Either/Or

This Page generates from an exchange between me and a great-grandson.  For a period, we sent, each weekend an E-mail to each other touching on both personal and general life issues as they appear in Christian interpretation, consideration and application.   A major point one day related to the either/or personal attitude for the interpretation of factors in life context, as contrasted with the both/and attitude.  There needs to be enough self-knowledge for the individual to know whether or not his or her own attitude (as understood from application of principle) is flexible to treat thought and conduct with an integrity that relates to truth.  We may not realize the matter belongs to humility so for the affirming person to have support (reason for making decisions and assertions based on assumptions and evidence relative to the context).  These factors are vital, but they may not be acceptable by friends in discussion.  They remain for us.  The objective person is accepting of the human problem even when he or she is frustrated with contradictions, even misrepresentations.  In fact, they may not be contradictions but paradoxes (seeming contradictions, but both true).  Biblical evidence, vital for me, may be discarded by others.

There are some issues on which I hold firmly to either/or, but my attitude relative to that stance should not be cause for arrogance in my exchanges with others.  Many persons in every context, including some devout Christians, fail in this matter.  They are right and that without hearing out a person with contrary beliefs.  They offer no credit to any other themes or actions than their own.  There is an ugly rigidity, even when we agree to their conclusions.  An effective illustration of this melodrama can be seen in the near two centuries-old debate about religion and science over the matter of evolution in nature and its meaning in the forming of mankind by God.  The bold assertions of humanistic scientists on one side, knowing little about faith based beliefs, have been used to degrade religious faith.  On the other hand the faith based persons respond with attitude and presuppositions and evidence from Scripture that may mean nothing to the humanist.  So it is that we have batted the ideas, assumptions, vituperations, accusations, and other bits of ammunition back and forth in a kind of intellectual warfare.  The warfare slows, sometimes stops the advancement of knowledge and understanding which, rightly engaged, yields wisdom.   

Instead of the attitude either/or, we could take the stance of: What if it may be both/and? It may not be both/and, but we are talking here of attitude so as to give an environment of objectivity that seeks to find truth in anything.  It is an attitude that embraces more persons working toward a goal rather than dividing because of personal preference, a preference that may be true but loses its force because it is entered by the door of prejudice.  We see the matter in government (that has, on occasion, closed down), we see it in families so to divide mates, even children from their parents, and so instances may be fleshed out. 

I have sometimes wished that I could have monitored Moses and Zipporah in their differences that led to separation for several years.  Moses went on to Egypt to deliver the Jewish people from slavery.  On the trip Moses was commissioned to circumcise his sons, but demurred.  Zipporah interrupted and carried out the commandment, even if troubled by it and in a serious conflict with Moses.  Zipporah returned to her father, who likely became a father-figure for Moses’ sons.  Moses led the people in the setting up of community, and arranged everything in place.  At last, when Jethro had prepared his daughter, and Moses had time for his family, old Jethro took his daughter and grandsons to their father in the Wilderness, and the reunion was magnificent.  Jethro, a pagan priest in Midian, was converted to Moses’ God in the mending of his daughter’s marriage and observation of blessing in Israel from God.  His conversion was a striking event.  He even mentored Moses in a major order of administration and democracy.  Knowing the possibility of conflict with his continuing presence and with work to do at home, Jethro left, and returned to his people.  Moses released him.  The wise old father-in-law priest contributed to God’s people and leader, as they contributed to him.  This is the way God works for earth.  We are seekers of truth, love and peace.  We close the past in forgiving spirit and point to the future for both personal and civil life.