Thursday, May 03, 2007

The Truth in the Word

An Antebellum era (pre-civil war) family Bible...Image via Wikipedia

A friend of mine recently asked: "Can the Gospel be truly proclaimed without propositional truth statements?" I add another: "Can we ask or respond to your question without using propositions?"

A proposition is a "setting out in words." This is what the Bible does and this is what the Gospel does. How else do we communicate to the world that Jesus rose from the dead. Now, we may use a number of different culturally relevant symbols to help people understand the fact and meaning of Jesus' resurrection. Still, the proposition "Jesus is risen!" is necessary for first order communication. To me, skepticism about truth communicated through propositions is as much skepticism about truth as it is about propositions. (And why is it that propositional truth claims are always shot down by those using propositional truth claims?)

I like what Francis Schaeffer said to a professor who challenged him about the Bible. The professor questioned the likelihood that we could communicate with God because our finitude would make it impossible to understand God. There would be no "core of univocity" he said. Schaeffer said in a very humble voice: "I think when God said, "Don't commit adultery," He knew we would understand what He meant." Another great Bible scholar, Mark Twain, said: (I paraphrase) "Many things in the Bible I can't understand, but there are many things in the Bible that I cannot misunderstand." It seems to me if God made us to symbolize and use language, He also assumed we could understand Him and each other, regardless of the problems of culture and sin.

If we tailor our beliefs or approach to reach postmoderns by minimizing the use of words, by the time we get it together, they will be change into something else. The Scripture is a story, as some would say, a meta-narrative or great story. This is obviously true and it speaks to the current fascination in our culture with narrative. Ultimately, we must keep in mind, that the meaning of the story is defined and clarified by the didactic in Scripture. I find it amazing that the Bible has such appeal and power to communicate over 2,000 years to disparate cultures of varying communication modalities. It has told the Gospel in literate, non-literate, oral, and symbolic/visual settings. It has been effective to tell the Gospel in every culture despite the unique, intrinsic cultural barriers to its message. In most cases, whenever the Gospel is received by a culture, the people in that group seek a Bible in their own language. (I know there are exceptions, but exceptions don't discount the majority.)

I don't argue that people groups can't receive the message of the Gospel without a Bible. Just as Prof. Librescu at Virginia Tech displayed self-less courage in saving his class, one can express truth without words. But we only know about what this noble man did through the words of those who witnessed his sacrifice. People can see and experience dimensions of the Gospel in a number of ways. However, unless there are propositions - statements of fact and truth - behind the other forms of communication, the clarity and certainty of meaning will fade into the relativity of subjectivism. As the meaning becomes more subjective and less universal the message is increasingly lost. To have faith in Jesus one must listen to a "gospelizer" who tells the Gospel in rational, understandable, verbal statements (written or oral).

I think part of imaging God is the ability to communicate through words and to understand God when He speaks. The Bible should set the agenda for our preaching and not what is "hot" in the culture. At the same time, narrative is essential to message of the Bible and the Bible message is one grand story about God. Too often culture sets the agenda for our methods (and even our message) when it should be Scripture. I believe in Truth with a capital T. And I believe that Truth is communicated through propositions. This is not the prevailing view in our culture, but the fundamental assumption of the Bible is: the God of truth speaks through words.
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

No comments: