i hate the term "born again"

i hate the term "born again" that is my opinion and it is one i stand with. For me, the term “second life” is far more expressive and meaningful. while i think others have the right to use what ever term they desire i also believe we need to start developing terms, metaphors, theologies and expressions of those in new ways. for me, a “second life” is found in believing in christ, and is not “proved” by evidence of any “gift.” the idea that “being born again” can only be “true” if certain gifts are expressed, violates scripture on many levels. i believe we need to take a new stance on many of the “doctrines” of the church and ask ourselves with all honesty and grace, “do we believe this because scripture teaches this, or because tradition teaches it?” let me explain it like this:

i stand firm on the fact that in order to truly be moving ahead and deconstructing one needs to get rid of old terms that carry baggage and form new ones without the baggage (they will, over time create their own baggage) - no matter who it offends. if we are truly to express the faith in a relevant way, simply taking the terms used by evangelicals will simply show we are evangelical and nothings changed - to take the terms used by the contemporary church, means we are simply the contemporary church and nothings changed.

i believe we need to find new words, new metaphors, new expressions - and if that is "either/or" well, i am at a lose - but as brian says, we will not truly be postmodern if we simply use modern terms to express our faith - so, the task at hand for us all is to, in my opinion, seek to find new ways of expressing our faith - and not the old ways.

i am not striving to push a button, but the idea that "either/or" should stop us from forming alternative expressions is not a valid argument - we have to not let the "either/or" debate stop us from developing terms that hold true to an emerging people. if we do, we are allowing moderns to dictate our growth and terms - if a person desire to use "born again" fine, so be it - but in a emerging expression "born again" carries too much baggage and can never be "redefined" - so, we need to find a way that expresses that idea (or one close to it) with different words. i think we have moved away from our desire to express our faith in new ways and settled on letting those outside an emerging mindset determine how we express our faith. i am sure others will think that i am “wrong” by not accepting the expression of others, and that is not the case. You can have the expression you desire, but when we are talking about certain things, remember to define your meaning. remember that your evangelical, modern expression of faith does not express my heart.

without developing a “conspiracy theory” i believe there is a movement afoot to stop us from forming new theologies, new expressions of faith, new metaphors, new terms - and, while not "collective" in any way - that movement is trying to stop us with the "both/and" debate - the "both/and" is a valid reality - but in that i believe, modern expressions of faith have no place in forming a postmodern/emerging expression of faith. they can have their theology, and that is fine (both/and) but that theology is not expressed in an emerging reality -

here is one that I am working on developing: (let me know what you think)
love is a sacrament – historically we have defined a sacrament as something either christ did, or commanded us to do. For example, baptism is a sacrament of the church because jesus “did” it – he was baptized. Communion is a sacrament because jesus commended us to do it in remembrance of him – so, since jesus commands us to love, love is a sacrament – still in process, but you get the idea.

No comments: