it was interesting to see how different people wanted me to, or thought I should resolve the apparent conflict (although I did not see it as a conflict). But since someone was supposedly offended (no one actually ever wrote me and said "David you offended me"), then I must surely do my part to resolve the conflict (which may have never actually been a conflict). What lots of people did write me was that "IF you had said these things to me, THEN I would have been terribly offended."
Which actions were then expected of me were determined by the point of view (POV) of the advice-giver. Amazingly it was like they fell into two camps . . . the “collectivist” or “individualist” POV of the reader/advice-giver. Missionally these designations are usually used to explain cultural differences, like the difference between North American culture and Thai culture. But I experienced both coming out of North America! Here are the two basic Points of View:
What I found clinically fascinating (it was not experientially fascinating nor pleasurable) was the fact that the POV of the person chiding me or cheering me, determined their suggested next course of action AND each side (POV) used scripture to back up their instructions to me!
While everyone agreed that I was either stupid or brave (again depending on your POV) the fact that scripture was used to support both collectivist's and individualist's POV taught me something very important: that we often read and use and see scripture from our POV, (i.e. our POV informs our understanding of scripture) rather than Scripture informing our POV. This is dangerous, especially in a world that makes Truth very personal and non-absolute. I think I want to be more careful to let the Word of God say what it says, rather than using it as a instrument or weapon for my purposes.
3 comments:
LOL!!! You are how old and are just now noticing that scripture is continually filtered thru POV?? :-)
The first time I remember this being brought home to me in a clear, tangible way was when I read Christianity Today's parallel articles, titled "The Ordination of Women: Yes" and "The Ordination of Women: No"
Both used the same scriptures to reach opposite conclusions.
This is "clinically" fascinating, as you put it.
I know many other cultures value an indirect way of expression, but it is really interesting to note how many people in our own culture view situations from the Collective rather than Individual framework.
Frankly, I also think the Collective mode may make it easier for an evil person to shoot a room full of innocent people, walking casually around the room shooting one person at a time.
Individualists may be more likely to jump up and throw a table across the door or take some other more direct and possibly very risky action - although they may quickly be joined by a couple of Collectivists who were just waiting for someone to lead the way.
So if you would like a pleasant tea party, invite Collectivists. If you would like to increase your chances of survival, best to toss a few Individualists into the mix - although you then may also increase your chances of getting struck by lightning!
I feel your analysis is too simplistic. The truth is definitely personally revealed and thank God it is. It also absolute and thank God for that as well.
One thing to bear in mind is that scripturally we matter to God as individuals and have His Spirit to hopefully discern personal matters. The wisdom of God is many-sided. We also have the collective in the church. The church is a unique entity. Also within the church is a system of leadership. There are hopefully checks and balances there that help an individual and the body rightly divide the Word. So to really muddy the waters, as believers we function both individual and collectively. We are commanded to. It is an impossible to reveal truth except through flawed human beings and human systems that exist in time. If we are believers, we are new creatures regardless of our POV.
I'm not sure Scripture had anything to do with it. If it had, those who were offended would have spoken to you directly rather than using
proxies.
Post a Comment