Evidence for God from Science

I'm pretty regular on facebook putting up thoughts in my Christian Walk as well as quotes that I love. Here's one I found today from Brennan Manning in "The Ragamuffin Gospel"

Brennan is a Catholic Priest who is a recovering alcoholic. He has a beautiful meditational and mystical bent (in a good way) to much of his writings. There are times when he absolutely floors me with some of his insight. Here's the Quote:

"The Word we study has to be the Word we pray. My personal experience of the relentless tenderness of God came not from exegetes, theologians, and spiritual writers, but from sitting still in the presence of the living Word and beseeching Him to help me understand with my head and heart His written Word. Sheer scholarship alone cannot reveal to us the gospel of grace. We must never allow the authority of books, institutions, or leaders to replace the authority of *knowing* Jesus Christ personally and directly. When the religious views of others interpose between us and the primary experience of Jesus as the Christ, we become unconvicted and unpersuasive travel agents handing out brochures to places we have never visited."

Some may feel uncomfortable with this. Note however he's not saying that knowlege, study and exegesis are not beneficial or good in their place and priority. He's saying that there's a "knowing" that goes beyond it. The greek word that often expresses this in the NT is "ginosko".

Anyway, this one especially stood out to me and I thought I would share it here as well.

blessings,

bart

I've been reading that too! Picked it up about a month ago and have really enjoyed it. I think he definitely gets at something that is easily missed when people make their faith into a mental exercise: That Jesus is knowable and we can have a relationship with Him.

Brennan is "real."

Sometimes he gets out on a limb and some tangents, but when read in context and understanding, I really appreciate him and have gained a lot from him.

as long as, as so many times when the pendulum swings, we don't give up one for the other. I would say, for the vast majority of the church in America at least, we need to apply our minds more than our emotions.

I see this as many "student-teacher" type of interactions, where, for instance, the student artist wonders why the professional artist gets to "let go of the rules" and simply paint what he or she considers easy art. When the professional has studied and studied and understands the rules. I think it is perhaps easier for you to espouse this, since you are so educated you are in less danger of falling for false prophets or beliefs. But for someone who is an infant in Christ, their feelings when they meditate can easily lead them down an "Oprah" theology, which certainly feels good and sounds great and wonderful.

That's only an analogy, of course, and the understanding in CHrist is much more significant than a student artist. Just so long as we are encouraging understanding the word as well as cultivating the relationship and the meditation, I agree with his points.

We can mistake "knowledge about God" as being "knowledge of God", but we can also make the mistake of trying to separate the two. The common evangelical mantra "doctrine don't matter, just love Jesus" just does not pan out. We cannot rightly claim to know God if we refuse to learn about God, especially as He is revealed in His Word. That would be like claiming to love my wife, yet refusing to learn anything about her. The Word has to transcend even our personal experiences. (Oprah "experiences" a god). Doctrine matters, and our experiences of God must align with how He is revealed in His Word.

Everybody has a theology (even RIchard Dawkins). The question is whether the theology is a good theology or a bad theology.

puritan lad wrote:We can mistake "knowledge about God" as being "knowledge of God", but we can also make the mistake of trying to separate the two. The common evangelical mantra "doctrine don't matter, just love Jesus" just does not pan out. We cannot rightly claim to know God if we refuse to learn about God, especially as He is revealed in His Word. That would be like claiming to love my wife, yet refusing to learn anything about her. The Word has to transcend even our personal experiences. (Oprah "experiences" a god). Doctrine matters, and our experiences of God must align with how He is revealed in His Word.

Everybody has a theology (even RIchard Dawkins). The question is whether the theology is a good theology or a bad theology.

With all due respect PL, it appears to me that your statement dichotomizes things to all or nothing statements contrasted against one another rather than synthesizes and you're reading elements into the quote that are in my opinion and observation not there. I'll take the experientially extended Love and life-giving Grace of God over an automaton academic dissecting of text any day. They are not mutually exclusive and in my past anyway, if I've erred anywhere it's been on the academic side and I need and appreciate the balance this quote gives.

That's just my experience though .... Your milage may vary and that's fine. You are who you are and I am who I am.

puritan lad wrote:We can mistake "knowledge about God" as being "knowledge of God", but we can also make the mistake of trying to separate the two. The common evangelical mantra "doctrine don't matter, just love Jesus" just does not pan out. We cannot rightly claim to know God if we refuse to learn about God, especially as He is revealed in His Word. That would be like claiming to love my wife, yet refusing to learn anything about her. The Word has to transcend even our personal experiences. (Oprah "experiences" a god). Doctrine matters, and our experiences of God must align with how He is revealed in His Word.

Everybody has a theology (even RIchard Dawkins). The question is whether the theology is a good theology or a bad theology.

I do not think Bart is stating what you stated above but pointing out that cold dogma alone cannot reach God either - that's all. Doctrine serves as a tool to understand God and aids growth – no one is denying this.

Doctrine provides venues of light to aid understanding in ones walk with the Lord growing from grace to grace in the light shown and protecting us from errors. However, doctrine alone produces much darkness causing blindness to seem dogmatic light. (Luke 11:35)

Many Christian's always ask – “why is my walk with the Lord cold - non-living - I know the bible and doctrine but my walk - weak - where is God?”

“And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.” John 17:3 - NKJV

Why so little faith that the Lord will carry out his own word?

John 17:20-23, "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; 21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22 And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one 23 I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me...."-
-
-

Canuckster1127 wrote:With all due respect PL, it appears to me that your statement dichotomizes things to all or nothing statements contrasted against one another..

Is that what I did, or did I say that they go together?

puritan lad wrote:

Canuckster1127 wrote:With all due respect PL, it appears to me that your statement dichotomizes things to all or nothing statements contrasted against one another..

Is that what I did, or did I say that they go together?

Show me where you said they go together and then contrast that with the rest of your statement.

Canuckster1127 wrote:Show me where you said they go together and then contrast that with the rest of your statement.

puritan lad wrote:We can mistake "knowledge about God" as being "knowledge of God", but we can also make the mistake of trying to separate the two.

puritan lad wrote:The common evangelical mantra "doctrine don't matter, just love Jesus" just does not pan out. We cannot rightly claim to know God if we refuse to learn about God, especially as He is revealed in His Word. That would be like claiming to love my wife, yet refusing to learn anything about her.

puritan lad wrote:The Word has to transcend even our personal experiences. (Oprah "experiences" a god). Doctrine matters, and our experiences of God must align with how He is revealed in His Word.

Al of these statements suggest that the Love of God and the Knowledge about God go hand in hand. We are to love God with our minds as well as our hearts, souls and strength. In contrast it is you who wrote...

Canuckster1127 wrote:I'll take the experientially extended Love and life-giving Grace of God over an automaton academic dissecting of text any day

Don't want to read too much here, but this approach is dangerous. It seems to suggest that external spiritual experiences are more worthwhile than Scripture (or at least the studying of Scripture), treating the study about God in Scripture as optional.

No such implication is present. Academic, cerebral, dissecting of text, doctrine without a personal, experiential Knowlege (ginosko) of Christ is no better than the opposite extreme that you address. What were the characteristics of those whom Jesus chastised the most in his ministry? Were the Pharisees criticized for not studying enough and expounding upon scriptures or were they chastised because their outward facade hid a dead, dry and lifeless interior?

John 36“I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the very work that the Father has given me to finish, and which I am doing, testifies that the Father has sent me. 37And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, 38nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent. 39You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, 40yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

(interesting that apparently Jesus wasn't a Calvinist in terms of election in this particular instance either .....) How can they refuse what they cannot choose?

Canuckster1127 wrote:Were the Pharisees criticized for not studying enough and expounding upon scriptures or were they chastised because their outward facade hid a dead, dry and lifeless interior?

Both.

"But Jesus answered them, "You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God." (Matthew 22:29)

"and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe the one whom he has sent. You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me," (John 5:38-39)

Canuckster1127 wrote:(interesting that apparently Jesus wasn't a Calvinist in terms of election in this particular instance either .....) How can they refuse what they cannot choose?

I don't see election in this passage. In any case, I thought that you wanted to avoid this debate (sometimes we can't help ourselves), but since you brought it up:

"but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock." (John 10:26)

"because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given" (Matthew 13:10-11).

"lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them" (Matthew 13:15).

"were disobedient to the word, to which they were appointed" (1 Peter 2:8).

Why? "..even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight" (Luke 10:21).

There is nothing at all I disagree with when I read that quote. We must be able to experience God in His word as His word and know His word.

I guess my worry was in imperfectly applying this concept and communicating this concept. Always when we start to say to people "we should do x or should do y" the danger is in people interpreting it as "only x and less y" or vice versa.

In a time when sometimes the American church is steeped in emotionalism and we fail at knowing scripture, that was my only concern, that this would be wrongly interpreted.

zoegirl wrote:There is nothing at all I disagree with when I read that quote. We must be able to experience God in His word as His word and know His word.

I guess my worry was in imperfectly applying this concept and communicating this concept. Always when we start to say to people "we should do x or should do y" the danger is in people interpreting it as "only x and less y" or vice versa.

In a time we sometimes the American church us steeped in emotionalism and we fail at knowing scripture, that was my only concern, that this would be wrongly interpreted.

No worries. There's danger even in good things. Aslan is not a tame Lion.

lol, yeah...that's true