Below is a blog post I came across in class: It's certainly interesting, discussing the relationship between "relationship" and theological forms, doctrines, or ideas. Below this post is a selection from C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity.
Enjoy.
Blog Post
Relationship, not Religion
Over the past year and a half, I've enjoyed a running email conversation with Tamara Cissna, a friend in Portland who's trying to wrap her soul around postmodern faith like Susan and I are trying to do. Early in our conversation, she said she was struggling to grasp a Christianity that "works", but she had trouble articulating exactly what she meant.
Last Friday, she sent a link to a news report about a Leonard Sweet-visit to Baylor University. Leonard is one of the revolutionary evangelical thinkers and writers regarding Christianity, the Church, and postmodernism. In the report, Sweet said...
...The Roman governor Pilate was the first postmodernist because he asked Jesus a "fundamental postmodernist" question: "What is truth?"
All of Christianity hinges on the answer, {Sweet} suggested.
"Truth is Jesus," Sweet said. "This is the uniqueness of Christianity in all of the religions of the world. Every other religion defines truth in propositional terms."
All other prophets and spiritual leaders told adherents to follow their teachings to find the way to enlightenment, Sweet said, but Jesus was the "only one who had chutzpah to announce to the whole world 'I am the way.' Truth is a relationship."
"Truth is a relationship." That's what Tamara meant by a faith that "works."
I love this, and the article it came from. I think Tamara's exactly right, and what Sweet says resonates deeply with most postmodern Christians I know. Susan and I were raised and indoctrinated into thinking that Christianity was propositional truths, systematic theology, proof-texts, and outlines with fancy alliterations.
But now I think we got kind of a cheated. We missed the grand narrative of God's story and the fact that we're living in the midst of a big love story -- it's about a love relationship, not bullet points and Bible Studies. And that's a faith I find a lot sexier than learning a bunch of stuff about God. I'd rather live an adventure with God - and to me, that's the heart of this thing we call Christianity.
Ok, this is Phil again. A couple of thoughts:
1. "it's about a love relationship, not bullet points and Bible Studies..." - It shouldn't be a choice. We should never have to make a choice for or against relationship or studying about God. In fact, studying about God affects our heart, moves our emotions and grows our relationship with God.
2. It is inescapable that God chose to reveal himself in propositional terms, i.e. the Bible. That is the only way we can learn about an infinite, eternal being, as finite and fallen creatures.
3. He uses modernistic forms of argument to justify his postmodern view of a relationship with Christ.
Alright, in our class we came acros this selection from Mere Christianity from the great C.S. Lewis. For me, it's the greatest answer to this whole, relationship vs. propositional truth. He words it perfectly:
I remember once when I had been giving a talk to the R.A.F. (Royal Air Force), an old, hard-bitten officer got up and said, "I've no use for all that stuff. But, mind you, I'm a religious man too. I know there's a God. I've felt Him: out alone in the desert at night: the tremendous mystery. And that's just why I don't believe all your neat little dogmas and formulas about Him. To anyone who's met the real thing they all seem so petty and pedantic and unreal!"
Now in a sense I quite agreed with that man. I think he had probably had a real experience of God in the desert. And when he turned from that experience to the Christian creeds, I think he really was turning from something real to something less real. In the same way, if a man has once looked at the Atlantic from the beach, and then goes and looks at a map of the Atlantic , he also will be turning from something real to something less real: turning from real waves to a bit of coloured paper. But here comes the point. The map is admittedly only coloured paper, but there are two things you have to remember about it. In the first place, it is based on what hundreds and thousands of people have found out by sailing the real Atlantic. In that way it has behind it masses of experience just as real as the one you could have from the beach; only, while yours would be a single glimpse, the map fits all those different experiences together. In the second place, if you want to go anywhere, the map is absolutely necessary. As long as you are content with walks on the beach, your own glimpses are far more fun than looking at a map. But the map is going to be more use than walks on the beach if you want to go to America.
