We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.

dove-pigeon-innocence-purity-jpg

Knowing and Experiencing God

The way we view God is in part conditioned by the state of our minds and hearts. Origen put it this way: “[T]he Holy Spirit addresses our nature in a manner appropriate to its imperfection, only as far as it is capable of listening.”[1] In fact, Origen went so far as to argue that the way Jesus’ contemporaries viewed him was conditioned to some degree by the state of their soul. In other words, for Origen, it wasn’t only after the resurrection that people viewed Jesus according to their spiritual capacities.

Many patristic fathers subsequently appropriated the insight that we experience God’s revelation according to our spiritual capacities. In fact, this concept has in one form or another factored into the theology of almost all of the Church’s chief theologians, playing an especially strong role in those who have been influenced by the principal “like is known by like.”

This principal has been articulated and defended in recent times by T. F. Torrance who discerns in it in the way that human knowledge works in general. He writes:

All genuine knowledge involves a cognitive union of the mind with its object, and calls for the removal of any estrangement or alienation that may obstruct or distort it. This is a principle that applies to all spheres of knowledge, and not simply to our knowledge of God.[2]

Speaking specifically of our knowledge of God, Torrance writes:

The closer people draw near to God, the more integrated their spiritual and physical existence becomes, and the more integrated their spiritual and physical existence becomes, the closer they may draw near to God in mind and being in ways that are worthy of him.[3]

The converse is also true, however. The more estranged people are from God, the more their knowledge of him is obstructed and distorted. In this sense, we must acknowledge an important element of truth to Ludwig Feuerbach’s famous proclamation that humans make God in our own image. While I would of course reject his claim that God is nothing but a projection of humans, I think it is biblical and reasonable to concede that the way individuals and groups conceive of and experience God reflects the spiritual condition of their heart (along with a number of other factors, such as their psychological make up and their cultural conditioning).

In light of this, I’d like to suggest that we think of our conception and experience of God along the lines of a Rorschach test. That is, I submit that the way we imagine and experience God says at least as much about us as it does God. When we yield to the Spirit, we are empowered to discern the true glory of God “in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Cor 4:6). While we must always acknowledge that until the consummation of the age we can see only through a dim glass (I Cor 13:12), it is the revelation of God in the crucified Christ that must function as the ultimate criteria by which we assess the extent to which any conception and experience of God is accurate or inaccurate.

Hence, to the extent that our conception and experience of God conforms to the character of God revealed on the cross, we may conclude that the Spirit has managed to break through our limited and fallen hearts and minds. But to the extent that our conception or experience of God fails to conform to this character, we must conclude that our limited and fallen hearts and minds have resisted the Spirit.

This leads us to a crucial question: How is the spiritual condition of your heart influencing your ability to see and experience the truth of God as revealed on the cross?

[1] Fragment on Ps.11:4, in J.B. Pitra, ed., Analecta Sacra Spicilegio Solesmensi (Tusculum: xxx, 1884) II, 465.

[2] T. F. Torrance, Mediation of Christ (Colorado Springs, CO: Helmers & Howard, 1992), 24-25.

[3] Mediation, 26.

Photo via flosca via VisualHunt.com

Related Reading

The Most Beautiful Truth

Jesus was God incarnate. Yet he continually referred to, and prayed to, God the Father as someone who was distinct from himself. He also continually referred to, and claimed to be empowered by, God the Holy Spirit as someone distinct from himself. And yet Jesus, along with all Jews of his time, believed there is…

Topics:

Thankful for the Passion of God

The classical view of God has held that God is impassible, meaning he is above pathos (passion or emotions). The main reason the church came to this view was that, following the Hellenistic philosophical tradition, they associated emotions with change while believing God was above all change (immutable). Moreover, experiencing emotions implies that one is affected by…

Greg’s Response to Driscoll’s “Is God a Pacifist” Part III

This is the last of a three-part response to Mark Driscoll’s post, “Is God a Pacifist?” We’ve seen that, to prove that Jesus was not “a pansy or a pacifist” (meaning that Jesus was okay with justified killing), Mark Driscoll skips over what Jesus actually taught and modeled in the Gospels and instead appeals to…

Podcast: How Does God Influence Us?

Greg discusses the problem with speculating on HOW God interacts in the world.  http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0265.mp3

A Guide to the Book of Revelation

Marc Nozell via Compfight Kurt Willems posted this excellent guide for reading the Book of Revelation as it was intended to be read. As Kurt points out, this is the most misunderstood and misinterpreted book of the Bible. If you were weaned on A Thief in the Night or the Left Behind series of books,…

Christus Victor Atonement and Girard’s Scapegoat Theory

Many of the major criticisms of Crucifixion of the Warrior God that have been raised since it was published four weeks ago have come from folks who advocate Rene Girard’s understanding of the atonement. A major place where these matters are being discussed is here, and you are free to join. Now, I have to…