Reading the sections about what they called "Dirt Philosophy" or "Sensualistic Materialism" in regard to the Spirit and the Word reminds me of a song I have sung in different churches.
"Break Thou the Bread of Life, Dear Lord to Me, As Thou Dids't Break the Bread Beside the sea,
Within the Sacred Page, I seek the Lord, My Spirit pants for thee O living word"
That is what I grew up with. Then, as I moved around, I remember singing this from another song book as,
"BEYOND the Sacred Page I seek thee Lord . . ."
Different words! I didn't recognize how significantly different these words are. The first suggests that our Lord is contained within the sacred page, while the latter suggests that the sacred page is a witness to the Lord. He is beyond the sacred page. The sacred page points to him.
The first (within the sacred page), seems particularly Lockean, or Baconian. But, God does not exist in the sacred page. He does not depend on scripture for his existence, nor does he require the written word to change men's hearts. The spoken and written word are tools to bring people to God. I remember a term I heard several years ago, "bibliolatry." That term seems to fit here. Can you focus too much on the word that you miss the one that the word is supposed to bring you into communion with? Can you know the Bible and not really know God? Can you know and even obey the Bible and still miss the author of it?
I am thinking of passages such as 1 Corinthians 2 that talks about how, through the Spirit, we have the mind of Christ. Titus 3:5 says we have been renewed by the Spirit. This is another way of saying we have become a new person, the old person is put to death. The Spirit transforms us inwardly. It occurs to me that passages such as these do not say we read the word and we obey and are therefore changed. It seems to go much deeper than this. To have the mind of Christ is much deeper than memorizing scripture or some biblical doctrine. As important as these are, they are only related to knowing God. I know that knowing scripture and doctrine is not the same as knowing God.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
The section about what they authors call pre-cognitive thoughts was challenging. I think others may call it a "Modern Western Worldview," or you could call it a "Lockean Worldview." It is very scientific and rational. I grew up thinking everyone had to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Most of the Christians I knew in my younger years put a lot of emphasis on human responsibility and response, and almost none on the role of the Spirit, other than giving us the written word. In fact, there was very little if any role for the Spirit in our daily lives.
It seems that most had a pretty high view of man. Man was not helpless due to sin, according to them. Man's heart was not desperately sick. Man was not truly enslaved. All one had to do was decide to do what is right. Yet over the years, I have seen people repeatedly be stuck due to sin. They want to change, but can't. Those from my youth would say it is not that they can't, but they simply won't. I don't think that is always the case. Just knowing the right thing doesn't seem to always to the trick. Perhaps that is why Jesus says that he who sins becomes a slave to sin. Perhaps that is why Paul says that, "while we were helpless, Christ died for the ungodly." Perhaps this is why he says that it is God who is at work in us, both to will and to work for his good pleasure." In short, it is not just salvation that we need, but sanctification, which is a work of the Spirit. It isn't just redemption that we need, but inner reformation. We need to be formed into the image of Christ, and this transformation is a work of the Spirit.
I have to wonder at some of the people I knew in my younger years who were Christians. Some of them got caught up in sin and became stuck. They fell away. They were sorrowful about it, but never came back. Were they unwilling? Maybe it is because they were to focused on their own human ability. Maybe they knew the Bible, but never fell in love with the author of the book. We had a lot of knowledge of doctrinal formulations, we knew all the arguments for various doctrines. But, I wonder, how well did we know God at that time?
I don't where some of those people wound up, or if they found their way to the love of God. But for myself, I am grateful that I was able to look past the roadmap (Bible), and find the destination (God). I am grateful that somehow I have been able to allow the Spirit to work in my life and change my heart.
Post a Comment