Re: For 'Forgiven'...on fear vs. love
Submitted by Forgiven on January 27 2000 at 18:48:12
In reply to For 'Forgiven'...on fear vs. love Submitted by Jules on January 26 2000 at 19:01:13
|
This is a rushed and incomplete response to these latest posts - mainly because I'm on holiday for the next week and don't have time before departing to give it the consideration it needs. But the reason for posting despite that - apart from to express appreciation that I've been missed which is really good - is that there are two level to the sense in which it is a live issue in my church. The simple level is that it is my perception that we as a church are failing because we are failing generally to take God seriously; we are tending to indulge in 'bolt on' spirituality where we add a bit of worship to our lives because it feels good, not because there is a meaningful relationship with God going on. And part of the cause of that is that we responding to God on our own terms (God loves me, isn't that nice), not starting with a commitment to repentence - i.e. what God wants of me is what is the best for me and the world, so I need to die to sin, crucify and deny myself (give up the unhelpful relationships that I really would like to have....) and go his way. (OK so its an over simplified contrast but I think it makes the point) But the emotional charge in this comes from the fact that the person who is my YF at the moment is, in my opinion suffering the consequences of this emphasis. To explain who he is, he's 19, straight, knows most of where I'm at and is still willing to be my friend. He's the most important thing in my life, knows it, and copes with that reality. Not that it is too challenging - it is genuinely true, as far as I can tell, that there is no sexual element in the attraction I have for him ( I can measure that by the difference in my attitude to him and certain others who are less significant) However this is not the point. Despite being the product of the church, his attitude to God is 'I'm not ready for that yet' - mainly because he doesn't see any urgency. He prefers the life of pleasure to the call to holiness. And in my mind this is because the only aspect of God that he has seen over the years is the 'God loves you and is waiting for you' rather than something about the fear of God and the horror of the consequences of rejecting Him. To return to my original argument - why did God start with the law and obedience etc etc - and only after many centuries reveal the love element (Yes its there in the Old Testament, especially the Prophets, but its not the primary, obvious, first thing that strikes you. Why did God do it like that? And similarly in the New Testament, the emphasis in the bits of preaching that we do have recorded in Acts is REPENT REPENT REPENT not LOVE LOVE LOVE (that's the Beatles ;=)) As I think I said before (yes this is rushed....) this is about perception and emphasis - but is it valid to argue that the experience of people growing up in the 20th century has been so starved of love that they need to know about God's love first when the people of the 1st century didn't need that preached up front. Hope you find this interesting, challenging, and OF GOD!! |