It certainly hasn’t helped us Western Christians to have pushed so hard on the forensic metaphor. ISTM that it is less important to know when one is actually converted than it is to keep on being converted. Throughout the NT there is lots of fuzziness re: sequence and experience. However, the clear emphasis is on staying the course with Jesus.This is not to say that there shouldn’t be a conversion marker. The church has historically recognized that as being baptism. So it might just be best to say that Peter started down the conversion road at his baptism (whenever that was). This is not to minimize any faith he had leading up to that — only that it’s somewhat futile –- and from our end of things unnecessary –- to peg these things down. God knows and it’s his opinion that counts anyway.

Acts 11.17 (cf. also 15.7-9) would suggest that Peter himself would point to Pentecost as the moment when:a) he believes in the Lord Jesus Christ;b) is given the gift of the Spirit;c) has his heart cleansed.If it looks like conversion, smells like conversion, tastes like conversion and acts like conversion why not call it conversion?Cheerio Pete

Scot,I agree that the love analogy is probably the most reliable. Love is something all of us are familair with, few understand fully, and no one can quantify. It is also marked by milestones that could be related to the cvonversion steps–becoming “twitterpated” (to borrow a phrase from Friend Owl in Bambi), going steady, becoming exclusive, getting engaged/married, consumation, having children.All of these steps may happen or a subset. Some may be conscious steps, others only apparent in retrospect. Many parallel the steps you outlined in the previous post. I still fall under the view that conversion (or love) occurs when the trajectory of your life changes from singleness to partnership. From self to another.But this begs the question: If conversion is this change of trajectory, can we change and fall away? What does this imply for the doctine of “once save-always saved”?

Scot – this has been fascinating reading. Great stuff, lots to think about, and I think in particular your discussion of Peter highlights some of the difficulties in thinking through the issue. Bob – I’ll toss out my own thoughts here on the question. I think the connection here with the judicial metaphor actually gets to the question that you’re asking, which I think is something that’s been sort of an issue for the classic Reformed position that I’m assuming you’re describing. The issue is this: we all know, or at least know of, people who appear to have a genuine conversion experience, but who later fall away, whether that be through conversion to another faith, rejection of the faith, or the faith never seems to “take root”, so to speak. The Reformed tradition is forced, largely (but not entirely) I think because of the reliance on the justification metaphor, to say that either these people will return to the faith, or they never genuinely converted in the first place. The biblical evidence, I think, is much more diverse – Hebrews argues against it, I would say, as does Galatians and Revelation, I think. I don’t see any discongruity between assurance of faith and a later “de-conversion”, so to speak, because I think the premise is largely an attempt to have the justification metaphor make sense. (That’s not to downplay the importance of justification by any means, but simply to identify it as one metaphor among several.)

Scott,I would agree with you on this one. Thanks for the thoughtfulness of your remarks.

Scott (two T’s), Exactly. All I’ve been taught are these point-in-time, change-of-status doctrines (inregards to salvation, justification, hell, etc.). But they don’t hold up because, as Scot (one T) said, it’s never “accomplished”; we’re never done. I’m glad because the journey is half the fun.

Well said. We need to move past the binary approach to “conversion” and recognize the “wooing” over the “winning”. I also agree with Brad in the need for milestones, not for definitive reasons as much as for communal celebrations!Jamie Aprin-Ricciwww.emergentvoyageurs.blog.com