jump to navigation

Some troubling conversations February 7, 2007

Posted by Cobus in Emerging Church, theology.
trackback

Had a conversation with one of my classmates yesterday. This is actually a story of hope. We’ve been having some differences, some mayor differences theologically over the past 4 years. What binds us is our love for God and the world. The story of hope, for me, is the fact that we are still sitting around a coffee table and talking, and as long as that may continue, for me there is still some hope.

But yesterday was kind of a bad experience, because I felt like sitting in the accusation chair. I was bombarded with questions on historical factuality of certian biblical passages. Now, don’t get me wrong, I do believe that there is a real life history behind the Bible stories, just not that the Bible is simple history.

I have no problem believing in that which must be of another dimension, meta-reality, the surreal, whatever you whould like to call it. I believe in God, and if God exist, with the concept that I have of God, I see no reason why God should be limited by certian laws. The fact of the matter is just that I can’t remember when last I asked myself whether some certian event REALLY happened, and happened EXACTLY the way it was told. I look at the Bible, and to me the most logical explanation is that the writers was trying to convey a message not writing a modern historical textbook…

But you know what, I’m not really in the mood for this. Interested in the conversation on the Bible. Glenn and some others wrote down some thoughts a while ago. Click here and check the posts from second half of November. I know some others also wrote some thoughts, but can’t remember who. Maybe I’ll write some of my own thoughts one day…

Another thing from the conversation. Who are we willing to work with. Where do we draw the line? Do we need more than the small creed saying “Christ is God”? In this we agree that God exist, and that he became man in Jesus. OK, maybe “Jesus the Christ is God”.

But in the end. I’m glad for the conversation we had, although it got a bit troubling in the end. We are still conversing, may we always at least have this, we are conversing. Big question is how are we church while some find it difficult to work with others because of theological stuff?

Advertisements

Comments»

1. Glenn - February 7, 2007

I have been steeped in “theological stuff.” The Bible College that I attended is among the most conservative in the country. There I was taught to work separately from other Christians who didn’t see everything the way I was taught.

Of course, that is wrong and not biblically supportable.

I have some to see a person’s relationship with Christ as a continuum, rather than always worrying about who is “in” and who is “out.”

I once worked with a local evangelistic campaign of the Luis Palau organization and we came to the conclusion that we would offer an invitation to every church to be involved and simply let those who weren’t interested exclude themselves.

Paul addressed preaching Christ out of jealousy of rivalry and his conclusion was to simply rejoice that Christ was being preached even though their motives were wrong. (Philippians 1:15-19)

My conclusion: reach out with the love of Christ to all. His message was so radically inclusive that it led to his crucifixion. People hate it when you love the “wrong’ people!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: