Integrating Missionally

My previous two posts (here and here) looked at what many philosophers deem to be a special kind of knowledge, one which is the basis for the standard view of knowledge. It is called propositional knowledge. Here is a short recap.

Propositional knowledge requires three conditions. Propositional knowledge requires truth. You cannot know something unless it is true. It is never right to say, “He knows it but it is false!”. That lacks complete logic. You cannot know that George Jetson was the first man to step foot on the moon. The reason you cannot know that is because the facts indicate that Neil Armstrong was the first person to step foot on the moon. You know a proposition only if it is true. What we must now deal with is an understanding about what it is for something to be true. The simple and widely accepted answer to this is contained within the correspondence theory of truth.

Correspondence theories claim that true beliefs and true statements correspond to the actual state of affairs. This type of theory attempts to posit a relationship between thoughts or statements on the one hand, and things or facts on the other. It is a traditional model which goes back at least to some of the classical Greek philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. This class of theories holds that the truth or the falsity of a representation is determined solely by how it relates to a reality; that is, by whether it accurately describes that reality.] Additionally, a “proposition is true if and only if it corresponds to the facts. A proposition is false if it fails to correspond to the facts.”

A second condition for propositional knowledge is belief. If you know something, you must believe it or accept it. Belief in this case is being used in a broad sense. Any time you take something to be true, you believe it. This includes hesitant acceptance as well as fully confident acceptance. If you do not even think something is true, then you do not know it. In addition, it must be stated that you can believe something without it being true, having the facts to support it. Propositional knowledge requires belief, but belief does not require truth.

Philosophers also say that a third condition for knowledge is justification for the belief. What justification amounts to is of considerable debate. Justification is something that comes in degrees, meaning that you can have more or less justification. In addition, you can be justified in believing something without actually believing it.

The modern church has adopted propositionalism as the basis for understanding truth and knowledge within the context of Christianity. The Bible is understood propositionally. Belief is understood propositionally.

In the context of Christianity, however, we must deem propositionalism desperately lacking. In fact, Christians cannot beholden our knowledge of God in a propositional manner. Here’s why. By definition, propositional knowledge must contain verifiable facts. Does the scripture have facts? Yes, indeed. It is a fact, propositionally, that David was a king in Judah. It is a fact, propositionally, that Solomon was a very wealthy king of Judah. It is a fact, propositionally, that Jesus lived and a fact, propositionally, that Jesus died. It is not a fact, propositionally however, that Jesus walked on water. Though I believe that He did, it is not provable or factual.

The basics of our faith are not factual, propositionally; they are beliefs. We cannot factually verify that Jesus walked on water. We cannot factually verify that it was an angel of death who killed all the first-born of Egypt in Exodus. We cannot factually verify many of the miracles of scripture. They are beliefs, not facts.

However, to equate truth as propositional means that we must deal with truth through the lens of an epistemologically propositional framework. To do so destroys our Faith.

Does that mean that there is no truth? No. Does that mean that there is not such a thing as absolute truth? No. I believe in truth and in absolute truth, which is found only in a relationship with Jesus Christ. Yet to define knowledge and truth through one particular framework means that we have to take the good and bad that framework brings. For a Christian, propositionalism cannot work.

The second implication for the church is that propositionalism potentially distorts the gospel. Belief in a propositional framework is used in a broad sense. Any time you take something to be true, you believe it. This includes hesitant acceptance as well as fully confident acceptance. In addition, it must be stated that you can believe something without it being true, having the facts to support it. Propositional knowledge requires belief, but belief does not require truth. To adopt the gospel with hesitant acceptance and equate that to the biblical definition of belief distorts what it means to believe in Jesus Christ. Belief in Christ is not an acceptance of facts It is a emotional, mental, and physical response to the calling of God upon a person’s life. If even the demons “believe” and are still bound to an eternity in Hell, then belief has to be more than acceptance of facts; it is a movement towards God as a response to God’s calling.

The framework that best exemplifies biblical truth and biblical salvation, then, is a relational framework. Salvation is a response to Jesus wooing us relationally. Truth, biblical truth, is found only in a relationship with Jesus and the revelation of the Spirit (I Cor 2:14). Therefore knowledge and truth are best described as relational, not propositional.

Popularity: 10% [?]

Layers of Experiences Can Create our Identity

Transformation is an identity marker for a Christ-follower. That transformation is evidenced by the transformation of our daily practices in life, which for Paul is the utmost expression of worship.

Romans 12:1 indicates that all of life’s daily practices are an expression of worship. Christ followers are to present their whole nature, every aspect of life, in a sacrificial expression to God. This implies all of our experiences and interactions with creation. But those daily practices are formed in some manner. How they are formed is a reflection of our identity.

This formation happens both externally and internally. Formation happens externally through the schemas and programs of this world. The behaviors of others imprint upon us the patterns of behavior. These schemas can be positive or negative. Each of these external behaviors work to form our understanding of self. Experiences also contribute these running programs. Both negative and positive experiences add additional layers to our programming. Our understanding of self is enhanced or degraded based on these experiences.

It is out of these schemas and programs that not only are our understanding of self is formed, but this understanding forms our identity. Our identity is a reflection on how we perceive others think of us. If we perceive that others think of us as the smart person in the room, we may push ourselves to know a lot of information about a lot of topics so that we can maintain our perceived identity. Of course, often we have to let others know that we know a lot of information about a lot of topics, so then we are perceived as a know-it-all. Regardless, our behavior is an understanding of our identity.

Paul urges us to not let the external factors form us. Our identity, and thus our behavior, are to be transformed internally through the God who created us. It is an internal metamorphosis, It is accomplished through the transformative power of Gospel and the work of the Spirit in our lives. The Spirit converges experiences, relationships and the Gospel to bring healing to our emotions, which in turn brings transformation to our thoughts. We are able to control our thoughts when our emotional memory is healed. The schema of the world, which has imprinted painful experiences and thoughts upon us, is healed and transformed so that we think about ourselves differently than in times past. A different understanding of who we are reveals the transformation in identity. This transformation will produce different behaviors, more in line with the one who created us. Our identity, now defined by the Spirit, allows us to live out who we were created to be and in doing so, we accomplish the well-pleasing will of the one who created us. It also leads to a wholeness and peace in life.

Popularity: 4% [?]

A painting by my good friend Sam Raynor, who also does book cover designs for Missional Press. Pneumanaut is the combination of two words: pneuma, meaning Spirit, and naut, as in astro-naut or one who rides the stars. So pneumanaut is one who rides the Spirit, letting the Spirit take us, unfettered and uncontrolled.

Popularity: 1% [?]

This weekend my wife and I went out to dinner with a couple from our church. The wife noted that our last two worship gatherings felt more like a Friends Meeting than a Baptist worship service. Some in her family were Friends (Quakers) and she had been to several meetings. She noted this because I’ve started talking about the Spiritual Disciplines in worship. When we discussed meditation we actually took time in worship to meditate on scripture, re-write it in our own words, look for application and then pray over it. Twenty minutes of silence occurred while all that happened. In our worship gathering this weekend, we talked about prayer and so we actually took time as a corporate body to pray, and we ended with a big prayer meeting.

So I in this conversation I got to learn from her all about a Friends Meeting. It was quite fascinating and unique. Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: 3% [?]

How did God speak to people and let them know what he wanted them to do? This was a question I was asked recently and so I went through the book of Acts to try to answer this question.

I went to Acts because it was of a similar time period that we live culturally and because Jesus had ascended and given us the Holy Spirit as a direction and guide. I also chose Acts because of the time frame that it covers, thirty or more years of birth and movement of the early church.

What I discovered was absolutely amazing. It’s not what I thought I would find. It was quite disturbing to me as I considered how people normally look for direction from God.

My process was to look at each time a Christ-follower or group of Christ-followers made a decision. I then broadly categorized them and will use an example from scripture of each. The breakdown shows the following:

1. Visions, Trances, and Dreams – Acts 10:3-16
2. Wisdom and Common Sense – Acts 15:19-22
3. Inner Voice – Acts 16:1-10
4. Visitations from God or his Messengers – Acts 23:11

Contrary to what I thought I would find, wisdom and common sense appeared, in my judgment, in only one passage, possibly two. This does not take into account implicit decisions about which boat to take or whether or not to talk about Christ, only opportunities presented in Acts where a decision was made and it was stated that it came from God.

I was taught in seminary that the introduction to Acts was implying that Acts was the continuation of the ministry of Jesus. It says in verse 1:

In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach…(1:1, ESV)

The first book was what Jesus began to do and teach and the second (Acts) is what Jesus is continuing to do and teach, now through the Holy Spirit.

Two things must be noted. If the above statement is true, and since both persons are God and would be consistent, then it appears the ministry of the Spirit, in Acts, and Jesus, in Luke, occur through signs. Inherently this is true. The way Jesus described his ministry was through signs. In Luke 4, Luke tells us of how Jesus introduced himself and his ministry to the people in the synagogue. It says:

16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. And as was his custom, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and he stood up to read. 17 And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written,

18 “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives
and recovering of sight to the blind,
to set at liberty those who are oppressed,
19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.“

Luke 4:16-19, ESV

Jesus told the people what his ministry was about not by saying he was the Messiah. He told them through signs. “Here is what my ministry is about: healing, freedom, liberty…” These were signs of the Messiah, indications that the Messiah had come.

In Acts, most of God directives were pronounced through the use of visions, dreams and visitations. Again, these were signs of the rule and kingdom of God from Joel 2:28-32 that Peter picked up in his Pentecost sermon in Acts 2.

Jesus chided the religious leaders in Matthew 16:1-4 that they could not read the signs that had already been given. We have fallen into the same hole.

Popularity: 5% [?]