural truth. To me it underscores the priesthood of the believer and the importance of going directly to the source for truth. Otherwise, in spite of the best intentions and efforts of godly preachers and teachers, our belief system can easily be built on the comparatively rickety structure of someone else's preconceptions of truth, rather than truth itself.
A recent event in our family brought to my attention once again our western technical view of Christianity in general and the salvation experience in particular. The specific instance I'm thinking of was a relentless hammering of the need to know an instant in time when a person was saved. Some do have a date to affix to this, but I believe based on what I've run into talking to believers in various cultures in other parts of the world that "process" is probably a better descriptor than "instant." At the far side of the process one ends up with a set of embraced beliefs based on scriptural truth and fruits of the holy spirit that are the verification of what has happened. This can crystallize in an instant to which one can fix a date, but I don't think this is necessary or even normal. I'm inclined to think that this concept is a western overlay. Believers I have interfaced with in other cultures haven't come away from scripture with this concept at all. And their salvation experience, from what I observed, is often much more solid and absolute than many others I have observed who point to an instant in time as if a magic trick had been performed.
Along with the birth metaphor scripture also gives us the darkness to light metaphor many times as well. Dawn is a steady, undeniable process that happens in a knowable envelope of time, but one can't pinpoint a moment when night changes to day. God certainly has the power to change a person in an instant, magic-like way. But it seems that God's default style, if you will, of transformation, observable in all creation, is gradual and organic without hard edges. And along the organic line, birth is a moment as is conception, but the nine months in between is a wondrous process. Based on the conservative Christian stand on abortion, it's arguable that our annual celebrations of individual life should be done on our conception day rather than our birth day. But that's a lot harder to pinpoint, isn't it? Even the birthday of Jesus is celebrated on an arbitrarily chosen date. The important thing is not knowing the instant that the thing happened, but knowing the fact that it did happen. I believe that focusing on process vs. "the instant" postures us much more effectively for living out Christ to those around us. It makes us much less likely to give up on someone for whom "the instant" is lost in our judgment.
How I wish there was a simple way to filter human construct out of scriptural truth. To me it underscores the priesthood of the believer and the importance of going directly to the source for truth. Otherwise, in spite of the best intentions and efforts of godly preachers and teachers, our belief system can easily be built on the comparatively rickety structure of someone else's preconceptions of truth, rather than truth itself.
posted by wingman at 12:15 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home