Knowledge part 2
In speaking of knowledge given by God, Peter sets up a dichotomy when he compares it to the corruption of the world. This knowledge (epignosis) is freely bestowed upon all by God's grace -- it is even possessed by the apostate, as Peter explains in 2 Peter 2:21. In essence, I see this as a choice. We are connected to the power source, this knowledge that gives us all we need for life and godliness. We are able to partake in the divine nature through God's promises, promises that were fulfilled in Christ. However, we can choose to isolate ourselves from the source of power. We can cut off the life support, so to speak. If we do so, we become controlled by pursuit of our own lusts, beginning a process of destruction that eventually leads to perdition.
Peter was speaking to the Gnostic ideas that faced the church in his time. He is assuring believers that they do not need to try to obtain some type of "esoteric knowledge" of the type that the Gnostics proposed. This knowledge is already given freely by God. Utilizing this knowledge will lead to an experiential knowledge (gnosis), that will continue to develop until the fullness of knowledge is finally realized. The eschatological tension is present and perennial. In both of Peter's epistles, I have noticed a strong thread of hope for glory, perhaps the most positive aspect of eschatological tension -- and one that is missing from a lot of teaching in the church today. Glorification is a doctrine that tends to be misplaced and overrealized (perhaps in the case of much-publicized "eschatomania"), or ignored to the point of fostering a type of "Christian nihilism" (see Jacques Ellul). I have not explored these ideas very heavily and they are not the point of this particular post, but perhaps I will develop them more in the future.
The bottom line? Well, one can see that the increasing secularization of our culture is a reality. I am beginning to wonder how effective the church will be if it remains married to the world, instead of realizing the inherent tension between being hooked up to the power source and living according to worldly wisdom. We cannot depend on our social institutions to save us. At the same time, it is foolish to assume that enforcing Christian morality (which results from epignosis rather than causes it) will cause the empty secular culture to neatly fall in line. How we ourselves are living becomes the primary concern to set the precedent. I believe this is why Peter does not leave the subject of knowledge with simple assurance that allows complacency. Knowing that we have been given all, we strive through discipline to add godly characteristics to our lives. These are not means to an end, these are manifestations of what we have been given. Such a reaction can be the only feasible one, for the same knowledge that makes us free demands action and will ultimately hold us accountable.
Peter was speaking to the Gnostic ideas that faced the church in his time. He is assuring believers that they do not need to try to obtain some type of "esoteric knowledge" of the type that the Gnostics proposed. This knowledge is already given freely by God. Utilizing this knowledge will lead to an experiential knowledge (gnosis), that will continue to develop until the fullness of knowledge is finally realized. The eschatological tension is present and perennial. In both of Peter's epistles, I have noticed a strong thread of hope for glory, perhaps the most positive aspect of eschatological tension -- and one that is missing from a lot of teaching in the church today. Glorification is a doctrine that tends to be misplaced and overrealized (perhaps in the case of much-publicized "eschatomania"), or ignored to the point of fostering a type of "Christian nihilism" (see Jacques Ellul). I have not explored these ideas very heavily and they are not the point of this particular post, but perhaps I will develop them more in the future.
The bottom line? Well, one can see that the increasing secularization of our culture is a reality. I am beginning to wonder how effective the church will be if it remains married to the world, instead of realizing the inherent tension between being hooked up to the power source and living according to worldly wisdom. We cannot depend on our social institutions to save us. At the same time, it is foolish to assume that enforcing Christian morality (which results from epignosis rather than causes it) will cause the empty secular culture to neatly fall in line. How we ourselves are living becomes the primary concern to set the precedent. I believe this is why Peter does not leave the subject of knowledge with simple assurance that allows complacency. Knowing that we have been given all, we strive through discipline to add godly characteristics to our lives. These are not means to an end, these are manifestations of what we have been given. Such a reaction can be the only feasible one, for the same knowledge that makes us free demands action and will ultimately hold us accountable.