I’ve been reflecting lately on the influences that led to my becoming a Christian as well as on those that have informed my faith. These influences have, I would say, been largely evangelical with an emphasis on the experience of faith. By experience, however, I do not necessarily mean in the sense of “I experienced this wonderful, warm feeling that told me that God is really there.” I mean experience as in experiencing the changed life that results from an authentic belief in salvation through Jesus Christ. Personally, I would count readings in philosophy and theology as influential and as experiential as relationships or anything else I’ve experienced that have illuminated God’s reality and love to me. (I realize that my own conversion experience may or may not be similar to anyone else’s.)
As to just what constitutes experience, though, clearly any thought a person has ever had has been experienced just the same as any feeling that’s been experienced. An experience is something that happens to you.
The denomination of the church I belong to, the Evangelical Covenant Church, had its beginning among Swedes who were seeking an authentic faith as opposed to what was being offered by much of the state Lutheran church at the time. They sought to experience the new life in Christ rather than merely assent to dry doctrine that did not result in new life.
Now, doctrine ultimately should not be “dry,” of course, and ought not be considered doctrine unless it is indeed the truth that, once believed, results in new life. Truth is truth, this cannot be denied. But just what is truth? Is truth limited to that which can only be apprehended intellectually? Is true doctrine found only in thought? If doctrine is to apply to whole persons, as surely it must, then it must be found in affection as well. We are not merely minds, we are also hearts (feeling-entities). The Bible speaks of belief, which is an assent of both the heart and the mind (consent of the will). If one wants something to be true but cannot consent to it, then one doesn’t truly believe. If one thinks that something may be true but cannot sympathize or harmonize with it, then one doesn’t truly believe. Though truth certainly is not dependent upon someone believing it in order to actually be true, and though one can experience truth whether one assents, consents, or sympathizes with it or not, a person cannot experience salvation unless one assents, consents, and sympathizes with the gospel. Regarding Truth-with-a-capital-T (absolute truth), the redemptive and regenerative part of it cannot be and will not be experienced unless one consents and sympathizes. And if one does not consent/sympathize, then, because Truth is Truth, one will experience its damnation.
If proper doctrine is spoken but not lived and demonstrated by those speaking it, can it truly be taught by those speaking it? Can it truly be imparted? Can the Word of God by itself transform? I don’t believe so. Can God cause the Word of God to transform someone (via the Spirit) regardless of the example of the source? Yes, of course, but I wonder how often this actually happens. Persons who accept a teaching “out of context,” so to speak, are probably not as likely to accept Truth as they are a counterfeit or a sham (i.e., whatever is being represented). Or, more likely, they will not accept it at all. There is more that conveys the Truth than mere word. And there is more that prevents a person from accepting the Truth than mere hardness of heart on that person’s part. It may be a truly receptive heart that refuses to accept even a word of Truth that is not conveyed with the Spirit that witnesses to it (or if one has never had an experience that enables one to comprehend the Truth).
Whether or not consent to and sympathy for the gospel is wrought wholly by God is a matter of very serious debate among Christians today. I won’t argue it here. But I think that the debate ought to be viewed holistically.
Here’s my proposition: if doctrine is thought, then it must be feeling as well. If doctrine applies to the whole person, then it must encompass the Truth as it applies to feeling as well as to thought. One cannot have proper thought without proper affection, and vice-versa. What I mean by this is, salvation comes by the love of God that comes by God's love. Love is greater than both thought and feeling though it informs and illuminates both.
The Bible speaks often of “hardness of heart.” This refers to an unyielding will. The will encompasses both the mind and the heart – it must. The will cannot merely involve mind over feeling; if one chooses to do what is right in the eyes of God as far as one believes, then one is choosing an allegiance to God over an allegiance to something else, whether that something else is a feeling or a thought that is at odds with what is right in the eyes of God. Allegiance therefore involves the choosing of one affection over another, or one thought over another. As long as we are in this life and possessed of fallen humanity, we will always live with a conflict between our fallen-ness and the redemptive life that comes only from God through Christ and is given only by God. Anyone who denies this is denying reality. (Romans 7:14-25)
This conflict, therefore, is the experience of the one living by faith in God through Christ. This conflict is truth. Yet, praise God that, through Jesus and the Holy Spirit, we may also experience the truth of salvation and be delivered from the truth of condemnation and damnation.
