According to John’s Gospel, Jesus said, “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (8:32, NIV). This article looks at the relevance of those words from these three vastly different perspectives: the 16th century Anabaptists, a 20th century German theologian, and a 21st century novel.
Emil Brunner’s Emphasis on Truth as Encounter
One of the most important theologians of the twentieth century was Emil Brunner. Born in Zürich and a lifelong resident of that Swiss city, Brunner (1889~1966) published a seminal book in 1938, and it was first released in English under the title The Divine-Human Encounter (1943).*
One of the most important books I read in seminary and studied more deeply in graduate school was Brunner's Revelation and Reason, the 1946 translation of his original German book published in 1941 and titled Offenbarung und Vernunft.
In that significant book, Brunner emphasized that humans can know God only by means of revelation, not by discursive reason alone. What God reveals is not information to be grasped by the intellect. Rather, God's revelation is God's own self, who is known primarily by personal encounter.
Chapter 24 of Revelation and Reason is titled “The Two Conceptions of Truth,” and the “Thou” truth as emphasized by S. Kierkegaard and M. Buber is the truth that comes from “personal encounter” (370-1). That is also the nature of truth which comes from “personal knowledge” as emphasized so strongly by Michael Polanyi in his 1958 book with that title.
When I first studied Brunner and Barth in seminary and graduate school, I found Brunner's theology more compelling because he affirmed truth as encounter and held that affirmation while leaving room for faith and reason to work together.
Brunner and Barth agreed that God is known only through revelation. They differed on whether human beings have any capacity to seek and to find God’s revelation. Brunner said yes: there is a “point of contact.” Barth said no (“Nein!”), because that would make revelation depend partly on us humans.
The Shack’s Emphasis on Encountering God
Wm. Paul Young’s novel The Shack was originally written for his six children. It was first published in 2007, initially by the small, newly created Windblown Media after conventional publishers had declined it—and surprisingly, it became an international bestseller. I recently read it for the second time and was highly impressed with its theological depth.
Mackenzie (Mack), the central character, is a nominally religious man with traditional theological/doctrinal beliefs. But the book is about his encountering the truth of God by meeting and conversing with “God the Father,” portrayed as a large Black woman, with the Holy Spirit as the fairy-like Sarayu, and with Jesus as a very human-like man who liked to do carpentry work.
Of course, the bulk of the book must be interpreted as “myth” (in the theological sense), which means, of course, not a “false story” but rather the use of narrative to disclose truth that cannot be stated propositionally.
As Copilot, expresses it, “Mack’s weekend in the shack is not meant to be read as a historical event; it is a narrative vehicle for revelation, healing, and encounter—Brunner’s Wahrheit als Begegnung in fictional form.” (I thought that was a clever way to depict what The Shack was saying.)
Mack’s spiritual growth and deep comprehension of truth came through the deep encounters with the triune God in the “shack” that he discovered in the woods. The truth he learned from those encounters was quite different from the doctrines he had accepted as a rather perfunctory Christian believer.
The Sixteenth Century Anabaptists
The Anabaptist movement began in Zürich, the same Swiss city where Brunner was born. From the start, that modest beginning in 1525 emphasized discipleship, following the Christ they encountered in the Bible and in their somewhat mystical experiences, rather than by studying theological doctrines.
It has long been said that there is no "Anabaptist theology,” for their movement was about doing rather than writing about theological doctrines. Although I have a Ph.D. in theology, I am happy to be a progressive Anabaptist now, placing emphasis on encountering truth and on seeking to follow Christ faithfully.
_____
* The German title was Wahrheit als Begegnung. A second German edition was published in 1963 under the same title, but the English translation, issued the following year, is titled Truth as Encounter: A Study in the Theology of Truth.
Thanks Leroy. This is interesting. You're use of the novel as a mythology is right own, so it seems to me. I've read very little of Brunner but came to the same or similar conclusion about divine-human encounter by other routes.
ReplyDeleteI've always thought Barth's position was untenable. However, stressing personal encounter, I realized while preaching years ago, opens up a whole universe of possibilities with regard to what one senses and claims as an encounter with the God (the Holy Other). My wife and I participated in a ritual of worship on the banks of the Ganges once with a lot of adults and children chanting hymns to Shiva, while off in the water was a statue of Shiva. Candles and flowers were handed to us as they were to all, and we sent them down the Ganges just as others did. Offerings to Shiva. I would consider that an experience with the Holy other, just as much as singing a hymn and taking communion in my UCC church. But my very evangelical Baptist friend thinks I was being idolatrous.
These days, I think the idea of "discovery" probably fits the divine-human reality better than the concept of "revelation." "Revelation" is rooted in the Western notion that God and creation are separate realities. That's another traditional Western view I think is untenable. You might remember that I once wrote an essay claiming, "There ain't no place where God ain't!"
Thanks, Anton, for your thought-provoking comments. Let me start (and maybe finish) my reply with your last statement. I basically agree with that statement. But before saying more about that, let me comment directly on the blog post.
DeleteTheologians, as you no doubt remember, used to talk about special revelation and general revelation. One main reason why I could never accept Barth was because of is rejection of any general revelation. Brunner affirmed the later, at least to a certain extent. But I want to accept far more than he did. My main professor in graduate school was Dr. Eric Rust, and he talked a lot about the cosmic Christ and the sacramental universe, and I still think those are highly significant assertions. I certainly don't accept pantheism (all is God or God is all), but I do think the concept of panenteism is an important one. All the created world can be seen as God's creation and all of creation points to God--and here I use the name God as the traditional term for Transcendence (which, I realize, I affirm more than you do). So, all the created world is revelation of the Transcendent, and that revelation is experienced not primarily by the mind but by the heart. As Pascal said, “The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of.” Those reasons of the heart are mystical experiences, especially such as Pascal had in November 1654. As you will recall, he wrote, "God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob, not of the philosophers and scholars." That contrast — the living God of encounter vs. the abstract God of reason — is the main point of what Pascal wrote that night and the heart of his later theology. And that emphasis is one reason I have greatly appreciated Pascal ever since I first learned about him when I was a college student
Much earlier this morning, local Thinking Friend David Nelson, sent the following comments by email:
ReplyDelete"Thanks for writing about 'truth' and how it is discovered and embraced by three different entries. The quest for truth remains. I am further convinced that reason, revelation and life experience revels truth for each of us and our challenge is to discover truth through our own life experience. Jesus, as a rabbi teacher, gave us many glimpses of truth which help. The Buddha and other teachers have been helpful. Each person has a mind and when we have nurtured our minds, we too seek truth. It remains the rabbit we hope to find in the bushes of our lives. That seeking is to be honored and respected even when it seems difficult to do so."
Thanks, David, for reading and responding early this morning to my blog post. Please see my reply to what Anton wrote (above), which is also is a partial response to what you wrote.
Delete