Yesterday I had a wonderful conversation with Thomas for the Something Beautiful podcast. Today, a subsequent Twitter conversation and unrelated post by Greg Bolt on the nature of the boundaries of a church body lead me to focus on the same question: where is God revealed and how can we incorporate that into our religious social structures.
The model of Christendom is that God is specially revealed in specific religious structures and social systems – the denominations. This paradigm ignores that God can also be revealed in systems that have nothing or very little to do with traditional religious structures within Christendom. Essentially, if you want to participate in the life of God, receive forgiveness, salvation, etc., you had better get your butt in church. Even though there is a movement away from this notion, that God can only be revealed and received within specific denominational social structures, it is still assumed and perhaps insisted that as long as you are some sort of Christian church or other named social space or community, you are doing the job of revealing God in the right way.
What this does not take into account is that the very source of a church's revelation, the grace of God which we receive by following the way of Jesus, is formed in a ministry that revealed God to all of those outside of the bounds of the normative religious structures, social spaces, and religious social systems of the time. In parable after parable, and confrontation after confrontation with religious and political authorities, Jesus has reveals a clear and common thread: when the Kingdom of God is revealed, it is revealed everywhere to everyone. Jesus reveals a Kingdom, a community and socio-political system, completely radical to all social systems of the time. The only fault of the religious authorities is that they are so bound to the system of revelation that they received, that they do not see God revealed fully in their very presence in Jesus.
I have been asked many times by atheists why I don't believe in unicorns, Zeus, or follow Allah revealed through Muhammad if I cannot actually prove any of it, much less why I specifically believe in Jesus. My answer is that this revelation of God, in Jesus Christ, makes sense to me, it forms a lifeworld I understand, it is a set of traditions that I hold dear because they have made me the person I am, and it offers me a source of spiritual nourishment. If Jesus is the special and unique revelation of God, that makes sense to me. In short, Jesus works.
I believe that every human being is born with a unique sense of the spiritual and is born with a unique ability to receive God. I also believe that God is so beyond our physical limitations – our churches, our traditions, our cultures, and the existence of space and time – that there is no place within the entire set of space and time that was and is out of the reach of God's resurrection in Christ. In Christ space and time were healed from the great rift that space and time create between the human ability to receive God, and the being of God itself.
To say that God can only be received or even fully received within a specific tradition betrays the very ministry through which Jesus reveals to us the Kingdom of God. That the two greatest commandments are love of God and love of neighbor are not limited to the Abrahamic traditions alone is witness to the reality that God is revealed in every corner of the universe, in every hidden place where we delude ourselves and convince ourselves that God cannot possibly be. The narrow gate of Christ is thus a paradox since it rips open all space and all time to show that God invites all into a Kingdom that is being revealed literally everywhere. The beauty we only need to receive it.
Related posts:
I agree with you, my push back would be are there places where you can't see god but others can?
If that is the case then there are places/communities that we (I) don't belong (based on our own self-selection), which was the point of my post…I think?
i think that there are places where other see god but i cannot – yet. i have seen that in people in other religious traditions. but that does not mean that i now belong in a buddhist community or a pentecostal community. my point is that our spiritual home is part of a journey as we develop in our faith. we cannot lock the door to our religious homes, but have to keep them unlocked and get out to explore as we are able. home is where you can put your feet up, but that does not mean that you will never move if god calls you somewhere else.
I'm with you man!
You are so right and that was very well stated. I have always found it strangely ironic that a religion that pays homage to Jesus, who defied institutional authority and turned doctrinaire thinking on its head, became so enmeshed in its own institutional hierarchies and rigid doctrinaire thinking. A classic case of "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Drew Tatusko, Drew Tatusko. Drew Tatusko said: new post: god is revealed where god is hidden http://bit.ly/28xfcp #outlawpreachers #fb [...]
Rev. Tatusko,
I am not following either your supposition or conclusion.
Could you explain to me how you begin with this "The model of Christendom is that God is specially revealed in specific religious structures and social systems – the denominations. " Where is "sola Scriptura" in this? Or are you somehow conflating and subsuming the Catholic view of special revelation in Scripture and in church tradition as the two pillars? You also seem to combine both General and Special revelation or do you not see any distinction between the two?
Is General Revelation therefore salvific in your view?
actually not a rev., but working on it
i think that the idea of sola scriptura is good, but with severe qualification:
1) put the phrase in context. this was a way for the reformers to separate themselves from the papacy by subscribing to an alternative authority structure. of course even then it became colored by the various traditions that popped up out of the reformation. i don't for a second subscribe to it as an absolute to govern the church due to its origins or its inherent fallibility. nonetheless i think it's a good idea to check against our authority structures.
2) it is never scripture alone, but scripture as legitimated through a given traditional authoritative interpretation of it. sola scriptura is always through the medium of a tradition which is why we will always have disputes and have had them since the reformation. by critiquing the social boundaries of tradition i am, by default, critiquing the way that sola scriptura actually has reinforced traditional boundaries. either one of them is right and the rest are damned, or all of them are flawed. evidence points to the latter and if so, god is revealed in far more places than "the church."
general revelation can be salvific, but does not do much if one has no clue what it is. then again, i am not sure many christians understand what it really means. baptism should be followed by teaching for this reason.
Rev. Tatusko,
I am not following either your supposition or conclusion.
Could you explain to me how you begin with this "The model of Christendom is that God is specially revealed in specific religious structures and social systems – the denominations. " Where is "sola Scriptura" in this? Or are you somehow conflating and subsuming the Catholic view of special revelation in Scripture and in church tradition as the two pillars? You also seem to combine both General and Special revelation or do you not see any distinction between the two?
Is General Revelation therefore salvific in your view?
actually not a rev., but working on it
i think that the idea of sola scriptura is good, but with severe qualification:
1) put the phrase in context. this was a way for the reformers to separate themselves from the papacy by subscribing to an alternative authority structure. of course even then it became colored by the various traditions that popped up out of the reformation. i don't for a second subscribe to it as an absolute to govern the church due to its origins or its inherent fallibility. nonetheless i think it's a good idea to check against our authority structures.
2) it is never scripture alone, but scripture as legitimated through a given traditional authoritative interpretation of it. sola scriptura is always through the medium of a tradition which is why we will always have disputes and have had them since the reformation. by critiquing the social boundaries of tradition i am, by default, critiquing the way that sola scriptura actually has reinforced traditional boundaries. either one of them is right and the rest are damned, or all of them are flawed. evidence points to the latter and if so, god is revealed in far more places than "the church."
general revelation can be salvific, but does not do much if one has no clue what it is. then again, i am not sure many christians understand what it really means. baptism should be followed by teaching for this reason.
[...] few weeks ago I posted that God is revealed where God is hidden. God is revealed not only in our religious structures, but outside of them as well. However, I [...]