Biblical Theology
[Here is
the Introduction to
The
Six Pillars of
Biblical Power: Real Theology
for the Grass Roots,
© 2008 John C.
Rankin]
____________________________________________
Introduction
The Power to Give or
the Power to Take?
“There are two
choices in life:
Give and it will be
given, or take
before you are
taken.”
I spoke these
words spontaneously,
in the context of
marriage, while
addressing an
audience of some 550
people at Smith
College in
Northampton,
Massachusetts. It
was November of
1994, during one of
my series of Mars
Hill Forums. My
guest was Patricia
Ireland, then
President of the
National
Organization for
Women (NOW).
I know of nothing
in the depths of
human experience
that is not fully
interpreted by this
reality. And it is
above all a question
of power.
What is power? It
is the ability to
accomplish a desired
outcome. The power
to give will do that
for any healthy
goal. But the power
to take before you
are taken will only
devolve into
self-destruction. It
is ultimately
impotent, and equals
the inability to
attain any desired
outcome.
Biblical Theology
The foundational
reality of the power
to give is the
starting point of
biblical theology,
and for the six
pillars of biblical
power. And these
pillars sum up the
whole Bible.
For many people,
the word “theology”
is mystical,
theoretical or
terrifying. It all
depends on our
various experiences
with it. The
principal fear can
be with people or
churches that are,
in reality or
perception, seeking
to “shove religion
down our throats.” I
agree – I do not
want anything shoved
down my throat,
especially sideways.
But also for me,
true theology is
both energizing and
the source for real
freedom. “Theology”
comes from two Greek
roots, theos
for God, and
logos for word.
It is simply means
“God’s Word” or “the
study of God’s
Word.”
Do we have
interest in
theology, and its
practical effect on
our daily lives?
Does biblical
theology serve human
freedom? I argue
that it is the only
source for true
freedom. Do we
pursue qualities
such as peace,
order, stability and
hope, to live, to
love, to laugh and
to learn? I believe
these qualities of
the image of God are
universal, we all
pursue them, and
they can only be
rooted, fully, in
biblical theology.
This is real
theology for the
grass roots level
where all of us live
our daily lives, and
which, if it
percolates from
there, can transform
nations.
I love the
in-depth study of
biblical theology.
And for that reason,
I desire especially
for its beauty to be
grasped by the
widest range of
people – all of us
who want a solid
grounding in life.
This book is thus a
simple, yet
substantial,
summation of real
theology, and with
the most practical
of implications.
Only Genesis
To set the table
for the six pillars
of biblical power,
we need to start
with Biblical
Theology 101.
Namely, what is the
nature of the Bible
on its own terms? We
need to be freed
from post-biblical
prisms by which most
of us see the Bible,
whether in terms of
church history or
various doctrinal
grids.
There are five
elements here, the
fifth of which is
our focus in these
pages. And the
compound term, “Only
Genesis,” will prove
pivotal.
Story
First, the Bible
is the greatest
story ever told,
indeed, the only
fully true story. It
is the historical
narration of the
acts of the Creator
on behalf of man and
woman, we who are
made in God’s image.
In other words,
it is the story of
God’s relationship
and conversation
with us, and ours
with one another.
Only when we enter
into and understand
the storyline of the
Bible, of these
relationships, does
true doctrine
emerge. Biblical
doctrine, or
teaching, is rooted
in the storyline. It
is sterile
otherwise.
Creation, Sin and
Redemption
Second, we can
note that the entire
Bible is based on
Genesis 1-3 and its
three all-defining
doctrines of:
Creation
> sin
> redemption.
The word “fall”
can be inserted in
place of “sin,” as
it describes what
the first sin did to
man and woman – they
fell from God’s
original place, and
need to be lifted
back. But too, the
word “sin” describes
both the original
fall and its
consequences, so I
use it as the
primary term. “Sin”
is a word that is
easily
misunderstood. It
essentially means
brokenness of trust,
and we all know that
from one or many
angles.
There are two
metaphors we can use
to describe these
doctrines. The first
is directional in
nature:
The order of
creation
> the reversal
> the reversal of the reversal.
The second is
organic in nature:
The
wholeness of
creation
>
the brokenness of
sin
>
the restoration to
wholeness.
The order of
creation is the root
of all truth and
reality in time and
space.
From the
beginning, God
established the
order of creation,
and our lives,
according to a set
plan that was
intended for our
greatest joy as his
image-bearers. But
through a
disobedient act of
the will, Adam and
Eve and the whole
human race have
submitted to a
reversal of that
order, and we reap
the painful
consequences. Sin
can thus be
understood as a
reversal, as
brokenness. It is a
reversal in that it
goes in the wrong
direction. It is
brokenness in that
it breaks
relationship with
God, with one
another and the
wholeness of his
creation. Following
the inception of
human sin, God
instituted the
reversal of the
reversal, the
redemptive process
designed to purchase
us back from the
slavery of sin – to
restore to us the
original purposes,
trajectory and
wholeness of the
order of creation.
The word
“redemption” means
to buy back out of
slavery. Slavery, by
definition, is the
loss of an original
freedom. Thus, we
can also define the
doctrines of
creation, sin and
redemption this way:
Freedom
> slavery
> return to freedom.
In the Apostles
Creed and Nicene
Creed, this reality
of creation, sin and
redemption provides
the structure of
classic Christian
confession – God the
Creator, Jesus who
rescues us from sin
as the Redeemer, and
the Holy Spirit who
sanctifies the
redeemed believer.
We cannot
participate in the
reversal of the
reversal without
first knowing what
the reversal is, and
we cannot know what
the reversal is
apart from first
knowing the order of
creation. Indeed, I
am convinced that
the more time we
invest into
understanding the
genius, simplicity
and depth of God’s
order of creation in
Genesis 1-2, the
more we will have
power to understand
the rest of
Scripture, history
and life. We can
make a
generalization that
will repeatedly
evidence itself in
specific contexts:
Creation is
simple and true;
Sin makes
things needlessly
complex in its
dishonesty; and
Redemption
restores us to
simplicity and
honesty.
Occam’s Razor
(from William of
Ockham in the 14th
century) is
applicable:
Reduce
needless
redundancies, or the
simplest explanation
is usually the
truest one.
To put it another
way:
Honesty can
uniquely afford to
keep things simple.
The challenge is
to learn the
simplicity of the
order of creation,
and in the midst of
the complexity of
the reversal, to
apply the
simplicity, and so
arrive at the
integrity of the
reversal of the
reversal. If this
rootedness in
creation is not
secure, then the
storms and currents
of sin’s
complexities can
drown us, even as we
struggle for
redemption.
Another way to
consider the reality
of creation, sin and
redemption is by
analogy to music.
Music requires
mathematical and
poetic order, and
Genesis 1-2
evidences this
beautifully. No
cacophony as with
pagan origin
stories. But more
profound yet,
classical music that
ministers to the
human soul is rooted
in:
Equilibrium
>
tension
>
resolution; or
Home
>
away from home
>
home again.
Anyone trained in
music knows this
well. The elements
of tension can be
repeated, heightened
and lengthened in a
musical score, and
so heighten the
glory of the
resolution, the
return home. Pagan
music that stays
inside the tension
motif reflects its
theological error.
Wolfgang Mozart
(1756-91) was once
reputed to run
downstairs when
awakened by someone
playing the piano,
and who stopped at a
point of unresolved
tension. Mozart hit
the resolution note
and returned to bed,
now able to sleep.
God, Life, Choice
and Sex
Third, in the
order of creation
there are four
all-defining
subjects addressed,
with God being the
first subject from
which all else
follows:
God
>
life
> choice
> sex.
These are the
only four subjects
in the universe we
ever need to deal
with, and they are
defined in the order
of creation. Or to
put it another way,
every issue we
confront finds its
basis in how these
four subjects are
defined and how they
relate to each
other.
These subjects
equal the content of
Genesis 1-2:
God is
sovereign, and his
purpose in creation
is to give the gift
of life, especially
human life
– man and woman as
made in his image to
rule over his
handiwork.
Then comes
the gift of moral
and aesthetic choice
that serves the
prior gift of
human life.
Finally, in the
order of creation,
is the gift of sex
within marriage:
Here
is the
power to pass on the
gifts of life,
choice and sex
through procreation
to our
offspring,
to celebrate the
height of what it
means to be made in
God’s image.
Or to put it
another way, true
sexuality is an
expression of godly
choice that serves
the gift of human
life that comes from
God.
The reversal of
the order of
creation is thus:
Sex
>
choice
>
life
>/God.
This reversal
order is where
promiscuous
sexuality employs
choice to hide from
undesired
consequences, and
some of these
choices injure or
destroy human life,
all in an affront
against God the
Creator.
The word
“promiscuous” refers
to an indiscriminate
mixture, and often
in terms of multiple
sexual partners; but
I am using it at its
basic level where
any sexual mixture
outside of marriage
is indiscriminate,
uncommitted,
uncovenantal, and
thus promiscuous –
from the Latin roots
of pro + misc[ere],
to be “pro-mixture.”
As well, when I use
the word “marriage”
in true context, I
am referring to that
which is
heterosexual,
faithful and
monogamous.
The observation
of these terms, as a
summation of the
content of Genesis
1-2, is an example
of real theology at
the grass roots.
When we consider
the nature of human
abortion, with all
its pain and
betrayals that lead
to such desperation
for abandoned women,
we are dealing
head-on with the
real world. In the
mid-1980s I was
addressing a
fund-raising banquet
for a Crisis
Pregnancy Center in
Ithaca, New York. In
the middle of my
talk I observed how
the politics of this
debate are framed by
the self-chosen
labels of “pro-life”
and “pro-choice.”
But I also saw this
as a false conflict
– both life and
choice are good
gifts of God,
located in the order
of creation. We
cannot make any
choice unless we are
first alive, and a
choice to destroy
the life of another
is not an informed
choice. In other
words, life defines
choice.
And, as I thought
it out further, I
noted that
“pro-life” people
are overwhelmingly
rooted in a biblical
sense of the nature
of God, and that
“pro-choice” people
are overwhelmingly
rooted in a sense of
approving, or at
least not
disapproving, of sex
outside of marriage.
Thus the conflict
can be portrayed
this way:
God
>
life
>
/
< choice
< sex.
And this is
really a conflict
between the biblical
and pagan views of
the four subjects of
the biblical order
of creation:
God
>
life
> choice
> sex, on the one hand, versus
Sex
>
choice
>
life
>/God, on the other.
In fact, it also
proves that there is
no debated issue in
human history that
does not come down
to these terms, and
how they are
defined.
In a later debate
at Ithaca College,
the topic focused on
human abortion.
During the question
and answer period, I
spontaneously noted
the four
all-defining
subjects in the
universe, and
introduced in
Genesis 1-2. There
was immediate
skepticism from the
audience, and in
particular was one
student glared at
me, as if to say,
“You can’t fool me.
I know there are far
more than four
subjects.” But as I
defined these
subjects and applied
them to the subject
at hand, the
skepticism waned
noticeably.
Which is to say,
I would have likely
never made this
observation about
God, life, choice
and sex had I not
been engaged with
real issues, painful
and divisive issues,
in the face of
genuine skeptics. In
these pages, as I
focus on the six
pillars of biblical
power, the backdrop
of such prior
biblical definitions
will always be
percolating beneath
the surface. They
are inescapable.
The Ten Positive
Assumptions of Only
Genesis
Fourth, in the
biblical order of
creation, there are
ten positive
assumptions. When I
use the term “only
Genesis,” it is
another way of
speaking about the
content of Genesis
1-2, the order of
creation:
-
Only Genesis has a
positive view of
God’s nature (the
power to give).
-
Only Genesis has a
positive view of
communication (the
power to live in
the light).
-
Only Genesis has a
positive view of
human nature.
-
Only Genesis has a
positive view of
human freedom (the
power of informed
choice).
-
Only Genesis has a
positive view of
hard questions
(the power to love
hard questions).
-
Only Genesis has a
positive view of
human sexuality.
-
Only Genesis has a
positive view of
science and the
scientific method.
-
Only Genesis has a
positive view of
verifiable
history.
-
Only Genesis has a
positive view of
covenantal law.
-
Only Genesis has a
positive view of
unalienable rights
and the First
Amendment.
These ten
assumptions define
the first volume of
my trilogy, First
the Gospel, Then
Politics, and
that volume is
called Only
Genesis. It was
self-published in
1999, sold out, and
will be edited and
republished,
hopefully, sometime
in 2009. Volumes 2
and 3 are yet to
come, where Volume 1
focuses on theology,
Volume 2 focuses on
politics and Volume
3 focuses on
spiritual warfare.
These ten
positive assumptions
reflect the
integrity of
biblical content
introduced in the
order of creation,
and define virtually
every known subject
in the universe, and
as infused by the
prior definitions of
God, life, choice
and sex. These ten
assumptions also
equal the basis for
a fully genuine and
rigorous liberal
arts education.
Only Genesis
is an in-depth
theological study
for those
interested, and sets
the context for the
six pillars of
biblical power in
these pages.
The Six Pillars of
Biblical Power
Fifth and finally
here, the six
pillars of biblical
power are distilled
from ten positive
assumptions. These
assumptions and
pillars are unique
in their essence and
wholeness, are not
found in any pagan
origin text or
secular construct,
and they are at the
core of all that is
good in human
civilization.
These pillars are
ethical in nature.
“Ethics” comes from
the Greek terms
ethos and
ethikos, for
“social customs or
habits,” for how we
treat people. And
depending on
context, “ethics”
can be used either
as a singular or
plural term.
“Ethics” as a term,
apart from context,
is by definition
neutral – there are
good ethics and
there are evil
ethics.
The six pillars
equal the basis for
the most
Spirit-filled
doctrine possible,
doctrine that leads
to transformed lives
and a transformable
world. In fact,
these pillars, as
believed and lived,
lead to the highest
standards and
accountability to
the work of the Holy
Spirit in
sanctification.
The first four
pillars are
distilled from the
ten positive
assumptions, and
were placed in
parentheses in the
listing of the ten
assumptions above.
The last two pillars
are drawn from the
order of redemption,
which is to say, as
a remedy for the
broken trust of sin
that assaulted the
goodness of the
first four pillars.
Thus, the six
pillars are these,
and they literally
sum up the whole
Bible:
-
The power to give.
-
The power to live
in the light.
-
The power of
informed choice.
-
The power to love
hard questions.
-
The power to love
enemies.
-
The power to
forgive.
The Gospel
With these five
basic elements of
Biblical Theology
101 in place, there
are some other
crucial terms to be
defined, as
subcategories of the
above.
First is the term
“Gospel.” It is
rooted in the Old
Testament Hebrew
root b’sar,
meaning “good news,”
and is introduced in
the assumptions of
Genesis 1 when God
pronounced his
creation “good” (tov).
Then we see it in
the New Testament
Greek term
euangelion,
which means
“good news,” and
from which we derive
the English term
“evangelical.” Thus,
tov and
b’sar are the
language of the
order of creation,
and euangelion
is the language of
the order of
redemption. It is
good news that God
made the good
creation for man and
woman as his
image-bearers. And
it is good news, in
the face of sin,
that God has
provided for our
redemption from it.
The order of
creation is good
news, the reversal
is bad news, and the
reversal of the
reversal is good
news.
Only Genesis is
Good News, as God
pronounced all he
made good. It is the
root of the New
Testament Gospel
where Jesus is the
“Messiah,” from the
Hebrew for “the
Anointed One,” for
Jews and Gentiles
alike. The
redemptive
centrality is clear
in the opening words
of Mark’s gospel:
“The beginning of
the gospel of Jesus
Christ, the Son of
God” (1:1). We who
claim to be
evangelical are
those who believe
in, live and preach
the Good News of
Jesus the “Christ,”
from the Greek for
“the Anointed One,”
which fulfills the
Gospel of only
Genesis. The ten
positive assumptions
and the six pillars
of biblical power
are Good News.
The Wesleyan
Quadrilateral
Second, a vital
faith begins with
prima scriptura,
or “Scripture
first,” that is, the
Bible on its own
terms. Another way
of looking at this
is by considering
what is historically
known as the
Wesleyan
“quadrilateral”
basis for authority
in the Christian
life:
Scripture
> tradition
> reason
> experience.
This means
Scripture – the 66
canonical books of
the Bible – is
regarded as the
inspired and
sufficient written
word of God. On this
basis, we affirm and
support all church
traditions that are
consistent with
Scripture, and we
set aside those that
are inconsistent.
Thereafter, reason
and intellectual
rigor are received
as God’s gifts and
as intrinsic to a
biblical worldview
to begin with.
Finally, the purpose
of biblical faith is
to experience God’s
love. With
Scripture, tradition
and reason in place,
such experience is
properly rooted, and
it flourishes.
The reversal of
the Wesleyan
quadrilateral is:
Experience
> reason
> tradition
> Scripture.
This is idolatry,
and idolatry can be
as explicit as
goddess worship or
pantheism, or as
subtle as a wrong
order of priorities.
The most perversely
successful
idolatries worship
something “good”
instead of the God
who made it good.
Experience is good,
but it is not God.
Reason is good, but
if untethered from
the God who made the
mind, it turns
ultimately to evil.
Tradition is good,
but if it supplants
Scripture, it
becomes an idol.
Politics is meant to
serve the human
good, but it is not
God. Even the Bible
can be reduced to an
idol. We worship God
who inspired the
Bible, not the book
itself. The Bible is
meant to lead us to
this true worship.
A Radical Faith
Third, biblical
faith is radical.
“Radical” comes
from the Greek word
radix and the
Latin word
radicalis, that
which is “root
level” or
foundational.
“Radical” is a good
word when used
properly.
Biblical
believers are thus
called to be
radical, to have a
sure foundation that
provides balance and
strength, quite the
opposite of being
extreme or
fanatical.
To be radical is
to be biblical. To
be biblical is to be
rooted in only
Genesis, the only
truly radical
foundation in
history. Thus, the
ten positive
assumptions and the
six pillars of
biblical power are
radical – the most
deeply rooted and
foundational
realities of how we
relate to God and
one another.
Radical ethics
will lead us to:
-
Give when taken;
-
Bless when cursed;
and
-
Love when hated.
Or, in other
words, we have two
choices in life –
give and it will be
given, or take and
it will be taken.
Biblical
believers are called
to reverse the
reversal. The roots
of time and history
are in Genesis 1-3,
so if we wish to be
genuinely radical in
rectifying the
political evils of
our time, the order
of creation is where
we start.
The Image of God
And fourth, from
the outset, we are
all created in the
image of God; we are
the crown of his
creation. In
grasping this
reality, we come to
understand a common
ground that is truly
universal.
At a debate in
April 1989, at Brown
University in
Providence, Rhode
Island, I
spontaneously
articulated some
elements of the
image of God. I was
questioned about the
issue of rape and
incest. A young
woman believed that
the right to have an
abortion should be
available to those
who became pregnant
by such a violent
act.
I began to frame
my response by
looking directly at
her and saying: “In
your life, are you
like me, seeking the
qualities of peace,
order, stability and
hope?” As I spoke
these words, I had
her
eyeball-to-eyeball
attention, and the
hundreds of students
and faculty in the
Sayles auditorium
came to a hush. The
century old seats,
bolted to the floor,
always creaking at
the slightest
movement, also
ceased their
chatter, producing a
moment of intense
focus. She said,
“Yes.”
I then said, “Is
it also fair for me
to assume, that like
me, you also seek to
live, to love, to
laugh and to learn?”
Again, the same
focus of intensity
defined the
audience, the seats
unmoving, and again
she said, “Yes.”
So I continued,
“Then there is far
more that unites us
than divides us – we
are seeking the same
qualities. The
question is, in the
face of the hell of
rape and incest,
does abortion unrape
the woman and
restore to her the
lost qualities of
peace, order,
stability and hope?
Or does the abortion
only add further
brokenness?”
The room
continued its quiet,
and I could have
left the issue
there. I knew that
the resonation with
the image of God, as
represented by these
qualities, was so
complete in that
moment that most
students and faculty
could answer the
question themselves
and deduce from
there the reality I
was addressing.
In the content,
pain and deep
emotions of such a
question, there is
the need to draw on
and, at least
implicitly, identify
the six pillars of
biblical power. A
brief review would
show how rape,
incest and human
abortion oppose
these six pillars.
The true
power of love is
needed to redress
the false power of
rape.
When I
spontaneously
defined these
qualities of God’s
image – peace,
order, stability and
hope; to live, to
love, to laugh and
to learn – they were
immediately
imprinted in my
soul. They sum up
well the theological
realities of the
image of God, and
they make an easy
acronym, the POSH
Ls. I have
identified and
defined the POSH Ls
ever since.
In his 1971 song,
“Slip Slidin’ Away,”
Paul Simon addresses
both social and
theological
concerns. In one
verse he evokes the
prospect of a father
traveling a great
distance to explain
to a young son why
he hasn’t been there
for him. But fear
and uncertainty
creep in, and upon
arrival, the father
simply kisses the
sleeping boy and
leaves. Simon’s
chorus then defines
a truly ubiquitous
moment: “Slip slidin’
away, slip slidin’
away, you know the
nearer your
destination the more
you’re slip slidin’
away.”
This is a fine
poetic grasp of the
theological nature
of human sin – we
strive for the
qualities of the
image of God, but it
seems too often that
the more steps we
take forward, we
actually make or
yield to more
backward steps. The
six pillars provide
the power to
overcome obstacles
to the
reconciliations we
seek.
The Goodness of True
Skepticism
So far, we have
sought to define
some key elements of
Biblical Theology
101, and hence the
basis for the six
pillars of biblical
power. One pillar is
the love of hard
questions, and it
proves integrally
related to the prior
three rooted in the
order of creation. I
have written about
real theology at the
grass roots in how I
first grasped the
God
® life
® choice
® sex nature of only Genesis. So too does my whole theological grasp of
the six pillars, all
that constitutes
Biblical Theology
101, find root in
the fruit of an
original and
experiential
skepticism. And from
my experience in
first seeking and
finding God, I came
naturally to embrace
the Wesleyan
quadrilateral in its
foundation for
genuine experience.
From age six, I
grew up in the
Unitarian-Universalist
Church, and there I
was taught to be a
skeptic of the
Bible. As an
eight-year old, in
the fall of 1961,
our Sunday School
teacher read the
story of Jesus
feeding the five
thousand men (plus
women and children).
She said up front,
“And of course, we
know that miracles
cannot occur.” I
thought to myself,
Why not? I
was skeptical. She
continued to explain
how what really
happened was that
Jesus inspired
thousands of selfish
people to unstuff
their tunics, which
were full of bread
and fish, and share
them with each
other, all because
Jesus inspired one
little boy to bring
forth his five small
barley loaves and
two small fish.
I thought she was
explaining too much,
even though I had
yet to learn of the
social impossibility
of such in
first-century Jewish
life, where modern
individualism was a
foreign concept. The
people were away
from the town
spontaneously, it
was late, no
provisions had been
made, and whatever
food they had they
would naturally
share with one
another, beginning
with the needs of
the children.
Then, in the
winter of 1962, our
teacher turned to
the Old Testament,
starting with
Genesis. She gave a
detailed explanation
of how Genesis was a
primitive myth among
primitive people who
did not know science
or other modern
means of knowledge.
So I thought, If
it is a myth, why
bother? I was
again skeptical.
Skepticism is
good if used in
pursuit of the
truth. The goal is
to test everything
equally to see what
proves true and what
does not. That which
proves true can be
embraced with
confidence, along
with the freedom for
the risk-taking
nature of faith that
follows. But
skepticism employed
to avoid the truth
does not serve the
good, nor true
power. Thus, to be
skeptical of the
Bible is fine; it is
a question of why,
and to what end.
Truth proves itself
to the honest
skeptic – and the
truth of the six
pillars of biblical
power proves
satisfying.
In my skepticism
of skepticism at
this early age, I
was rooted in a
prior amazement at
my existence in the
face of an awesome
universe. I remember
wondering where
space ended. To find
out, I hitched a
ride with Flash
Gordon (that will
date me) and
traveled to the end
of the universe. And
do you know what we
found? A brick wall
with the words
posted on it, “End
of Universe.” Now it
was a little
comforting that in
the age of Sputnik
that the sign was in
English and not
Russian. But it was
also unsatisfying.
What was on the
other side? And what
was on the other
side of the next
wall?
Then there were
the questions about
time and number.
What happens one
minute after time
ends, or what is the
biggest number? What
is the biggest
number plus one? And
on and on. No one
can deny the reality
that this known
universe, in which
we can measure our
existence, is bound
by the necessary and
helpful concepts of
space, time and
number. And we all
acknowledge that
since we can
describe the
limitations of these
measurement devices,
there must be
something greater.
And yet we cannot
wrap ourselves
around that which is
greater, for we are
finite and limited.
Where does such a
trajectory take us?
A Skeptic Finds the
Answer
In the face of
this trajectory, I
was nonetheless a
self-conscious
agnostic by age 14.
An “agnostic” is
someone who does not
know if there is a
God (from the Greek
roots a +
gnosis, “to be
without knowledge”).
But it was an
open-ended
agnosticism, which
is to say I was
always impressed by
the beauty of the
universe and amazed
by my own existence
and self-awareness.
I was open to
whatever truth
proved to be, open
to the idea of God.
But I did not know
one way or the other
in the summer of
1967.
I was in Boy
Scout camp, and each
Sunday we were
required to attend
chapel service. One
Sunday morning, as I
was getting dressed,
one of my tent mates
was resting on his
cot. I asked him why
he was not getting
ready. He answered,
“I am an atheist.”
So I asked him,
“What is an
atheist?” He said
that it meant he did
not believe in God,
and all I had to do
to get out of chapel
was to tell the
scoutmaster that I
was an atheist. I
said, “But I don’t
know.”
That September, I
began ninth grade
(“third form”) at
South Kent School, a
small prep boarding
school for boys in
the Housatonic
highlands of western
Connecticut. South
Kent had a daily
chapel schedule
rooted in the
Episcopal liturgy.
It was required,
but I determined not
to participate,
saying to myself,
I don’t believe this
stuff. So I did
not sing, recite,
pray, genuflect or
take communion. But
that proved a
“dangerous” thing to
do. For while other
students were
participating at one
level or another, I
ended up occupying
my mind reading the
words of the liturgy
and hymns, as they
were recited and
sung. I was
interested in the
possible existence
of God.
On November 1, I
was standing outside
the chapel in the
interlude before
walking down the
hill to dinner. As
the air pricked my
spine, I felt alive.
It was delightfully
cold, and in those
rural hills the
Milky Way was
exceptionally clear
that evening – like
a white paint stroke
against a black
canvas. I considered
its awesome grandeur
and beauty, and then
I posed to myself
this sequence of
thought:
If there
is a God, then he
must have made all
this for a purpose,
and that purpose
must
include my
existence, and it
must include the
reason I am asking
this question.
And if this
is true, then I need
to get plugged into
him.
I wanted to know
either way, and I
was convinced that
if there were a God,
then it would most
be most natural to
become rooted in my
origins. To be
radical before I
knew what radical
was. But I wanted
verification. The
“if” clauses were
real.
This was a
commitment to
myself, in the sight
of the universe, in
the sight of a
possible God. It was
in fact a prayer to
an unknown God.
One or several
evenings later, I
was the first
student into chapel,
taking my assigned
seating in the small
balcony. As I sat
down and looked
forward in the empty
sanctuary, I said
under my breath,
“Good evening God.”
Immediately I
retorted to myself,
“Wait a minute John.
You don’t even know
if there is a God.
How can you say
‘good evening’ to
him?”
But also
immediately, I
became aware of a
reality that was
prior to and deeper
than the intellect,
of a truth that held
the answer to any
and all of my
questions. There was
a God, I knew deep
within me, and I
knew that I had just
lied to myself by
saying I did not
know, even though it
was only now that I
knew I knew. My
heart knew before my
mind knew, but as
part of the whole
that my mind was now
grasping. I had yet
to speak it (see
Romans 10:9-10).
In this moment,
God’s presence
ratified the reality
of my belief as I
simultaneously
discerned a Presence
literally hovering
over me, filling the
entire balcony. And,
critically, this
Presence was
hovering and waiting
for my response. It
was powerful,
inviting and
embracing. This all
happened within a
moment’s time, and I
realized that I did
believe. No sooner
had I exhaled my
agnostic retort, did
I then inhale and
say, “Yes I do
[believe].” As I
did, this literal
presence of God
descended upon and
filled my entire
being – heart, soul,
mind and body.
Now I knew
nothing at the time
of the divine name
and nature of
Yahweh’s presence
and glory, as
experienced by the
Israelites in the
exodus community
with the tabernacle,
and later in
Solomon’s temple.
Nor did I know
anything of the gift
of the Holy Spirit.
Yet the grace of God
came into my life
that November
evening, as he but
gently crossed my
path with a touch of
his Presence. I
asked an
intellectual
question in view of
an awesome universe,
and was answered by
the Presence of the
awesome Creator.
The Six Pillars
With some
Biblical Theology
101 in place, and
with the trajectory
of my love for hard
questions as a key
prism for my grasp
of such theology,
let’s look at the
six pillars of
biblical power. They
are transformative
for all who would
embrace them.
###
