Experience Versus Revelation
A clumsy denial of truth can be infinitely less dangerous than an ingenious one.
A flat rejection of scriptural affirmations is nowhere near as serious as an approach by which an assumption is implanted later to develop into a false conclusion in the heart of the one affected.
Such assumptions are being widely made today and they can lead to serious conclusions. Implant the thought that one’s Christian faith rests primarily in personal experience and it is not long before the basic importance of divine revelation is lost in the heady philosophy that one is the captain of his own soul’s salvation.
It sounds reasonable to say: “I believe this, not because the Bible says so, but because I have experienced it for myself.” But it is exceedingly dangerous because it gives first place to experience and a secondary place to revelation. It is neither human reason nor human experience that authenticates the Scriptures. God’s written Word is authentic even when reason rejects it. It is authentic even if human experience would seem to affirm otherwise. To take any other position means that the mind and experience of man has primacy over divine revelation.
To put it bluntly: God’s Word is true, regardless of whether man accepts or rejects it. The Scriptures are authentic whether human experience confirms, or otherwise.
This is not to say that reason and experience are not vital; but it is to say that truth is dependent on neither.
A tree may fall in the forest where there are no ears to hear the fall. But the sound was produced just the same. So, too, the Scriptures depend for their truthfulness and their authority, not on the will or desire of man, but on the nature of their being an inspired revelation of truths man could never have learned in any other way.
The importance of human reason can hardly be overestimated. But if logical, reason must also recognize something outside and above itself. Without the illumination and control of the Spirit of God, man’s reason leads him into all degrees of folly. But when the Holy Spirit speaks in the Scriptures and to the heart of the individual, divine revelation becomes reasonable. Without the Spirit, spiritual truths are foolishness.
This is not to say that Christian experience is not a pearl of great price. Nevertheless, Christian faith centers in the person and work of Christ. In the Scriptures we learn who he is and what he did. It is as we appropriate him—the Christ revealed in the Bible—that he also becomes the Christ of our own experience, and this appropriation is by an act of faith.
This is not quibbling over non-essentials. Rather, it is a discussion of something basic. It is popular in some circles to say that only as portions of the Scriptures are illuminated to us personally by the Holy Spirit do they become the Word of God. But whether we permit them so to speak to our hearts or not, they are still the written Word of God and testify of the incarnate Word, the living Christ. A sword, lying on a table, is a sword whether one takes it in his hand and uses it as a sword, or not. It is not making use of it that transforms it into a sword, but using it does make it a usable weapon. The Bible is the sword of the Spirit, whether we so use it, or not. We may negate its usefulness by denying or refusing to use it, but we have in no way affected its reliability or its authority. If we lightly regard it, we are the losers, not the Bible.
One’s attitude and method of approach are of vital importance. The degree or extent of one’s faith is not the issue. Faith may be embryonic, or pitifully small, but faith there must be. “Speak, Lord, for thy servant heareth” reflects an attitude of mind and heart which God honors. “Lord I believe, help thou mine unbelief” is always a way to the heart of a loving Father. “If thou be the Son of God …” was invariably answered: “It is written.”
Some years ago the writer was working on a fellowship for advanced study in surgery. During the early months we worked on cadavers in the dissecting hall. Later, we transferred to the operating room, operating on the living. One’s attitude in the dissecting hall is totally different from that in the operating room. In the former there is an element of indifference and carelessness, for the subject is a dead body. But in the operating room every aseptic precaution and every detail of technique and procedure is meticulously carried out because one is dealing with a living body.
There is some similarity of procedure when it comes to the Bible. If it is a human book, then it can and should be approached with that cold analysis and criticism we would accord any other work of man. But if it is divine revelation, one’s approach must be totally different. This does not preclude any and every device of textual study and criticism avilable. The background and context must be carefully determined. The meaning of words must be determined in the light of the very best scholarship. As far as possible that which is historic and that which is prophetic must be defined. The allegorical and figurative must be recognized, and the poetic and symbolic should be determined.
But in all critical and analytical study there should be reverent scholarship that recognizes divine revelation as standing in judgment over man, not man in judgment on divine revelation.
By the assumption of some philosophical presupposition one can be led completely astray. Acting on the per-supposition that the supernatural and the miraculous can be explained in naturalistic terms, one will inevitably miss the main thrust of divine revelation.
Two years ago the pastor of one of the largest churches in America preached a sermon in which he affirmed his belief in the historicity of the person and book of Jonah. As a result he found himself the object of some ridicule from some of his fellow ministers. Some days later he wrote a column for the religion section of one of his city’s daily newspapers. In this column he affirmed his faith in a number of the supernatural events recorded in the Bible and closed with these words: “If I have erred it has been on the side of faith, not of unbelief.”
How important it is today that we, too, err (if such is possible) on the side of faith. Human experience is a variable quantity, and it has led many good people astray. But to place our faith in the divine revelation—the Christ of the Scriptures—is to take one’s stand on a rock that endures.
On the other hand, when we interpose either reason or human experience between our hearts and divine revelation, we demand an earthly explanation for a heavenly truth. We then by our own wilfulness close the door to the wisdom God only can impart.
L. NELSON BELL
