For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and in part I believe it. For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident among you. (1 Corinthians 11:18,19 NASB)In our culture, we are trying to get rid of competition. It's a philosophy that seems to believe that aggression is inherently evil, that aggression comes from competition, and therefore competition must be eliminated to also eliminate the evil aggression. Ironically, it's not working, not really. I believe it's another attempt at the enlightenment philosophy which claimed that humanity is reaching/evolving toward a pinnacle in which we will attain perfection.
There are a host of problems with this philosophy which was supposed to have failed in World War II, but continues feebly to try and impose itself on people today. The search for and the striving to create Utopia is a lot like the building of the Tower of Babel. Which is a lot like the eating of the forbidden fruit in the Garden. Which is a lot like children.
The church, or 'collection of those called out of society by their Creator', is supposed to be where the Spirit of our Savior creates this 'Utopia' within a society. The problem with church has always been the same, the people. From Paul's day down to our own, the human creatures making up the church have always marred the clarity of the Utopian concept set down in Scriptures. And yet, there is a 'purpose' to such marring.
Paul, in his statement in verse 19, is probably being ironic or sarcastic toward the congregation. He's probably both castigating one group and encouraging another, but he still said it. So, since the Spirit inspired it, what does He mean by it? I think it's wrong to create an entire 'theology' around any single statement in Scripture, and I'm not going to do so here. But his statement does seem to correlate with another philosophical position: There is no understanding of light without darkness as a comparison.
I think a philosopher said something like, 'I did not know light until I had experienced darkness' or some such. The typical application in philosophy is that difficulty in life enhances the enjoyment of the good times. I believe it's the height of irony when those following such a philosophy turn around and try to rid society of competition. Does anyone truly 'win' or even succeed if no one loses or fails? How would we even know or understand the question without both extremes present?
The writer of Ecclesiastes uses this concept as a theme throughout that book. But in that book, all the success and 'winning' paled after a time (there was no failure - and so it became 'failure'), and he realized that only God gives meaning to success, failure, gain, or loss. The real reason humans rebel against God is because we realize how we are truly such 'losers' compared to Him. Who wants to feel that? Yet, by not accepting that, we then deny ourselves the realization that we are truly 'winners' because of Him as well.
Selfishly, we want to be winners without Him, apart from our Creator and Savior. The true evil of humanity is not in what we perpetrate against each other, it's the reason we do so; to add another brick to the tower to heaven. But our rebellion doesn't change the truth that apart from our Creator we lose. Our rebellion doesn't change our need to embrace our Savior to win. Erasing competition, winning and losing from our culture doesn't change that either. The failures and pains of life will continue to illuminate, in sharp relief only shadow can create, our need for the success and relief provided by our Creator and Savior. This is where I find the 'faith of a child'; everything is provided to me by my Father.
No comments:
Post a Comment