I was praying today, not in my morning ritual that many of
us Christians call quiet time, but I was driving. And as is often the case, I was alone while
driving. It is my thinking that, if I am
driving with no one else to talk to, why not talk to the God Who has captivated
me in such a way that before I make most, should be all, of my decisions, I
talk to Him first.
So, I was praying and what I found myself repeating was, “I
want more of You than experiential Jesus.”
I am sure many of you know the Jesus that I am talking about. He is a fun Jesus. He lifts me up, and brings me down, when I
see myself for who I am. But, as those
of you who know me, this single line of prayer kick started a waterfall of
thoughts that I was compelled to meditate upon.
I have, in the past, been quickly categorized as
Neo-orthodox or even a Christian existentialist, and while I don’t reject these
categories entirely it is important to note that I don’t hold to all of what
those generalizations mean. Neo-orthodoxy,
for one has been described as holding a limited perspective on the authority of
scripture, as they may say that the scripture “becomes” inspired when the Holy
Spirit breaths upon the pages while they are being read. Like when a scriptural critic reads the Bible
to find the different inconsistencies in its message. Neo-orthodoxy would say that when reading the
Bible like this, it is not inspired. And
it stands to reason, as there is no belief that it is, that for that individual
it is not. The criticism of this
statement is that scripture says of itself that it is (2 Tim. 3:16), and it
goes around and around. This leads to
Christian existentialism, which upon hearing the word “existentialism” we
immediately think of “relative truth.” For
the Christian existentialist “truth,” itself, is not relative. As truth is wholly other than and cannot be
subject to any individual. That being
said, truth is only truth to an individual who accepts it. In the biblical sense “truth” become
judgment, at its worst, and “conviction,” at its best, for the unbeliever. “Conviction” is best, as it can lead to
receiving the truth.
So, I am going to limit this conversation to semantics. Depending on your perspective, “truth” for
you, may not be truth for me, based on belief, but belief, whether received or
not, does not change what or Who is truth.
Truth is wholly other than, and is beyond what any one individual can
fully know in its entirety. Or, if we could grasp “all truth,” it would
then become subject to our understanding and interpretation.
So, getting back to Experiential Jesus, Christian
existentialism says that truth, or reality, becomes truth when it is
experienced by the power of the Holy Spirit.
So, here is my question. If
Experiential Jesus becomes real when I experience Him, and then, based on the
experience, I believe, then what is to stop me from denying the experience? (Think of the one out of ten who returned to
thank Jesus for healing) How does this bring us to the point where we confess,
as Paul did, I am a slave to the cross?
Paul was captivated or taken hold of, this gives the impression of
slavery or that it was beyond his choice to receive or not. For Paul, did truth become real as a result
of his interrupted trip to Damascus? Or
was it something else?
Bear with me as the waterfall of thoughts splashes against
the rocks and churns in the multiple opposing currents below. Next: Romans 10:17 So faith comes from
hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. (ESV)
No comments:
Post a Comment