I should get back to more writing and there are two blog posts I started but didn't finish. However, this subject touched me and made me think, study and pray. It started when a friend of mine posted this grid:
It seems to me that in some ways our perception of our identity and our perception of God are symbiotic. How we see God will reflect how we see ourselves and how we see ourselves will reflect how we see God.
Looking at it the whole original grid is coloured by the perception of a Legalist identity -- look at the second column of Judge, Boss, Therapist and then Father. All very subservient positions except maybe father depending on how one sees one's father! Jesus said 'I no longer call you servants but friends'. Though not direct peers we are definitely not slaves!
It didn't match with a God of love if God is a judgemental boss who wants to fix his wayward children. It is, however, how many people see God. Indeed it was how I grew up seeing God. I used to call it the 'theology of splat'. You must do what God wants or He'll splat you!
And happiness is a very North American concept from 'Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'. We see this more as 'Life, liberty and the pursuit of harmony'. Our Father is bringing the universe back (at the end of time) into harmony rather than the Islamic idea (at the end of time) of happiness in excess.
As I've grown older I have realised that was a totally erroneous perception of God. The grid below now demonstrates my perception of self and perception of God. Immediately I can feel people saying 'so you ignore sin!' Not at all, but I now see it in context. When presented with a woman caught in a sin that according to the law a judge would sentence to stoning to death, Jesus, first of all, pointed out that we are all sinners and then did not sentence to death but commended her to 'Go and sin no more.'
So to my grid:
Looking at it the whole original grid is coloured by the perception of a Legalist identity -- look at the second column of Judge, Boss, Therapist and then Father. All very subservient positions except maybe father depending on how one sees one's father! Jesus said 'I no longer call you servants but friends'. Though not direct peers we are definitely not slaves!
It didn't match with a God of love if God is a judgemental boss who wants to fix his wayward children. It is, however, how many people see God. Indeed it was how I grew up seeing God. I used to call it the 'theology of splat'. You must do what God wants or He'll splat you!
And happiness is a very North American concept from 'Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness'. We see this more as 'Life, liberty and the pursuit of harmony'. Our Father is bringing the universe back (at the end of time) into harmony rather than the Islamic idea (at the end of time) of happiness in excess.
As I've grown older I have realised that was a totally erroneous perception of God. The grid below now demonstrates my perception of self and perception of God. Immediately I can feel people saying 'so you ignore sin!' Not at all, but I now see it in context. When presented with a woman caught in a sin that according to the law a judge would sentence to stoning to death, Jesus, first of all, pointed out that we are all sinners and then did not sentence to death but commended her to 'Go and sin no more.'
So to my grid:
When I completed my grid and I realised just how different my identity is and thus how I see God very differently. The next book I'm working on (with a whole group of people) is called 'Settlers and Nomads'. Legalists tend to be more settlers not liking things that upset their settled life. Nomads see themselves more as sojourners traveling through this life.
In the first row if our identity is more of a Settler then God is our heavenly anchor and he is concerned about the storms of life that would dash us on the rock. And both are simultaneously true but as individuals, we will see God differently.
As a legalist seeing God as judge? Though Scripture does talk about God as judge there are frequently two concepts alongside this: Firstly that God will save his people and that we are not to judge others. Though in Paul's letter to the Corinthians he says we should judge cases. But our emphasis should be on being guided away from sin ('Go and sin no more') rather than judgment about sin.
Of course that raises a pertinent topic of what is sin? It's rare to find anyone today who would see slavery as anything other than sin. But let's go back to 1102 and the Council of London held by Archbishop of Canterbury Anselm. A number of religious laws (canons) were drawn up, one of which was to forbid 'to sell men like cattle'. This is probably the first time slavery as such was outlawed.
In light of the debate about homosexuality, and whether it is sin or not, it's interesting to note that at the Council of London there was a move 'that homosexual behaviour was a sin, and they recommended that offending laymen be imprisoned and clergymen be anathematized'. However, Anselm prohibited the declaration of that decree 'advising the Council that homosexuality was widespread and few men were embarrassed by it or had even been aware it was a serious matter'. It was only later that it was it became the battleground it is today with people taking opposing views based on differing interpretations of Scripture!
As a legalist seeing God as judge? Though Scripture does talk about God as judge there are frequently two concepts alongside this: Firstly that God will save his people and that we are not to judge others. Though in Paul's letter to the Corinthians he says we should judge cases. But our emphasis should be on being guided away from sin ('Go and sin no more') rather than judgment about sin.
Of course that raises a pertinent topic of what is sin? It's rare to find anyone today who would see slavery as anything other than sin. But let's go back to 1102 and the Council of London held by Archbishop of Canterbury Anselm. A number of religious laws (canons) were drawn up, one of which was to forbid 'to sell men like cattle'. This is probably the first time slavery as such was outlawed.
In light of the debate about homosexuality, and whether it is sin or not, it's interesting to note that at the Council of London there was a move 'that homosexual behaviour was a sin, and they recommended that offending laymen be imprisoned and clergymen be anathematized'. However, Anselm prohibited the declaration of that decree 'advising the Council that homosexuality was widespread and few men were embarrassed by it or had even been aware it was a serious matter'. It was only later that it was it became the battleground it is today with people taking opposing views based on differing interpretations of Scripture!
Looking at my grid I also thought it fitted more with a trinitarian perception of a Creative God. As well as seeing God as related to us as Father I see the Holy Spirit as our guide and Jesus as our brother and friend. We are on this Messianic Pilgrimage through life and though obedience is part, we see from the dialogue between God and Abraham that it's not just 'do this or I'll splat you' but open to negotiation in some way like a friend. And Abraham was called God's friend. Thus the second row takes us to an intimate relationship with God as Father rather than the more distant in the fourth row of the original.
The third rows are almost diametric opposites: Consumer or creator? Happiness or fulfillment? Whereas it's true many see their identity as consumers and indeed some have taken God's blessing to 'subdue the earth' as the old English puts it. 'Fill the earth and govern it' is seen by some as 'use all the earth's resources to your own ends'. This dangerously misses the stewardship we are commended to. Jesus expressed it clearly in the parable of the three servants. Two of whom expressed diligence and creativity and one who did nothing.
Finally, I see seriously missing in the original grid anything relating to being a follower of the Messiah. The final row 'Christian' has so many different meanings it has lost almost all of them, though I admit that in some ways the final row in the original grid is similar to the second row in my grid. Christ is not explicitly identified in the original and that for me is important.
The third rows are almost diametric opposites: Consumer or creator? Happiness or fulfillment? Whereas it's true many see their identity as consumers and indeed some have taken God's blessing to 'subdue the earth' as the old English puts it. 'Fill the earth and govern it' is seen by some as 'use all the earth's resources to your own ends'. This dangerously misses the stewardship we are commended to. Jesus expressed it clearly in the parable of the three servants. Two of whom expressed diligence and creativity and one who did nothing.
Finally, I see seriously missing in the original grid anything relating to being a follower of the Messiah. The final row 'Christian' has so many different meanings it has lost almost all of them, though I admit that in some ways the final row in the original grid is similar to the second row in my grid. Christ is not explicitly identified in the original and that for me is important.
