Heraclitus was a pre-Socratic philosopher who believed that whatever is is changing (universal flux) and is the original source of the common saying, "You could not step twice into the same river." RC Sproul noted that Heraclitus is often credited with being the ancient father of modern existentialism, as the denial of anything that is fixed, changeless, absolute, or eternal can be traced back to the universal flux that Heraclitus championed.
I'm not going to pretend like I'm some expert on universal flux or existentialism (this post is actually only remotely related to those ideas), but it does seem to me that we live in a day where change is idealized and sometimes even idolized. From evolutionary and progressive worldviews, change is necessary for the betterment of society and the human race as a whole, and staying still and not changing (see: conservatives) holds us back from the better potential that could be achieved. From a more personal standpoint, we (especially as young people) see both internal and external change as necessary for maturation and personal growth. Not changing is often a sign of professional or intellectual ineptitude or personal immaturity.
Thus, I believe that we, young and educated people especially, have a certain expectation of change for all aspects of life. We anticipate technological advancement, participate in social justice movements, and engage in personal development and spiritual formation efforts. This expectation of change causes tension in the way that we view religion and ultimately the way that we view God. Just like past societal problems and technology, religious views, doctrines, and "interpretations" that are obsolete and out-dated ought to be amended for the betterment of the religion and its followers. After all, in our eyes, the age of a text or a belief do not solidify its meaning and reliability - it detracts from it.
Moreover, God himself ought to change, if he indeed was the author of such antiquated beliefs. He's already changed from being the grumpy, vengeful tyrant of the Old Testament to the loving, gracious benevolent ruler in the New Testament, hasn't he? Is it not expected that God would continue to change as society advances and sheds God's old laws in search for newer, better rules that fit?
I truly believe that in our idealization of progress and change, we have found it increasingly difficult to come to terms with the fact that God and His laws do not change. We have a harder time grasping the idea of perfection (as if it was easy to begin with) and how perfection is unchanging. What does it mean that God doesn't change? What does it mean that His law doesn't change? Do we really believe that God is perfect? Do we believe that His law is perfect? Is it really true that God couldn't be a better God, and what does that mean for all of the suffering in the world? Must something be unchanging to be perfect? Or does something need to change to remain perfect? How do God's immutability and perfection relate to one another?
There are some questions that I think that we young, progressive-leaning Christians ought to spend some time meditating on, lest we be swept up in the storms of public opinion and personal doubt without having solid foundation to stand upon.
Hebrews 13:8 - "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever."
Related Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment