You know, I am a very perverse person...
It's true.
I have a certain reluctance in using the standard evangelical invitation to have a "personal relationship with God". I suppose it's partly because I wonder what other kind of relationship you can have. An 'impersonal relationship' ?
Also because it sounds like you need to have a scary smile when you say it.
And also because it is so much more tame than the terms the Bible uses : repent, turn to God, be reconciled to God, etc... Anyway I had a "personal relationship" with one history teacher at school. He disliked me and I avoided him. It was all deeply personal, but hardly a good model !
However for the English home group we looked at Psalm 139 on Saturday night to answer the question "What is the God of the Bible like ?"
You can answer that question from the psalm with the abstract terms of systematic theology : omniscient, omnipresent, creator, etc...
However if you do that you miss something vital from the psalm.
The psalm doesn't say "God is omniscient". It says "God, you know all about me".
It doesn't say "God is onmipresent." It says "Wherever I go I find you there, God."
So the psalm is deeply relational.
Now I like systematic theology and I think it is important. Nay, vital. If I have a talent it is for seeing the overall picture - I am good at seeing patterns and systematising.
But you have to avoid the temptation to think about God in the abstract. He's there.
It's a bit like if someone asked me to describe Pat. I could do it pretty well, I suppose, but if she were in the room then I would involve her in the description. It would be rude not to. We don't talk about people in the third person in their presence, do we, children !
So we are obliged to have a "personal relationship" with God. We have no option.
After all, in him we live and move and have our being.
I have a certain reluctance in using the standard evangelical invitation to have a "personal relationship with God". I suppose it's partly because I wonder what other kind of relationship you can have. An 'impersonal relationship' ?
Also because it sounds like you need to have a scary smile when you say it.
And also because it is so much more tame than the terms the Bible uses : repent, turn to God, be reconciled to God, etc... Anyway I had a "personal relationship" with one history teacher at school. He disliked me and I avoided him. It was all deeply personal, but hardly a good model !
However for the English home group we looked at Psalm 139 on Saturday night to answer the question "What is the God of the Bible like ?"
You can answer that question from the psalm with the abstract terms of systematic theology : omniscient, omnipresent, creator, etc...
However if you do that you miss something vital from the psalm.
The psalm doesn't say "God is omniscient". It says "God, you know all about me".
It doesn't say "God is onmipresent." It says "Wherever I go I find you there, God."
So the psalm is deeply relational.
Now I like systematic theology and I think it is important. Nay, vital. If I have a talent it is for seeing the overall picture - I am good at seeing patterns and systematising.
But you have to avoid the temptation to think about God in the abstract. He's there.
It's a bit like if someone asked me to describe Pat. I could do it pretty well, I suppose, but if she were in the room then I would involve her in the description. It would be rude not to. We don't talk about people in the third person in their presence, do we, children !
So we are obliged to have a "personal relationship" with God. We have no option.
After all, in him we live and move and have our being.
Comments
For the first time in my life my hands are beginning - just - to suffer from the cold. Dieburg weather is a tad colder than Bordeaux, I pine for sunnier climbs...
Thought provoking