Simon Scott (no relation, but great choice of last name!) responded to my post of a few days ago, and I asked him to post something here.
Reflecting on Martin’s ‘So how do we share the gospel?’
Martin’s post suggested the intriguing possibility that salvation may mean we are saved ‘for’ rather than ‘from’ something and that something could be the revealing of a new creation or a new kingdom if you prefer that language. Great suggestion. So, we are all a part of something a little larger than our own selves which I have to say is a bit of a relief really! I mean, what kind of world would we be in if it were all about us? The thing is that we, humanity, are rather important at least on a couple of levels. From a faith perspective we are made in the image of God, we have God’s breath intimately given. Personally, I find this inspiring and humbling and my identity is certainly there- at least in those moments when I am not preoccupied with my identity in various (minor) successes and failures and so on. What would a grown-up version of me look like if I could live in that image? Back to that in a minute. The other reason humanity is important is the influence we have as the dominant species on our planet. A worldview that doesn’t think firstly that we are in God’s image, asks us to see ourselves as one species among many, to get over ourselves and realise we share the planet with all life forms that deserve a future-and whilst it shouldn’t need saying that does include all people. Humanity’s (ab)use of the planet is increasingly evident in human and non-human suffering.
So, I have been pondering the idea of salvation being a reciprocal kind of deal, between each person and between us and the planet. (Romans 8.18-23 is the go-to passage linking creation, humanity and salvation/liberation). That in some way the depth of salvation and transformation we experience is connected to our part in the liberation of others. Have to be careful with language of course as suggesting salvation is achieved by doing things has a long history of not doing well! I’ve certainly been influenced by Liberation Theology for which the defining question is ‘what does Christian salvation have to do with physical liberation in the present?’ The genuine concern and criticism is that salvation becomes reduced to freedom from social oppression and loses the inner freedom of a spiritual transformation. But then isn’t the Christian hope to see the removal of this either/or scenario so that spiritual and physical liberation are joined? And even that the cross and resurrection have already accomplished just that. Often this is (only/mostly) a future post-parousia hope and less of a now hope? Liberation theology in all its guises says that salvation starts now, whatever the future brings.
Back to ‘the image’. I am discovering the Eastern Orthodox idea of salvation as theosis, becoming like God (not becoming God), which is similar to the West’s sanctification. Salvation is an invitation into union with God and the ongoing transformation through the Spirit and a sense in which salvation becomes an individual and a shared experience in embodied reality. Bodies are important, reading only the smallest amount of black or feminist liberation theology seriously challenges this white male to see in a new light and the incumbent responsibility to ask, ‘how should I be?’ and how haven’t I seen?
Sharing the gospel then becomes an invitation to relationship with God and others that is tangible and experienced. Maybe it means planting gardens and businesses before churches or joining in with the things that people care about. Maybe it’s about recognising the other person before anything else because God was there first, the Spirit is present and it’s not about us. Lots of maybes lots of questions!
Another one. Maybe our idea of salvation, of being human, is evolving and maturing. Maturity not being even more certain of what I always knew but growing into the likeness of the one I am still getting to know.
Love this. Thanks for posting Simon