|
The work of the Holy Spirit and our response!by Peter B. VanderKam -- August 09 1997 Recently the "Observer" reviewed the book "Meeting Jesus again for the first time" by prof Borg. That book also caused an exchange between a reader and Yvonne Steward in the April "Observer". In that exchange Yvonne Steward made the comment that folks like the reader who were involved in studies of this sort could consider themselves to be part of the creative movement of the Spirit, and therefore of God’s action of "making all things new". Although I find that a comforting and encouraging thought, I empathize with the discomfort expressed by the reader. Why this feeling of frustration? It stems from what I perceive to be the general lack of commitment by the individual congregations of the UC of Canada to the study of "The Word of God". In the last few decades an enormous amount of linguistic, archaeological and
sociological research
has been done, the findings of which could greatly expand our understanding
of the Bible and its
message. In the light of that research the UC of C has released several
reports and studies on different topics. Since I joined the UC of C (1965), the United Church of
Canada has issued
a) - a new Curriculum (David C Cook replaced),
If nothing else, one would have to admit that this is impressive. Indeed, several outside sources have complimented the UC of C on being on the leading edge of biblical research. I would add my voice to that chorus, as I agree. Again, then why the frustration? During the last twenty odd years of my involvement with the UC of C, I have participated in church government up to and including the conference level. Based on accrued observations over those twenty odd years my perception is that the same leadership that produces those thought provoking study papers abandons its flock when it comes to dealing with the consequences of its scholarly findings. What are some of the changes we would have to make in our thinking if these issues had been studied thoroughly? We would have found that a) the Bible cannot be read literally, b) that the "fall" never occurred and that therefore our theology (which is fall/redemption based) needs to be rethought and restated, c) that the Trinitarian Formula as doctrine is a late addition to the beliefs of Jesus’ followers, d) that rather than being assigned to heaven or hell by a score-keeper God, each one of us has to accept the consequences for our choice to be for or against God, and e) that the idea of Jesus "paying for" our sins is difficult (if not impossible) to support on Biblical grounds as one would be hard pressed to show Yahweh threatening the withholding of His Grace until certain demands have been met. The parable of the Prodigal Son is the most powerful example in support of my claim. His return home was not predicated on him meeting certain standards or him "paying a price". We don’t face any conditions either. The "Good News" is that each one of us is forever confronted with the eternal and unconditional invitation of God to "come home" and to join the banquet as honored guest. As things stand, Christianity is rapidly loosing its credibility and relevance. Because of the (religious) language we use, and the images we invoke with that language, our Western (sophisticated and scientifically aware) society is rapidly turning to other spiritual sources for sustenance. Let me repeat. Ultimately it is because of our language, its related imagery
and the actions that
flow from that source that Christianity will be relegated to history’s
dustbin as being irrelevant or
will take off. As long as we insist on people thinking and acting from a
mindset that is over 2000
years old, Christianity’s demise is practically assured, especially in our
society. Already it is said
that we live in a "Post-Christian" era. If we, on the other hand, put the
biblical Truth through the
same restoration process the Sistine Chapel has recently been subjected to,
and we work hard at
May our response to the stirrings of the Spirit be affirmative! © Peter VanderKam
|
.