The expression "a personal relationship with the Lord" is often well meant by Christians. By that we want to point to the fact that our relationship with God is something personal that demands your heart. To be a Christian is not a philosophy or a code of conduct. No, to be a Christian means that the core of your being is seized upon and that there is a wonderful, intimate and real relationship between you and God. That is kindergarten categesis, you would think. As long as our children catch this, as long as this is engraved onto their hearts, everything is okay. Catechesis with all its dogma and doctrines can so easily only hinder this process. Personal relationship, personal relationship, personal relationship - that's all that matters. Thus saith postmodern categesis, Postmodern Cats 101, 201 and 301.
But don't the Heidelberg Cats (Heidelberg Categism) have an answer to this? They do, but apparently people won't listen any more. Perhaps we the reformed are to blame for that. Often we serve up the HC in such rationalistic dry colours and are as abstract and existentially poor as possible - nearly an unforgivable sin if you take into account the lively commentaries on the Cats available today. However, it is said that reformed theologian Abraham Kuyper could hold children spellbound on the tip of their chairs when he catechized them. The fishermen of his congregation even took his commentary on the HC, E Voto Dordraceno, with them to sea during the week.
I want to expose myself with a statement. If you don't make an effort to portray the truth of the H-Cats with passion and colour, or at least within a context of love, warmth and security - and here I am ready to hang for this- rather leave it alone. Rather let an Arminian who believes the Bible lead the little ones with fire to the throne of grace than let them become part of the frozen chosen.
But this still leaves us with second (third, fourth) prize. There still is the first prize or at least something much better. It is for sure better than all the pious gush about the personal relationship with the Lord. Why am I so stern on this point? Did the first paragraph not sink in with the blogger? Well, it has, but the concept of a personal relationship with the Lord on its own is so wide that you can make a u-turn with a schoolbus full of liberal theologians within it. The big question is: How do you spell your personal relationship with the Lord? This is the question that makes all the difference. Let us take an example. Richard Niebuhr defined liberal theology's definition of a personal relationship with the Lord thus:
a God without wrath,
brings people without sin
into a kingdom without judgement
through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross
Unfortunately this is how many still spell a relationship with the Lord when the Bible and the Heidelberger do not function. Without denying the operation of common grace there, just look at Oprah-related programs. And don't think it is not accompanied by serious people with even pious expressions. Who wants to differ with people who are so full of feeling? Indeed not the devil. You see, this description above is a pseudo-relationship that reeks, that doesn't know the fear and the righteousness of God, neither does it shudder at the jaws of hell. Does this mean that a plea is given here for the rehabilitation of fiery hell sermons? As the celebrated apostle puts it: God forbid. In any case, definitely not as it is easily understood in a moralistic sense: Be now a good boy or girl so that you may not have to end up in hell. God forbid. But what we cannot get away from if we accept the Bible as inspired and not only inspiring, is that we derive a definition there that protests vehemently against the feel-good candy floss that was mentioned.
The above is the classic mark of the liberal way of handling scripture. You only take the parts that suit you and this within your own views of how a relationship is supposed to be working. The Bible, however, tells us of God who is wrathful towards sin (cp. Es. 12:19-20; 13:13-16; 14:7-9,13-14,19-21; Rom 1:18,32;2:5-6,12,16 ). To come to know the God of grace we have to be cognizant about his definition of sin (Rom. 3:20; 1 Joh. 3:4) and of judgement and about reconciliation through the blood (Joh. 16:8-11; Hebr. 9:11,22,26). Without these truths you can never speak authentically about other complementary words and phrases like "grace" (Jn. 1:16-18; 2 Cor. 13:5) ,"He does not judge you either" (Jn. 8:11), "you are washed clean" (Is. 1:10-18; Ps. 51:4,9,12). you cannot otherwise speak authentically on what Christ really had done there on the cross (1 Cor. 15:3; 2 Cor. 5:21). Heidelberger-wise we should go and learn again what questions and answers 3-5,8-12,17-19 really mean.
But this catechizing only means that we pile up the firewood. It doesn't mean that everything is already okay. Perhaps this is the problem that some are sensing and then flee to the personal relationship word choice. With the intention to describe the covenant relationship with the Lord existentially we should indeed sympathise strongly. The firewood must indeed be kindled by fire from above. People will know if we are existensially on fire. God's fire cannot be hidden very effectively. No HC will accomplish this appart from the kindling from on high. Therefore we should pray to God that he himself will give life to his Word. It is therefore only right to spell out another form of personal relationship with the Lord that reeks - a relationship that is spelled with many verses and confessions and technical correctness. A lot of firewood thus, but without fire. One of the first signs of the fire lacking is of course the absence of warmth.
Perhaps I should have said this at the beginning. A personal relationship with the Lord is not exactly a description that is found in the Bible. One of the reasons for this is found in a statement that John Frame made. He said that every person on earth is already - willingly or unwillingly - in a personal relationship with the Lord, reconciled or irreconciled. Both groups take it very, very personally!
The Bible does speak often about the concept of a personal relationship with the Lord and also very extensively - the very reason why we should be careful not to use our own descriptions. The word in the Bible to describe this relationship with the living God is covenant. It marches through the Bible and eventually tells us of the new covenant of God in Christ into which He has drawn us. The tabernacle and later the temple foreshadowed this relationship to us in all kinds of symbols. Christ has fulfilled it. But from the beginning we learn that it has to do with cleansing and with a veil in the temple that was rent from God's side. We are only enabled by him to enter the Holy of Holies. To have God's Spirit within you as his temple and his law that is written in your heart (Jer. 31:31-33; Es. 36:25-27; 1 Kor. 6:19; Hebr.10:16), is something that can only happen in God's way.
Over and over again this is spelled out very concretely. You spell it with words like perfect holiness, wrath, judgement, sin and a cross. And because of this we can and must also spell glowingly on with words like cleansing, mercy, forgiveness and resurrection. And thus we come to know that God's wrath is gospel to them for whom he cares so much that he would rather give his Son in our place than to give us over to his righteous wrath against our sin. This message makes some people nauseous and is to them the smell of death. But they who accept it and take it as the food of life, find that it is the secret to real righteousness. The feeding becomes sweet and they are truly satisfied.
A personal relationship with the Lord is spelled C-O-V-E-N-A-N-T. About such a relationship we can talk for days.
No comments:
Post a Comment