Friday, February 01, 2008
Transformation
Writing at CGO, Esther Meeks notes that knowledge is transformative.
There is a huge differentiation in Christian schools here. I think this lies at the heart of the charismatic/cessation debate. Good old epistimology.
You see, absent the agency of the Holy Spirit, I think all knowledge is mere information. I know many people more familiar and more capable with theology, and all other information associated with my faith that are not transformed by that information. What is the difference between me and them? I know many people incapable of accumulating much in the way of information at all that are deeply transformed by the Holy Spirit.
While it is true that knowledge can play a role in transformation, I think it a step too far to say that knowledge is always transformative, or that knowledge is necessary for transformation. Of course, I do not think that is necessarily what Meeks is saying, I think she is saying that knowledge apart from tranformation is just information. But I also think that is just semantics. The essential point is that we are to be transformed and knowledge can play a role in that.
Here what strikes me. Many charismatics think that Holy Spirit baptism, or some other ecstatic experience is the only means to transformation. Hardened cessasionists think knowledge is the only such means. Both, I think substitute the means for the end.
How can the Holy Spirit be limited in the methods He uses for transformation? He is after all God? Isn't it just possible he will use the means best suited to the individual. And when we latch on to the means instead of the end are we not committing a form of idolatry?
Work that knowledge a little bit and let's see where we end up...
Technorati Tags:transformation, knowledge, cessasionitst, charasmatics
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator
Knowing is transformation. It is a creative insight that changes us and changes things. We emerge, from the knowing event, different persons, seeing the world differently. Knowing is more like a conversion and less like catechism, we might say. And apart from the conversion, catechism is lifeless two-dimensionality. Catechism of course is important, but precisely because it invites conversion.Ms. Meeks rightly points out that often what passes for knowledge is simply information, and that such is not transformative.
The dynamic of transformational knowing is, I believe, akin to the descent of God. The Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to his temple, says the Scriptures. God comes; I am changed. He breaks the bread and our eyes are opened to see Him and ourselves and our world differently. We’ve been summoned. There is no going back. That is knowing.
This suggests two very profound implications. In one direction, our relationship with the living Lord, far from being antithetical to “knowledge,” (as in “faith VERSUS reason”) is the best specimen and model of it. In the other, in whatever way we are involved in education—as teachers or students in classrooms, churches, homes, or on-the-job training, we must teach and learn and assess for transformation. We must learn, not so much to comprehend as to be apprehended. We must see ourselves as, in our determined efforts, putting ourselves in the way of the incoming of God.
There is a huge differentiation in Christian schools here. I think this lies at the heart of the charismatic/cessation debate. Good old epistimology.
You see, absent the agency of the Holy Spirit, I think all knowledge is mere information. I know many people more familiar and more capable with theology, and all other information associated with my faith that are not transformed by that information. What is the difference between me and them? I know many people incapable of accumulating much in the way of information at all that are deeply transformed by the Holy Spirit.
While it is true that knowledge can play a role in transformation, I think it a step too far to say that knowledge is always transformative, or that knowledge is necessary for transformation. Of course, I do not think that is necessarily what Meeks is saying, I think she is saying that knowledge apart from tranformation is just information. But I also think that is just semantics. The essential point is that we are to be transformed and knowledge can play a role in that.
Here what strikes me. Many charismatics think that Holy Spirit baptism, or some other ecstatic experience is the only means to transformation. Hardened cessasionists think knowledge is the only such means. Both, I think substitute the means for the end.
How can the Holy Spirit be limited in the methods He uses for transformation? He is after all God? Isn't it just possible he will use the means best suited to the individual. And when we latch on to the means instead of the end are we not committing a form of idolatry?
Work that knowledge a little bit and let's see where we end up...
Technorati Tags:transformation, knowledge, cessasionitst, charasmatics
Generated By Technorati Tag Generator
