I stumbled across this interesting video the other day. It's really well done & as a theology nerd, I enjoyed it. It's a promotional tool for a book called Dug Down Deep by Joshua Harris. I have never read the book and so cannot recommend it. However I can quibble with one aspect of what the video is promoting.
The final line of the video says, "The question is whether what we know about God is true."
Is that the question?
Truth is not a rational abstraction that you can write down in a sentence. You can write things down which are true, but you cannot write Truth, because Truth is a person - Jesus. Absolute truth exists in the person of Jesus and thus we can relate to the truth, we can live truthfully, we can say things that are true about Jesus (and false as well). But the ontological category of Truth only exists in Christ.
I'm pretty sure this is neo-reformed theology & more of the same attempt to say that doctrine is "truth," and to treat the scripture as a repository of timeless truths. The question isn't about WHAT you know - because everybody has a heresy or two lurking in the shadows of what they say they believe. The question is about WHO you know.
I don't think we should want to say things about God which are not true. I just think we need to recognize that what matters is not how perfectly our beliefs line up to reality. In my opinion, this is a good thing for Calvinists, because limited atonement is whacked!
Still... I found myself a little bit jealous. I want a well made video promoting my book.
Have a look and be jealous for me!
The final line of the video says, "The question is whether what we know about God is true."
Is that the question?
Truth is not a rational abstraction that you can write down in a sentence. You can write things down which are true, but you cannot write Truth, because Truth is a person - Jesus. Absolute truth exists in the person of Jesus and thus we can relate to the truth, we can live truthfully, we can say things that are true about Jesus (and false as well). But the ontological category of Truth only exists in Christ.
I'm pretty sure this is neo-reformed theology & more of the same attempt to say that doctrine is "truth," and to treat the scripture as a repository of timeless truths. The question isn't about WHAT you know - because everybody has a heresy or two lurking in the shadows of what they say they believe. The question is about WHO you know.
I don't think we should want to say things about God which are not true. I just think we need to recognize that what matters is not how perfectly our beliefs line up to reality. In my opinion, this is a good thing for Calvinists, because limited atonement is whacked!
Still... I found myself a little bit jealous. I want a well made video promoting my book.
Have a look and be jealous for me!
6 comments:
Tim, I'm not gonna lie. That is a cool video! I re-read your post a couple of times. At first I wasn't sure if I agreed, then after watching the video I totally get where you were going with your post.
And I think you're right. Jesus is absolute Truth, and not any doctrine, no matter how "right" it may seem. Any attempt to try and make it all about doctrine would end up leading us down the wrong path.
Alternatively, it could be said that we can "point" to the truth (not so much "speak" the truth). Whether or not the pointer (verbal or otherwise) is effective will depend on the ears of the hearer... (temperament, education, circumstances, etc). Dogmatic teachings can, in this light, be seen both to reveal and conceal the truth, depending on how they are received.
The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named is not the eternal name
~ Tao Te Ching
http://www.taoism.net/ttc/chapters/chap01.htm
'I Kissed Joshua Harris Goodbye' would be a better book...
Tim, I just ordered Dug Down Deep. I'll give it a read.
Is Joshua Harris the "I Kissed Dating Goodbye" guy?
Here are my thoughts on the video:
Things I Did Not Appreciate:
1. He's totally wasting that journal.
2. The caricature of the wife... umm... no.
Things I Did Appreciate:
1. He's totally wasting that journal.
2. The correct usage of "affects."
I liked it, too, though, even if he IS the kissing dating goodbye guy.
Didn't you kiss dating goodbye? I thought everyone in your generation loved that book!
Post a Comment