God suffers and grieves because man rejects his unconditional love. When God created the world He was in perfect relationship with man. There was no fear, no doubt or pain, but seamless harmony. Adam and Eve were in communion with God. Love was not selfish, but reciprocal between the divine and humanity. It was a world of peace and wholeness, nothing was lacking. However, mankind willfully chose to doubt and fracture their relationship with God through their disobedience. No longer is there harmony, but dissonance. No longer is there peace, but a quaking fear of the other. No longer is there joy, but intense suffering and pain. God suffers the pain of being hurt by the beloved, the suffering of rejected love. He is deeply wounded by man’s betrayal because He withheld nothing from His beloved (Gen. 6:5-6,Ps. 78:40). God cannot remain unaffected by our sin because He is a person in a shatteringly close relationship with humanity. The communion between God and man is so tightly woven together that it would be impossible for one to remain unaffected by the other.
Sin severs and corrupts relationships. No longer does man reciprocate the love of God, but consumes it. People crave for the blessings of God, but with egotistic motive. Men hunger for love, but reject a relationship with God out of fear and selfishness. God first loved mankind to foster communion, a relationship governed by reciprocal love. He does not love for the sake of love, but for the sake of the other. When reciprocal love is quenched and suffocated by sin there is disharmony, misery and loneliness. The “other” is consumed by the “I”. Human beings are inward, self-conscience, defensive, and depressed because they are consumers of love instead of self-sacrificing donors. Man’s sin deprives God of His glory and the love He merits.
Personhood of God
God is a God of personal love. He is not some abstract idea, completely distant or absolutely other. Instead, God is a person who is intimately involved with the world, continually concerned for the wellbeing of His beloved. A person is “otherness in communion and communion with otherness”. Scripture does not characterize God as pure act, as the Greeks would say, but in terms of relationship. It is an “I” and “Thou” relationship, as Marin Buber would describe it. Personhood necessitates the freedom to love. Love and personhood are meticulously connected to one another. Love is not freedom from the other but freedom for the other. Because God is love, he is active in time, involved and concerned for the objects of his love. Personality requires passibility. To be a person is to participate in the emotions and sufferings of the other. Maldwyn Hughes states that, “It is of the very nature of love to suffer when its object suffers loss, whether inflicted by itself or others”. Therefore, God is passible, capable of experiencing emotion and suffering, because his personhood is love.
Traditional theology understood God’s love as pure action, he is unconditionally pouring out love, but is unaffected by the ones he loves. God knows about man’s suffering, but does not identify himself with suffering. Richard Creel contends that perfect love is impassible stating, “The greatest lover may be one who never suffers for his beloved because it is not possible or necessary for him to do so.” I would argue a love that is incapable of suffering is not love. Scripture does not define love in terms of impassibility, but passibility. What is the paramount depiction of love in the Bible? It is dying, to suffer for the sake of another. Romans 15:13 directly states, “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends”. Likewise, Christ, who is the very image of God, expresses his perfect love by dying for mankind. “But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). Jurgen Moltmann argues that, “A God who cannot suffer is poorer than any man. For a God who is incapable of suffering is a being who cannot be involved. Suffering and injustice do not affect him. And because he is so completely insensitive, he cannot be affected or shaken by anything. He cannot weep, for he has no tears. But the one who cannot suffer cannot love either. So he is also a loveless being”. One has true love when he is open to suffering. Therefore, based on the definition of Scripture, Love is not impassible, incapable of suffering, but passible, capable of suffering.
Traditional theology understood God’s love as pure action, he is unconditionally pouring out love, but is unaffected by the ones he loves. God knows about man’s suffering, but does not identify himself with suffering. Richard Creel contends that perfect love is impassible stating, “The greatest lover may be one who never suffers for his beloved because it is not possible or necessary for him to do so.” I would argue a love that is incapable of suffering is not love. Scripture does not define love in terms of impassibility, but passibility. What is the paramount depiction of love in the Bible? It is dying, to suffer for the sake of another. Romans 15:13 directly states, “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends”. Likewise, Christ, who is the very image of God, expresses his perfect love by dying for mankind. “But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). Jurgen Moltmann argues that, “A God who cannot suffer is poorer than any man. For a God who is incapable of suffering is a being who cannot be involved. Suffering and injustice do not affect him. And because he is so completely insensitive, he cannot be affected or shaken by anything. He cannot weep, for he has no tears. But the one who cannot suffer cannot love either. So he is also a loveless being”. One has true love when he is open to suffering. Therefore, based on the definition of Scripture, Love is not impassible, incapable of suffering, but passible, capable of suffering.
Restrain Theology
A young theologian should pursue his studies with a disposition of humility. Scripture teaches that knowledge puffs one up. With what little knowledge he attains, a young theologian can be vain and condescending to a young believer. He enjoys rattling off abstract ideas and lofty concepts, only to shock and stunt the growth of a young believer. Thielicke warns us that knowledge is power. Truth, as he says, seduces us into a kind of joy of possession. We have comprehended something the other has not. Joy of possessing knowledge can crush love. Love is the opposite of the will to possess. It does not boast, but is giving. There are times and with certain people that we should restrain our theological concepts. Do not muddle their minds with difficult concepts which dishearten their pursuit of God. Paul understood his audience. Those who are young in the faith are fed milk, concepts that are simple to digest. It is only when they outgrow the spiritual milk does Paul begin to feed them hefty meat to consume and grow. I am learning patience with those who are younger in the faith, yet, at the same time, being submissive to those who are more spiritually discerned than I.
Studying theology should be a joy, but it must learned with a sober mind. The pursuit of knowledge has the power to either corrupt or strengthen one's faith. It can either draw us into God's presence or it can hide His face.
Studying theology should be a joy, but it must learned with a sober mind. The pursuit of knowledge has the power to either corrupt or strengthen one's faith. It can either draw us into God's presence or it can hide His face.
Relfections on the Life of the Theological Student
Recently I read an article by Benjamin Warfield on the life of the theological student. In his short article he reflects upon the relation between the "intellectual" life and the "spiritual" life of the student. As a student studying theology, Warfield speaks directly to my heart and the necessity to foster my spiritual life along side my intellectual studies.
Helmut Thielicke writes in one of his books, "A person who pursues theology, but does not read God's word is spiritually sick." Theology can be a sacred theology or a diabolical theology. Whether theology becomes the latter or former depends on the hands and hearts of those who pursue it. Theology deals primarily with life. It is not a dusty collection of abstract ideas, but a language. It is a language spoken in the second person. Intellect and knowledge are transformed into the language of the heart through an intimate relationship with God. It is a dialogue with God, not about God.
I find myself being fascinated with abstract ideas and complex issues within theology. They excite me, energizing my pursuit of God. However, I am slowly beginning to understand that knowledge is not faith. There is, as Thielicke puts it, "a hiatus between actual spiritual growth and what one knows." Many of the truths I have learned are inherited from another man's primary experiences. They are my reflections upon another believer's faith, thus secondary. We should not confuse secondary truth, that which is not primary experience, with genuine faith. We adopt the intellectual/spiritual reflections of other believers and create the illusion as if we understand in a primary way. It is only a conceptual experience. Instead, genuine faith is habit. It is only when we habitually practice what is learned do we grow into spiritual maturity. Thielicke warns us not to assume we believe whatever impresses us theologically or enlightens us intellectually. Here lies the subtle danger of believing in a theologian or one of your teachers instead of Jesus Christ. Every theological idea which makes an impression on you must be regarded as a challenge to your faith. Secondary truth becomes primary only when the intellect is absorbed by the human heart.
Before being learned, a minister must be godly. Studying theology is not just a religious duty, but, as Warfield puts it, "an active pursuit to make God known, to bring the student in the presence of God and keep him there." There is something wrong with both the spiritual student who does not study and the student who studies with a secular spirit, depriving God of the worship he deserves. We must war against the secular spirit in fear of becoming cold and callous to the divine. Familiarity mutes the voice of God and hardens the heart to feeling. The gospel becomes a mere series of historical facts and a source of philosophical curiosity. A student of theology, along with every believer, needs to habitually combine prayer with work. All too many believers work and study without praying. They have traded work or knowledge for knowing Christ. Doing things for God is not the same as being with him. Work and study dissociated from prayer does not bring us closer to God, instead, it divorces us from intimate fellowship with our Savior. God desires for us to be constantly abiding with him. Men often pray with selfish motives and render prayer useless. We should not view prayer as a means of gaining the blessings of God without the relationship. True prayer is perfect community and union with God. It is our connection to the source. Prayer is the vaccine that makes us immune to “diabolical” theology, a heart that is cold, void of feeling and imprisoned by the language of the third person.
Helmut Thielicke writes in one of his books, "A person who pursues theology, but does not read God's word is spiritually sick." Theology can be a sacred theology or a diabolical theology. Whether theology becomes the latter or former depends on the hands and hearts of those who pursue it. Theology deals primarily with life. It is not a dusty collection of abstract ideas, but a language. It is a language spoken in the second person. Intellect and knowledge are transformed into the language of the heart through an intimate relationship with God. It is a dialogue with God, not about God.
I find myself being fascinated with abstract ideas and complex issues within theology. They excite me, energizing my pursuit of God. However, I am slowly beginning to understand that knowledge is not faith. There is, as Thielicke puts it, "a hiatus between actual spiritual growth and what one knows." Many of the truths I have learned are inherited from another man's primary experiences. They are my reflections upon another believer's faith, thus secondary. We should not confuse secondary truth, that which is not primary experience, with genuine faith. We adopt the intellectual/spiritual reflections of other believers and create the illusion as if we understand in a primary way. It is only a conceptual experience. Instead, genuine faith is habit. It is only when we habitually practice what is learned do we grow into spiritual maturity. Thielicke warns us not to assume we believe whatever impresses us theologically or enlightens us intellectually. Here lies the subtle danger of believing in a theologian or one of your teachers instead of Jesus Christ. Every theological idea which makes an impression on you must be regarded as a challenge to your faith. Secondary truth becomes primary only when the intellect is absorbed by the human heart.
Before being learned, a minister must be godly. Studying theology is not just a religious duty, but, as Warfield puts it, "an active pursuit to make God known, to bring the student in the presence of God and keep him there." There is something wrong with both the spiritual student who does not study and the student who studies with a secular spirit, depriving God of the worship he deserves. We must war against the secular spirit in fear of becoming cold and callous to the divine. Familiarity mutes the voice of God and hardens the heart to feeling. The gospel becomes a mere series of historical facts and a source of philosophical curiosity. A student of theology, along with every believer, needs to habitually combine prayer with work. All too many believers work and study without praying. They have traded work or knowledge for knowing Christ. Doing things for God is not the same as being with him. Work and study dissociated from prayer does not bring us closer to God, instead, it divorces us from intimate fellowship with our Savior. God desires for us to be constantly abiding with him. Men often pray with selfish motives and render prayer useless. We should not view prayer as a means of gaining the blessings of God without the relationship. True prayer is perfect community and union with God. It is our connection to the source. Prayer is the vaccine that makes us immune to “diabolical” theology, a heart that is cold, void of feeling and imprisoned by the language of the third person.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)