Quick viewing(Text Mode)

Revelation and Faith the Knowledge of God As Gift

Revelation and Faith the Knowledge of God As Gift

CHAPTER 2

Revelation and Faith The of as Gift

How can we possibly know anything about God, let alone know God? Only because of the gift of God's self-, and onl y by faith. Revelation and faith are the two most basic epi stemological concepts for Chri sti an and have to be understood together. The terms themselves imply that C hristian theology is not fo unded on observation of the world around us, or philosophical reasoning, nor is it rooted in the depths of our own s. We know God and God's will and destiny for us through God's speaking a Word of self-disclosure, most decisively in the Chri st. This di sclosure is life-giving and liberating. It is not merely metaphysical , the data for a - sophi cal . It is a disclosure of God's will and intention fo r humanity and creation, which is justice, peace, and wholeness. Revelation is always a call to God's shalom, and faith is the active response to that call . The knowledge that we claim is fa ith knowledge, a gift of the . But revelation and faith are opaque concepts for many people and require elucidation. I begin by suggesting th at revelation of God and fa ith in God are not entirely di scontinuous with other kinds of revelation and faith.

"It Was a Revelation!" She Said

"When I heard Chomsky speaking on television about the Iraq war, it was a revelation'" she said . " I already had gli mmers of suspi cion about what was reall y going on, but somehow as he spoke, everything came together. As I sat there li s- tening to Chomsky the li ghts started going on, and by the time he was fini shed I had a whole new view of the world and knew l had to act on it. " " When my baby was born," the new mother said , " it was a revelation' A whole new range of emoti ons and feelings' Somehow the whole world seemed different. I' d never felt such wonder and tenderness before, such sheer joy! I felt

38 Revelation and Faith 3 9

I would do anything fo r my baby. I wo ul d even kill fo r him if I had to '" Mord eca i Ri chl er te ll s the story of a sixtee n-year- old boy, Noah, who has what mi ght be ca ll ed a brea kthrough "revelatory" ex peri ence of mu sic:

Th e first tim e Noah had been to a concert th e orches tra had pl ayed The Four Seasons by Vivaldi and he had bee n so struck by it th at he had felt something like pain. He had not suspected th at men were ca pabl e of such bea uty. He had been starll ed. So he had walk ed out wo nde rin g into th e ni ght, not kn owing wh at to make of hi s di scovery. All th ose stale li es . , fac ts th at he had co ll ected lik e hi s fa th er did stamps, knowledge, all th at passed away, rejected, dwarfe d by th e entry of bea ut y into hi s consc iousness. Th e city, th e ga udy ni ght, had whirled around him ph antas magori ca ll y but without importance. I didn 't kn ow about bea uty, he had th ought. No body ever told me. Wh en he had nex t been aware of hi s surroundings he was sitting on a bench on the moun- ta in . It was cl aw n.1

A "reve lati on" in thi s secul ar sense is a brea kthrough ex peri ence, fl as hin g new insight, li ghts goin g on, an Aha' , a mind-chan gin g, life-changing experi- ence. From the perspecti ve of fa ith , we may indeed di scern God's presence in such secul ar moments of li ght and truth , since Goel is not ti ed down to as such or limited to beli evers. We may spea k of revelati on in both subj ecti ve and obj ecti ve senses . On th e subjective side, an experi ence of new truth brea ks through to an indi vidual, and hi s or her whole view of th e wo rld is transfo rmed. But the person wh o received th e revelati on was confronted by an obj ectivity- something . .. someone there, a of fac ts seen in a whole different way which constitutes a kind of intuitive fl ash of rea li za ti on; an actual li vin g, breathing, wondrous baby, vulnerabl e and bea utiful ; the actuall y ex isti ng, magnifi cent, joyous music of Vi va ldi . When we speak co ll oqui all y in thi s way of a revelati on, we mean a breathtaking encounter wi th so methin g or someone ve1y real, so rea l th at other things , in li ght of it, seem unreal or in signifi ca nt . Th e geopoliti cal realiti es in te rpreted in a new way, th e baby himse lf, th e mu sic itself, are revelatory. Th ese analogies help us to gras p wh at revelati on means th eologica ll y and to see that "faith," or res ponse to God's revelati on, is not entirely di scontinuous with or unlike other brea kthrough ex peri ences. Li tera ll y, "revelation" means "unveiling" or "di sc los ure" of something prev iously hidden.2 In the scriptures of both testaments it is close ly assoc iated with the Word of Goel , God's speech or communicati on. When we spea k theo logica ll y about revelati on in a subj ecti ve sense, we use words like "conversion" and " fa ith ." In the obj ecti ve sense we speak of a story, a message th at has reached us, a mind-changing, life-changin g truth, or better, a person, someone who confronts us. We need to say immedi ately th at fo r many, perh aps mos t, Chri sti ans, no such 40 Reflections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality memorabl e, dramatic revelat ion of God may ha ve occu rred in their li ves. Many of us have simpl y been bapti zed as in fa nts and have grown up within the revela- tory traditi on of th e church, and li ve within the mystery and beauty of that tradi- tion without remembering a first moment of co nversion and faith. This does not necessaril y negate th e fact that we have rea ll y received the revelati on; ou r faith and commitment may be ve ry rea l, constantly nurtured by and , by hea ring the preaching of the Word , by receiving the sacrament of holy co m- munion, and by li vin g in Chri stian co mmunity. With some others, who were raised within the life of the church and then left it, or who were never ex posed to it at all , a breakthro ugh reve latory experience ca n occur later in li fe. It may be su dd en and dramatic or a slow ly dawning rea li zation. However it happens, we ca ll it "the work of the Holy Spirit," the di vine Rea lity breathin g in to us. However, where revelati on in thi s speci fi ca ll y biblical and Chri stian sense is concern ed , Chri sti ans claim a so lid , un shakabl e "objectivi ty" far beyond their own personal subj ective ex peri ence . Certain dec isive events have occurred in hi story by which God has spoken and ac ted in human hi story. The love and truth di sc losed th ere are consta nt and un changeable, more rea l than we are, an d do not depend on anyone 's ackowledgment or recogni tio n. "The grass withers, the flower fades, but th e Word of our Goel shall stand fo rever" (Is 40:8). For Chri s- ti ans this mea ns, objectively and preeminen tl y, the Iif e, death, and resurrection of Jesus, the Word made flesh. When we speak of revelation in a subj ecti ve sense, we mean th at it is actuall y received and beli eved by human beings.3 Rev- elation reaches its goa l when peopl e actually receive God 's Word of grace and promise, of command and of judgment, when people, both individuals and co m- munities, are conso led, encouraged, inspired, led . Revelation mea ns "God speaks"- not literally that vocalized words come floating down from the sky. Th e "Word of God" implies radi ca l givenness, some- thing we co uld never have told ourse lves. Though hea ring the Word has anal o- gies with the exampl es given above, it is qualitatively different, for it is somethin g that human beings could never happen upon fo r themselves, not something we could ever reach by pure rational thought, or find empirically in the world around us or in the depth of our soul s. It is neither stargazi ng, nor soul- gazing. It is not the result of reli gious ex peri ence in some general sense, for which human beings have a natural capac ity. It co mes radically from beyond us as gift. The content of revelat ion is not the end point of philosophical refl ection, nor is Chri stian faith a phil osophi cal hypothesis. Fro m within fa ith we kn ow (a posteriori, after the fac t) that God can be known only as God gives Godselfto be known. The holy mystery that confronts us in Jesus Chri st di scloses One who cannot be summoned to our objective inquiry, who can never become the "object" of our in vesti gative techniques . Jn faith ;i nd th eology we speak of the Subject who is beyond and above us, who never comes under our mastery or con- trol. This Rea lity can only be known as self-gift, as revelati on. We may say, th ough, that knowledge of God bears some resembl ance to the Revelation anrl Faith 41 knowledge of persons. A human person too ca n never be known objecti ve ly as an object that comes und er our masterful gaze. A person ca n be known onl y as she gives herse lf to be known. or course, one may observe or investigate or spy upon a person an d come to possess a good dea l of information about her, but rea ll y to know her, one mu st enter int o relati onship. She must disclose herself in conversation, in gestures and ac ti vit y toward oneself if one is trul y to know her. It is comm onl y said th at if we are really to know a person, ap preciate the depth and mystery of a person, we must do so in a relati onship of love. She mu st reveal an d give of herself; oth erwi se she simpl y ca nnot be known. Not onl y that, but the person who would know her mu st enter into a relationship of receptivity and trust- a kind of faith- if mutual knowledge is to be real. This is true also of the Go el whom we know in Jesus Chri st. Goel has given God's very self to us in Jesus and does so again and aga in through th e Sp irit, in Word and sacrament, and can be known onl y in a relati onship of prayer and worship, tru st and hope. It is sig- nifi cant th at in Hebrew scriptures, th e same verb is used about knowing God as knowing one's spouse: "Now th e man kn ew hi s wife Eve, and she conceived and bore Ca in" (Gen 4: I). "Elkanah knew hi s wife Hann ah, and . . . Hann ah con- ce ived and bore a son" ( I Sam I: 19-20). So also, to "know God" is not a merely abstract intell ectu al thing, but a matter of relationality, love, and trust. Kn owledge of God biblically also has an ethi ca l dimension, and thi s is essential to the prax is dimension of faith. Specifi ca lly, to know God is to do jus- tice. Those who think th ey kn ow God but perpetrate oppress ion and injustice are self-deceived. The Jeremiah speaks for Go el in praise of a fa ith ful man , Josiah:

Did not yo ur fa th er eat and drink and do justice and righteousness? Then it was well with him . He judged th e cause of the poor and needy; then it was well. ls not this to kn ow me? says the . (Jer 22: 15-1 6) lsaiah too thinks of knowledge of God as practi ca l righteousness. At the end of hi s grea t visionary of universa l peace, he dec lares, on God's behalf: "They will not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth will be full of the knowledge of th e Lord, as the waters cover the sea" (Is 11 :9). According to and Jeremiah, th en, li vin g and acting ri ghteously, or at least sincerely attempting to do so (however imperfec tly), is essential to knowing God, since loving God means lovi ng justice. In th e , John says so mething similar about love: "One who loves is of God and knows God ... for God is Love" (I Jn 4:7-8). Knowledge of God, then, is relational and practical ; it is not merely the possession of academic, metap hysical information. What is given in revelation is not so me theory or in fo rm ation about the transcendent. What is given is practical wisdom and relationship. It is typical for Chri stians to speak of Jesus Chri st as "the revelation of God," since, for Chri sti ans, the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus is decisively and 42 Reflections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality incompara bl y revelato ry of God and therefore also di sc loses the truth about humanity, creation, hi story, and the futu re. A good dea l will be said elsewhere in thi s book about Jes us as reve lati on, but it wo ul d be fa lse chri stomoni sm (a n overl y exclusive emphas is on Chri st onl y) to suggest that reve lati on occured first and onl y in Jes us of Nazareth . Qui te apa rt fro m th e ques ti on of genera l revela- ti on in the rea lm of nature, or di vin e self- di sclos ure in the other great reli gious tra ditions of th e world , we know in th e Chri stian tra di tion that the God revealed in Jes us th e Chri st was already kn own before the time of Jesus, and is still known, by the Jews. Revelati on as God's redemptive self- di sclosure in Jes us has its indispensa bl e, sine qua non presuppos iti on in th e his tory of revelation with the peo pl e of . There we fi nd estab li shed th e pattern of God's se lf- disclosure through pro pheti c ca llin g, promi se, and hi stori cal event. The li fe , death , and res urrection of Jes us as reve latory event have to be understood as con- ti nu ous with the pattern that we already fi nd in the Hebrew scriptures.

Vocation, Promise, Word Event

While th e te rm "revelati on" and its accompanyin g ve rbs do not occur very freq uentl y in the Hebrew scriptures (see Gen 35:7; 2 Sam 7:27; Hab 2: 19; Job 38: 17; Is 22: 14; 40:5 ; etc.), th e bas ic premi se is th at God communicates, God "speaks." Much more co mmo n is the term dabar of , th e Word of the Lo rd , whi ch comes over and over aga in to patri archs, judges, or chari smati c lead- ers and : "The Word of the Lord came to Abra m" (Gen 15: I); "The Word of th e Lo rd ca me to Nathan" (2 Sam 7:4); th e Word of the Lord yo u rul ers .. ." (Is I : 1O); and so on. For our purposes here, it seems use fu I to foc us on two of the earl iest and most fo rm ati ve in stances of revelati on: the ca ll of Abra ham and the story of , his ca lling, and the exodus fr om Egypt, whi ch may be referred to as "Word events," or events that speak. It is imposs ibl e, of course , to reconstruct a hi storicall y fa ctual account of what happened between God and or between God and Moses. The encounters that we hear about in Genes is and Exodus we re surely ineffable and beyond apt description. Besides that, they come to us from a fa r di stant time, were recounted orall y, and were later written by ancient peopl e whose mentali ty was quite different fro m our ow n. But these ancient stori es of Israel's experi- ences with God are so importan t- not onl y for our fa ith tradition bu t fo r our whole re li gious and cultural hi story- that we dare not ignore th em. We are to ld of a holy One who ca ll s and in spires human serva nts, wh o establi shes covenant with a peo pl e, who pro mi ses the bl essing of a better future, who command s and leads the peopl e toward that future. We hea r of God's Word coming to Abraham, who is still regarded by Jews, Chri sti ans, and Muslim s as their common "fat her" in faith : Revelation and Fai th 43

Now th e Lord said to Ab ram, "Go from your country and your kindred and your fa th er's house to the land that I will show yo u. I will make of yo u a great nati on, and I wi 11 bless yo u, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless th ose who bless you , and the one who cu rses yo u I will curse; and in you all the fa mili es of th e earth shall be blessed. " (Gen 12: 1-3)

Thi s leav in g behind of country and kindred, setting out to a new land and a whole new li fe , is remembered by the spiritual descendants of Abraham (Jews, Chri s- tians, and Mu slim s) as the fo unding eve nt of their peopl es and their fa ith tradi- tions. We should not overlook th at peopl e of our own time may often respond to such a story with skepti cism. We may imag in e th e conversation of a confirma- tion class of bright questioning teenagers reactin g to Genes is 12:

Conversation

DE13 13 1E: But are we really supposed to believe that God talks to people like this? I 've never heard God talk and I don't kn ow anybody else who has. If somebody told me th at they heard God talking to them I 'd think they were crazy.

R EV. BRIAN : [Stroking hi s beard ] Yes, one might think that such people were in th e gnjJ of auditory hallucations.

JASON : And besides. it says God will curse people who curse them. Do we really think God curses people? ft sounds like th ese people made this stuff up to make th eir own nation sound like th e greatest and most important one in the world.

R EV. BRIAN : ft do es sound rather like a territorial, tribal god, doesn 't ft ?

K IM: Wai t a minute' You can 't just criticize the like that ' I thought this was th e Word of God' You make it sound like it 's all a pile of. . . rubbish!

R EV. BRI AN : Oh definitely not rubbish, Kim i And you 're right, we should listen to th ese stories in a spirit of reverence, listening for God's Word. But we can i help criticizing th e Bible if it do esn 't make sense to us. We 'II either reject it as nonsense or find some credible way to understand it and learn from it. But J agree with you, Kim, somebody didn i j ust make all this up to fool us. There must be something ve1y significant behind it. Jn fact these old stories, for all their human glitches, are telling us sornething of earthshaking importance that has had an enormous impact on the 1vhole world.

D EBB IE: Really? What '.s· so earthshaking about old.fairy tales?

REV. BRIAN : Well, three great world faiths had th eir beginning in some such ancient events as these. Whole civilizations, their moralities and cultures and 44 Reflections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality , their art and literature, took th eir beginnings here. A concept of one God, and concepts of time and his/my and the ji.1ture, as well. And, most impor- tant Ji-o m our point al view, Jesus came out a/ this tradition' In /act, the whole world has been blessed thro ugh this history, which started with Abraham!

The youn g peopl e seem impressed but not entirely convi nced. But most of us, in a ll honesty, need to ask: Does Goel reall y speak such quotabl e words to a human being? C ri tical study of th e suggests that th e words attrib- uted to God here re fl ect the later ex peri ence and fa ith of the Jewish community and its own actual hi story of covenant and bl essing. Here th e fa ith community, long centuries after th e events of God with Abraham, imagin ati vely interprets th e beginnings of its remark abl e nati onal and spiritual hi story by means of this story of vocati on and pro mi se 4 The story of Abraham refl ects Israel's subsequent po li tical and spiritual hi story. We need not deny, though, that some such revela- tory event occurred and th at a dim memory of it is recorded here, as it was passed down through many generati ons by word of mouth. The later his tory of God with the Hebrew peopl e also te ll s us of God speaking with peopl e, especia ll y the pro ph ets, and so it should not surprise us that such an experi ence of God com- municating stands at the very beginning of th eir fa ith tradition. We will not nec- essaril y accept it in detail as hi sto ri call y factua l. What we have to take seri ously is the Jews' confession of fa ith th at a di vine presence and bl essing have accom- pani ed its hi story and have been with them from the beginning, that God speaks through parti cular propheti c indi vidu als, and th at th ey are indeed a "called" nati on, through whom in truth the whole world has been blessed. The "earth- shaking impact on th e whole world " in cl udes the ori g inati on of three great world fa iths th at have shaped civili zati ons fo r centuries. The call of Abraham may be said to have initiated a whole new concept of time and of hope fo r long term hi s- tory in whi ch God is purposefull y at work. We find the same pattern of calling, command, promise, and event in the story of Moses:

Moses was keeping the fl ock of hi s father-in-law Jethro, the priest of Midian; he led hi s fl ock beyond th e wilderness, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. There the of the Lord appeared to him in a fl ame of fire out of a bush; he looked, and th e bush was bl azing, yet it was not consumed. Then Moses said, " I must turn asid e and look at this great sight, and see why the bush is not burned up." When the Lord saw that he had turned aside to see, God call ed to him out of the bush, "Moses, Moses!" A nd he said, " Here I am. " Then he said , "Come no closer! Remove the sandals fr om your feet, for the pl ace on which you are standing is holy ground." He said further, " I am th e God of your fa ther, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." And Moses hid hi s face, fo r he was afraid to look at God. (Exod 3: 1-6) Revelation and Fa ith 45

Thu s we are to ld of an un speakabl e, awesome encounter with a holy One who co mmands and pro mi ses. Was there rea ll y a tree burning that was not co nsumed? Di d God speak just these words to Moses? We need not think so. The story is wri tten down muc h later than the event and in li ght of other grea t events that occurred subsequ ently. We may bel ieve, though, th at Moses had an in describa bl e experience of be ing add ressed by One who spoke directly to him in hi s particu- lar circ umstance of oppress ion and anger, of longin g and hope. We know that fi re, in many re li gious tra di tions, sign ifies an epiphany or puri fyi ng, purging presence of the di vin e,5 and so we may co nsider the burnin g bus h to be sy mboli c ofa "burning" divin e presence im pi ngin g on the mind of Moses. Yet even in rev- elati on, God remai ns mystery. Moses is told to "come no closer. " We are told that, on another occasion, Moses be holds onl y the "back" of God, fo r "you ca n- not see my face; for no one shall see me and li ve" (Exod 33:20). A hum an being ca nn ot bear to see God. We shoul d note also th at God 's revea ling is not onl y se/f reve lati on. God also revea ls something- a purpose and a promi se. In the story of Moses and the exodu s, God revea ls th e divin e intention fo r liberty and justice fo r th e enslaved peo pl e. We must keep in min d that the story is to ld fro m hinds ight, fro m the per- specti ve of the coming libera ti ve event hav ing already occurred . J. Severin o Croatto, a Latin American Old Testament theologian, notes:

th e Promise, or the vocation, as narrated, ta kes for granted the experi- ence of th e li beration and the ex istence oflsrael as a peopl e on its la nd . The Pro mise expresses in the form of a pl an the event whi ch, in rea li ty, engenders the Pro mi se as word. Such is the ri chn ess of th e Pro mi se or the "vocati on." It speaks with a depth not grasped at th e tim e of Abra- ham and of Moses. 6

Again , we may accept th at so mething awesome did happen with Moses on the moun ta in . Whatever precisely happened between God and Moses, what we have in Exodu s 3 is the fait hfu l testim ony of th e Hebrew peo pl e to the ineffable pres- ence of th e holy One of lsrael,7 who ca ll ed th em to liberty and life. Because they li ved within an ongo ing tradi tion ofa se lf-revealin g God, they knew th at that tra- diti on had a decisive fo undati on in a reve lato ry ex perie nce of God "speaking. " No doubt, ora l traditions had been passed down th ro ugh the ge nerati ons te llin g of such encoun ters. It is reasonable to ask, Where, after all , did the fa ith of Israel origi nate, if not in so me such awesome ex peri ence of being addressed, com- manded, and led? And what, or ra ther who, was revea led, but th e gracious, com- manding and liberating God, whose self-disclos ure to tall y de-absoluti zed and desacra li zed the deified ph araoh of Egypt and all earthl y powers and auth oriti es? For Moses, and fo r all the generations of Jews to come, de ity has been hence- fo rth thi s holy, liberatin g One, who led, inspired, and empowered the escape in to freedom. The events of vocati on and pro mi se have been earth shaking in deed. 46 Reflections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality

They have had incompara bl e impact not only on reli gious and political con- sciou sness but on th e whole hi story of humankind. Without the burning bu sh and th e subsequent exodu s from Egy pt, neith er th e Hebrew faith tradition nor Chris- tianity would ex ist. Nor would so-ca ll ed Chri sti an culture or Western civl ization as we know it. The Islami c raith would ne ver have ari sen without thi s Hebrew, exodus background, nor the long brilliant hi story or Islami c civili za ti on, ce too recognizes Moses as a prophet and arose out of a Jew ish/Chri sti an mili eu . The antecedent of Christian faith and its ori gi nating so urce is this Hebrew experience of the self-revealin g, holy, and liberating God and the trusting, obe- dient res ponse to this revelati on , whi ch we call faith. But it was not only th e divinely initiated vocation and promise that were rev- elatory in the ea rly Hebrew ex peri ence. It was, above all , the hi storical event itself which became the vehicle of revelation fo r th e Hebrew people, and most specificall y th e event of the exodus from in Egypt. According to Croatto, "the Exodu s is the key event that models the faith of Israel. Unless we begin from thi s central event, neither lsrael's fa ith nor the formation of its religious traditions and sacred books are understandable."8 It is not my purpose here to offer a complete of the exodus texts- a massive task- but to ex pl ore its significance for the meaning of revelati on and fo r fa ith as res ponse to revelatio n. It was the Jews, says Mircea Eliade, who, because of their deci sive an d remarkabl e liberation from Egy pt and th e prophetic tradition that followed , "were th e first to discover the mea ning of hi story as the ep iph any of God. " Chri stian ity, out of its Hebrew roots, spread throughout the world its di scovery of "perso nal freedom and continuous tim e (in place of cycli- cal time)."9 The whole wo rld has begun to think of time as mov ing forward in a linear mann er toward an end or goa l. Peopl e interpreted the event of liberation as a divine event, a Word event. The event moved them to believe in and to trust the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and to order their li ves and society in obedi- ence to God 's law; that is, it was the ground of their faith. But for most of us today, immersed as we are in a criti ca l and modern sc i- entific worldview, the story is fraught with difficulty. We mi ght li sten in once again on our confirmation class, who have read Exodus 1-15 as their week's homework . They have read of th e saving of the infant Moses in the bullrushes by fiv e courageous women; of the midwives Shiphrah and Pu ah, who refu sed to kill the new born baby boys; and of the child 's mother and sister, and the princess. They have read of yo ung Moses' rebellion against the beating ofa Hebrew slave and the killing of the Egypti an slave master; hi s experience of the divine call at th e burn ing bu sh; hi s miracul ous deeds and hi s demands to the pharaoh to release hi s people; the horrendous plagues, the Passover, and th e death of the Egy pti an firstborn ; and finally the dra matic escape across the sea:

Then Moses stretched out hi s hand over the sea. The Lord drove the sea back by a strong east wind all ni ght, and turned the sea into dry land ; Revelntion and Fa ith 47

and the waters were divided. The went into the sea on dry ground, the waters forming a wa ll for them on their right and on their left. (Exod 14:21 -22)

Conversation

R EV. BRI AN: Well, rny ji·iends, I hope you all read Exodus 1-15 this week and found ii interesting. What did you think of if ?

JASON: Wow! Awesome! Co uldn I possibly believe ii, of course, but it makes a really good stmy! [N ervous laughter from the others] I really got oflon all that stuflabout God sending plagues and drying up th e sea!

K1M: 1 don't see why you need to mock it. Why can I God do whatever he likes? If God can create th e whole universe, I guess he can arrange.for a.few plagues, or dry up a lillle bit of water'

JASON : Well, I haven '! no ticed any lately. How come God didn '1 send a plague or two to lraq so the army wouldn I have lo go in with their guys/iring? A parting of the sea or something like th at might have helped out in South Amer- ica too, or Bosnia, or Rwanda, or Koso vo. Jf God can do this kind of thing why doesn I he do ii more r!fien? Mayb e he should have helped out th e people in the planes before they crashed in New York and Washington, or the people in the World Trade Center; or the innocent people that got bombed in or Baghdad!

R EV. BRIAN : Hey, Jason, I had no idea you were so well informed about politics'

JASON: [A little embarrassed] Yeah, my parents take me on all these peace marches and political rallies.

D EBB IE: 1 've also got a problem with this type of God. He seems so egotistical, showing off his power and hardening peoples· hearts. Are we really supposed to bow down to a God like this?

R EV. BRIAN: You 're right, Debbie. lt s· a very flawed concept of God, isn lit? The God that we meet in Jesus is quite different. On that basis I would criticize the idea of God that is going on in this story. On the other hand, the God who shows up in this story was a huge breakthrough for that tim e. Here you 've got a God who takes sides with lillle people. This is a holy God of compassion who hates slave1y. This was a far c1y from th e deified pharaoh, and in the name of this holy God, th ose little people dnred to d f'. fy the pharaoh. That was earthshaking.for the time!

MATTH EW: OK, so it was a great breakthrough for th e time. But can we take it seriously now? 1 think th e exodus is a great sto1y, but it do esn 't seem like it hap- 48 Reflections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality pened in this world f-/ ave you ever seen The on TVi' Moses wa ves his wand and th e waler sland1· up like wa//s on both sides' Neal stuff, but gel real. [Laughs and smiles]

KIM: [Not amused, flu shed with anger] By the time you guys are.finished, th ere won '1 be any Bible or le/ii

JASON : [After a bri ef sil ence] Maybe we should believe ii, but not take it liter- a// y . . . '?

DEBB IE: }'au mean it'.\' al/ ,1y 111bols and myths like the and Eve sto1y, lo teach us a lesson? Like ii never real/ )! happened al a/f ?

JASON : [Shruggin g] Yeah, maybe.

Rev. B RI AN: Wei/, J agree we don '1 have lo take ii all literally as/actual history, and we 're right lo be critical of its concept of God. But I don r really think it 5· a myth eithe1: Re111 ern be1; the Jews are real people with a real religious histo1y Their s/01y and.faith did actua//y get going somehow. Of course they 're not mod- ern, scientific people, so they do n r tel/ it the way we would today. But it 5· basic to their national memory that somehow things got started in an event of libera- tion, and their faith is that God had something to do with it.

K IM : A little more 1han "something lo do with it," wouldn i you say? !find the slory rea//y inspiring. /1 kind of'gets me excited to think what God could do 1f we believed in him enough.

R EY. BRIAN : Well, yes. Th ey think of God essentially as th eir Liberator, you see? They believe that Cod is al work within human actions and historical events bringing about j ustice and.freedom. We may still believe th at, without crediting the spectacular miracles. Cod can work thro ugh natural processes and thro ugh people :1· courage. Like the midwives, defying the pharaoh and refi1sing to kill the infa nt boys. And Moses, daring to confro nt the pharaoh. The miracles tell us that something astounding happened and the people were amazed We can still be amazed today when great events of liberation happen, eith er personally or s o c i a l~ )!. We might even say that wherever people are set free, God is in ii . . .

The exodus event was central and fo undational fo r the fa ith of Israe l. Fol- lowing thi s event, th e Decalogue of God 's commandments given by Moses opened with the words: " I am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You sha ll have no beside me" (Exod 20: 1-3). Whatever event occurred at the beginn ing of Israel's nati onal existence, it has to have been such as to account fo r th e exodus-centered covenant fa ith in a li fe-giv- ing, people-freeing God. We cann ot reconstruct the event and do not need to. But how are we to think of events as revelatory? It is clear enough, as in the conver- sati on above, th at most contemporary people do not find miraculous verti cal/ interventi ons very credible. They are fa r removed from our Uevrlation and Faith 49 norm al experi ence of li fe . Remarkab le things may occur, even answe rs to for healing, for exampl e, but they appear to happen in and through deeply com- pl ex , but natural processes. Plagues of locusts, th e sudd en death of firstborn chil- dren, a river fl ow in g with bl ood, and the timely subsiding ofa body of water, no longer appear to us (except in insurance poli cies) to be "acts of Go el ." We have to think of God's relati on to the wo rld and humanity in some other way. Revela- tio n, too, while we mu st think of it as a presence or inbreakin g of a holy tran - scendence, need not be seen as a supernatural setting as id e of the laws of nature. Had twenty-fi rst-ce ntury journalists bee n present to observe and report on the exodus events, probably th ey wo uld have found a politi ca l struggle, perhaps with element s of guerill a vio lence and bloodshed , elements of luck, and a reli giously in spired group of freedom fi ghters led by a charismatic reli gious leader. As writ- ers for the secular press they could have interpreted the whole remarkable event quite without reference to Goel or to miracles. However, such an account would have been entirely in adeq uate from the point of view of the insiders, the parti ci- pants in the event, especially as they reflected and pond ered upon it some time later. Fro m the vantage point of libe ra ti on hav in g been ach ieved, and the ongo- in g sense of th e presence of th eir liberatin g God with them, th ey looked back and saw th e event as an act of God, a mys teri ous, redem pti ve event in whi ch some- thing or Someone more than th emselves was at work. An event of such profound consequ ence mi ght, quite reasonabl y, be interpreted as an event of God. The story as we have it is not, of course, a bare chronicle of events but a "faith-ful" account of events as interpreted. As peopl e of the twenty-first century, we are likely to read th e exodu s story with quite different eyes than th ose of ancient readers, and yet th e story conti nues to fa scinate and inspire us. We may wish that such supernatural events would occur to liberate Africans or Iraqis or Palestini- ans today- or di sabl ed folk or peopl e in our own country stru ggling to live on social assistance. Yet it is often precisely these, whose circumstances most resemble those of the oppressed Hebrews in Egy pt, who find hope in thi s story. The hermeneutical concepts of Paul Ricoeur and J. Severino Croatto are helpful for an und erstanding of th e exodu s event as revelation . Certain historical events, Ricoeur says, are suffici entl y ri ch with meanin g and fertil e th at they gen- erate oth er events and become fo undational for a hi story of ideas, institutions, and practi ces. This happens when th e event is interpreted and thi s interpretation becomes th e "Word" of th e event. The interpretati on (e.g., th e exodu s story as we have it in the Bibl e) as written text, because of its ve ry ri chness and depth, takes on a life of its own. 10 " Di stanti ati on" (di stan cing) occurs between th e ancient author and the contemporary reader. Or, as he also expresses it, the tex t is " poly- semi c" (it has potenti al fo r multiple mea nings); it ex hibits a surplus or reservo ir of mean in g. 11 As Ri coeur insists, a responsible exegesis of the tex t will still explore the "world behind the text" (authorship, date, hi storical circum stances in which it was written) in order to und erstand what the author mea nt to say in that time and pl ace. It is not permissibl e to make the tex t say just anythin g we want 50 Refl ections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality it to say. Yet a contemporary reading will also attend to the "world in front o f th e text," th at is, the in terpreter 's own world of here-and-now. What does it mean fo r us today? What is th e li ving Word o f the ancient event fo r us? Or, to put it di f- fe rentl y, w hat or who oppresses us today, and how is God seeking to lead us to greater fullness of li fe? If we regard th e bib Ii cal accoun t as " holy scripture," presumably thi s is because we be t ieve it continues to speak God 's Word to us today, so that the exo- dus was not an event solely fo r th e ancient Hebrews, but continues to be revela- tory of God's w ill fo r a ll peopl e. Exodus, then, is still incomplete. While it is a once-upon-a-time actual event, it is also th e name of God's ongoing liberating work in the world . The " hermeneutical circle" (circle of in terpretati on) to whi ch Croatto refers, or "dialecti c of Scripture and context,'' 12 so typical of third-world liberati oni st method and hermeneutics, is anoth er way of stating the point. God 's self-revela- ti on, God 's leading and in spi ration and saving work among us, is a continuing, ongoing rea li ty, as we read the scriptures again and again in ever-changing cir- cumstances. In the Spirit and in expectant fa ith, we read and reread the story, fi nding fresh meaning as we put to it the questi ons that ari se out of our own needs and dil emmas . The circul arity between the ancient text and our present context becomes in fact a hermeneutical spiral in which the li ving Word never ceases to be revelatory in new ways. Faith as response to revelati on is not, then, a case of believing in authoritative doctrines or concepts (though th ese may be a helpful part of our thinking) nor even a response to a once-and-fo r-a ll revealed-ness in the past. Rather, it is a continuin g response to a li ving and revealing Word which speaks fresh messages to ever- changing contexts. In fa ith , th e text in spires us to look for new exodus events. Thus, fa ith as response to present revelati on, in the Holy Spiri t, finds new hope and new guidance and challenges us to play our responsible rol es in th e remaking of indi vidual li ves, and in the making of hi story. Revelati on, then, is not simply something that happened in past events. It has been especiall y the liberation th eologians of the third worl d who have found inspiration in the exodus story in our time and guidance for the struggles of their parti cul ar contexts. The hermeneuti cal circle, Croatto points out, runs in two directi ons. The contemporary context is interpreted in li ght of the exodus story. The story illuminates and assists in th e analysis of what is happening (in hi s case in Latin Ameri ca). The context is analyzed and interpreted in li ght of the biblical Word . But in turn, the present meaning of the biblical Word is illuminated by the circumstances, needs, and questi ons o f the present time. Croatto finds many mes- sages in the story concerning God's compassionate presence in history and God 's will fo r justi ce and freedom, concerning the mentalities o f oppressor and oppressed, and concerning love, violence, vocati on, and leadership. As a person of our time, he does not expect that fa bulous supern atural interventions will put Revelation and Faith 5 1 an end to oppression in Latin America. " It would be ingenuous to hope that the same will happen today in literal fo rm."

We want to comment on th e manifestation of the power of Yahweh, superior to that of the oppressor pharaoh, who can be overcome onl y by another " power." Now today there is a very clear that th ere is no power superior to that of a united and commi tted " people." When an entire people rejects a tyrant it creates an irremissible "power vacuum." The Hebrews' decision to rebel coll ectively and to fl ee ... insured their success. The pharaoh could do nothing against a united group. But thi s group was organi zed and did not hesitate to march because it had been "conscientizecl " and knew what it had to do, despite 1 the initial resistance and cloubt. '

Croatto does not claim to be able to describe the strategy of the liberation event in any detail. Obviously it was a political and social event that was interpreted and " indeed should be interpreted for a Christian conscience- as the will of God." 14 It was precisely the revelatory self-d isclosure of Goel to Moses, and th rough Moses to the people, that decisive ly conscientized th em and thereby undermined the authority of the deified ruler. God's presence and lead in g as holy, just, and compassionate, liberated the peopl e to play their own responsible roles in the making of a liberated hi story. "Exodus" is therefore endlessly fertile as in spirati on for today's stru ggles, both social and personal, fo r groups or individ- uals, against all kinds of tyrannies. This is so also in the case of the prophets who fo ll owed centuries later. They too- Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel- believed that Goel spoke to them God's own "Word," but, as we said earlier, not simpl y to provide in for- mati on about God's mysterious Self. Goel is always the Goel of the promise, who commands, judges, and acts, and above a ll promises a future for which the peo- pl e both hope and strive. At th e same time, the self-revealing God also remains concealed. One of the prophets declares: "Truly, you are a God who hides him- self, 0 Goel of Israel, th e Saviour" (I s 45: 15). Again , one could dismiss the propheti c announcements as the delusions of ancient, precritical minds, or as signs of auditory hallucin ati on and mental illness. Yet when one reads their mes- sages one cannot so easil y dism iss them, for one finds wisdom and eloquence, courage, hope, and for the future. The prophets brought a demanding ethic of justice from the God of exodus. People of fai th still di scern in their words the Word of God, uttered fa llibly, yet powerfully, through fl awed human beings. Of particular interest to is th e hope of the prophets for what the God of exodus had in store fo r the peopl e through the work of a great anointed king, or suffering servant, w ho would come in the power of God 's Spirit to bring justice and peace to th e world (e.g., Isaiah chaps. 11 , 42, 6 1). The first Christians identified Jesus as this expected one, the Messiah, the Suffering Servant of Goel. 52 Reflections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality

Jesus as Revelation

It is within thi s traditi on of God's revelation to Israel and th e prophetic hope th at Jesus appea rs, standing in th e lin e of the prophets. Hi s beauti ful life of preachin g, teaching, and hea lin g is carri ed out with ex trao rdin ary authority. I-l e inspires th e fa ith and love o f' hi s di scipl es and the hatred of the powerful. I-l e is cru cifi ed on a Roman cross and di es with fo rgiveness on hi s lips. I-l e is rai sed from th e dead. Aft erwa rd s, from th e perspecti ve of th e resurrecti on, his whole li fe and death, seen in light of hi s res urrection, are unde rstood as God's unique and decisive revelation and sa lvation. We will have to say much more about a ll of thi s in a later chapt er, but we need to note here something qu alitatively differ- ent in th e story of ongoin g revelati on. The New Tes tament authors proclaim a decisive revelatory event, a Word event of a different kind , in th e Ii fe, death , and resurrecti on of Jes us. The Letter to the Hebrews puts it thi s way: " Long ago Go el spoke to our ancestors in many and va ri ous ways by th e pro ph ets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son" (Heb I: 1- 2). In what appea rs to be a nascent trinitari ani sm, the Matthean Jes us says not simp ly that he reveals "Goel ," but that he, th e Son, reveals "the Father," and also th at the Father reveals him as th e Chri st (Mt 16: 16). Closely related concepts are li ght, wisdom, and Word . Paul , after the res urrecti on, spea ks of Jes us as God's li ght : " For it is the God who sa id , ' Let li ght shine out of dark- ness,' who has shone in our hea rts to give the li ght of the kn owl edge of th e glory of God in the face of Jes us Christ" (2 Cor 4: 6). Jes us not onl y teaches wi sdom but is th e Wisdom () of Goel ( I Cor I :30). According to John, Jesus not onl y brings li ght but is "the li ght of the world" (Jn 8: 12). Jes us does not, like the pro ph ets, simpl y .speak a Word fro m God but is, in hi s whole li fe, death , and res- urrection, God's own made fl es h (Jn I: 14). Jesus, then, not merely in hi s teaching and preaching, but in his very person, incarnates God's own presence. We note th at th e Greek wo rd apokalypsis (translated "revelati on") very often ca rri es an eschatologica l connotati on; that is, it pertains to the end-time, the tim e of th e fulfilled rei gn of God. Thi s future orientati on of revelati on coheres with the revelatory promise in th e Hebrew scriptures. Paul writes of wa iting for "th e revealing of our Lord Jes us Chri st" ( I Cor I :7 ) and of "the glory that is to be revealed" (Rom 8: 18). He writes of Jesus Chri st "the revelati on of the mystery that was kept secret fo r long ages bu t is now di sc losed" (Rom 16:25). First Peter spea ks of "a salvati on ready to be revealed in the last time" ( I :5), whi ch is the tim e when "Jesus Chri st will be revealed" ( I :7). The apocalypti c book entitl ed the Reve lati on of Jo hn begin s by proc laiming "the revelati on of Jesus Chri st" as the end-time victory of God's reign over all ev il , oppression, and death . It is true, I think, that the first Chri sti ans' whole perce ption of Jes us as revelation, apoka- lypsis, fl owed preeminentl y from th e event of the res urrecti on. Hi s preaching and teachin g, hi s love, compass ion, and co urage would not in th emselves account fo r Revelation and Faith 53 their naming him Mess iah (C hri st), and Word of Goel made fl es h. The res urrec- tion (as I shall argue later) is the apoka/ypsis par excell ence. As the sign of God 's final victory over ev il , injustice, and death , it may be seen as the proleptic (ahead of time) appearance of God 's etern al reign , the anti cipation of future consum - matio n. 15 As such, the res urrecti on is sine qua non for the proclamation of Jesus as God's decisive se lf-revelation. Has revelati on ceased sin ce the time of Jesus? Is nothing more to be ex pected until th e co nsummati on of God's etern al reign? Paul certainly did not think so. He believed that he received personal from Goel , by which he mea nt guidance and direction fo r hi s mi ss ion (see 1 Cor 14: 6; Ga l I: 12 ; 2:2 ; Phil 3: 15). This ca n be seen as another way to speak of the guidance of the Holy Spirit. But if Jesus Chri st is the revelation of Goel , it fo ll ows that ongo ing or con- tinuing revelation witnesses to him , or is at least congruent with what we find in him . All eged revelati ons are measured according to the "canon" of Jesus him self. We may draw a di stincti on here between "ori ginal revelation" and "depen- dent revelation."16 For biblical fait h, the event of the exodu s, fo r example, is ori gin al revelati on, a decisive libera ti ve , revelatory event, including the call of Moses and the struggle and eventual escape to freedom , which became norma- ti ve fo r the Hebrew people fo r all later di scernment of God 's Word , presence, and activity. But .J ews of later genera ti ons, who were not present fo r the liberati on from Egypt , nevertheless receive its revelati on, li ve within its truth , and regularly celebrate it liturgicall y. Dependent revelation is one of remembrance an d imagi- native re li vi ng of the event (anamnes is). So also, specifically among Chri stians, Jesus Chri st above al l is ori gi nal reve lati on and becomes normative for all sub- sequent alleged revelati on. The origi nal revelatory events establish God 's iden- tity and purpose. Yet later generati ons of Chri stians also receive the revelation in a dependent way, hea ring th e Word of Goel through scripture and preaching and celebrating it liturgical ly and sacramentall y. Revelati on, then, is th e bas ic suppos ition for the Chri sti an knowledge of Goel. Together with the concept of the Word of Goel, it is perhaps the most fun- damental epistemolog ical co ncept for Chri stian theology. We do not speak of it a priori, from outside faith. This is not an axiomatic philosoph ic concept. To receive the kn owledge of Goel is not a natural human possibili ty, nor is it di vinely given informati on. It is not, th en, primaril y " propositional. " Rath er, it is the offer of relationship, of direction, mea nin g, and hope and ca n be spoken of onl y a pos- teriori. wrote with ad mirable clarity about this:

We start out from the fac t that through His Word Go el is actuall y known and wi 11 be kn own again .... The question then cannot be posed in abstracto but onl y in concreto; not a priori but onl y a posteriori. The in abstracto and a priori qu es ti on of the possibility of the kn owledge of Goel obviously pres upposes the ex istence of a pl ace outside the knowl- edge of Goel itself fr om whi ch thi s knowledge can be judged. 17 54 Reflections on Revelation, Faith , and Rationality

In th e last analysis, th en, no hi gher or dee per auth ority ex ists that ca n identify or authori ze it. It is believed and acted upon. It call s fo rth the res ponse of faith.

Faith, Not Sight

Fa ith , of course, is co rrelati ve to revelati on. The concept is unintelli gibl e except as response to a revelati on- a Word , a wisdom, a li ght, by whi ch a per- son is co n fro nted. Paul te ll s us th at "we wa lk by fa ith , not by sight," yet full of confidence (2 Cor 5:7). Here he refi ects the ancient fa ith of Abraham, who left hi s home and kind red behind to go to a land he did not know: " It was by fa ith th at Abraham obeyed the call to set out for a co untry that was th e inh eritance given to him and hi s descend ants, and that he set out without knowing wh ere he was going" (H eb 11 :8). Fa ith is epi stemologica ll y vulnerabl e. Abraham mu st have had confidence, but he must have had difficulty ex pl ainin g hi s acti ons to hi s fa mil y and may have had doub ts himself. Why mu st thi s be so? Why does God as k us to beli eve wh at cann ot be demonstrated? ls thi s not an invitation to intell ectual di shonesty? Are we not then tempted to beli eve as a kind of wish fulfillm ent? Surely preachers and theologians should not encourage peopl e to be gulli ble, to be less intellectu- ally ri gorous th an they are abl e to be. Surely we should not as k for unintelligent fa ith , fo r unquesti onin g credulity' Yet perh aps there is an inner necessity to the vulnerability of faith . The obj ect of inquiry with which we are concerned is God' Not an obj ect among other obj ects; indeed, not an obj ect at all , but th e Subject, the ineffabl e Mystery who li es beyond all epi stemological mastery or control. Thi s is th e holy One whom we cann ot see and still live (Exod 33:20). At the same time the God whom we encounter in the biblical stori es, and especiall y in Jesus, is the gentl e, noncoercive God who does not dominate us, does not dominate even our processes of kn owing- so much so that Paul can say "God's fooli sh- ness is wi ser than human wisdom, and God 's weakness is stronger than human strength " (I Cor I :25). Many authors have described fa ith under various headings, and there is no one correct set of categori es that adequately characteri zes it. I shall speak of Chri sti an faith under fo ur headings: as grounded in experi ence, as trust and hope, as " fo ll owing Jes us," and as kn ow ledge.

1. Faith Grounded in Experience

The word "faith" is often used in an unhelpful way by peopl e who give the impression that having fa ith is (in the words of 's Huckl eberry Finn) "beli eving things that you know aren't really true. " Fa ith is sometimes seen as a matter of holding cert ain opinions simpl y because we want to, or because we Revelation and Faith 55 think we ought to, and therefore a kind of excuse for not thinking hard enough, a form of intell ectual self-indul gence, or letting so me authority do our thinking for us. I reca ll a confirmation class di sc uss ion between so me bright, rather skep- tical teenagers and their mini ster, in which the mini ster was challenged to be clear about what he meant by fa ith . It went so mething like this:

Conversation

JASON: So why do we believe that Jesus rose.fiwn the dead? My.fi'iends· say it '.s- just a.fairytale that somebody made up.

R EV. BRIAN: Well. there are a lot o/arguments that scholars have come up with to make it probable or credible, but in the last analysis, I guess it '.s- a matter of faith.

JASON: Oh. [A little di sappointed]

D EBB IE: Heck, by that kind of reasoning I could believe anything that feels good and say ii 'sfaith. Our science teacher says ii '.s· dishonest to say anything is true if we can i prove ii.

R EV. BRIAN: But we believe lots ofthings we can 't prove scientifically. Ho w about your mother :s love? Can you prove that ? Or that your favourite music is really beautifii/, or that it 's wrong to hurt people'.' fl we apply the methods of" natural science to all spheres of" life, we cut out half of what '.s· important. There are other kinds of reasoning bes ides scientific or mathematical. There are deeper levels of" knowing, and.faith is one of th em.

D EBB IE: Yes, but 1 can experience those things you mention. 1 mean, 1 know my mother loves me because she acts like she does. 1 can see and hear ha 1 can't see Jesus rising from th e dead.

R EV. BRIAN: Hmmm. I see your point. Tru e, f can 't see Jesus rising from the dead, and 1 certainly can i prove to anybody else that he did. But 1 still think my faith in his resurrection is reasonable. 1 guess what I 'm saying is, believing in Jesus is a special kind a/experience. Th e story grabs me, convinces me. Maybe it doesn i knock me right over; but at the end of th e day it persuades me. Not the story of the resurrection all by itse{f," but along with everything else we hear about Jesus- his /i/e. his teaching, his death . My faith isn't based on dry argu- ments. 1 f eel 1 meet the risen Christ as he is presented by the witnesses, and I decide to trust the witnesses. It s risky, but it '.s· a little like trusting another per- son. As a result, a lot of other things in li/e fall into place. l ife makes sense for me. I believe 1 experience Jesus as alive and present in my li/e and he changes my whole outlook on life as a result. 56 Reflections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality

The conversa ti on has a long way to go, and th e young peopl e are not neces- sa ril y co nvinced. The whole matter of beli ev ing in the resurrecti on will have to be di scussed again later. But first, a working definiti on o f' " fa ith ," so th at we kn ow wh at we are talk- ing about: Chri sti an fa ith as we hear of it in th e New Testament is a beli ev in g, tru stin g, obedi ent relati onship to God in Jesus Chri st th ro ugh th e Holy Spiri t. It is not fa ith in God in an abstract sense, but co ncretely, fa ith in th is triune Cod that we kn ow through Chri st and the Spirit. And ind eed it is an experience th at these ea rl y witnesses spea k o f. It is not a case of "beli ev ing" or merely assenting to concepts or doctrines th at they "take on faith " because so me sacred authority has taught them to do so. The di scipl es , of course, had th e unique advantage of knowin g and li vin g with a th oroughl y fl es hl y, visibl e Jesus of Nazareth . Hi s presence with th em was, as th ey te ll it, so gracious and powerful th at their lives could never be the sa me again . They beli eved th at hi s presence was th e very grace of God drawing near to them.18 After hi s death they claim ed to have met him ali ve aga in . They said th at th e power of sin and death had been overco me in him (i. e. , he had brought salvati on). But later New Testament witnesses who did not kn ow Jesus of Nazareth in th e fl es h spoke of kn owin g him through the Holy Spirit (e.g., Paul in I Cor 12:3). Even today, Chri sti ans oft en say that th ey meet Jesus Chri st, that th ey encounter him as a perso nal presence, and th at in him they beli eve they are in touch with th e ultimate mys tery and meaning of things. Their ex peri ence is interpreted ex peri ence, of course. It is mediated through scripture and th e co mmunity of fa ith. Probabl y for most people thi s is not a particularl y spooky ex peri ence or emoti onall y ve ry spectacul ar. It is more likely a deep and qui et ex peri ence, one of recogniti on, of acknowl edgment, including typicall y reli gious dimensions of awe, of mys tery, and of reverence. It may consist in a se nse of being powerfull y addressed (perh aps through the message of a preacher) or of bein g uncondi tionall y loved, of hav ing on e's life renewed or reori ented, of bein g deepl y chall enged or consoled, or of finding that life and the world make sense in a new way. It may happen in th e course of a conversa ti on wi th a beli ever, or in the contex t of worship or holy communion. It is not ideas or concepts (though these are involved) nor some kind of It , but a Th ou, which evokes thi s ex peri ence that we call faith. 19 We hea r the story of Jesus, of hi s Ii fe, deeds, and teachin g, of hi s death and resurrecti on, and th e story "speaks" to us powerfully and convincingly as a "Goel sto1y" or a Word event. Indeed, we may say that through th e story, God speaks, confronts, and grasps us. One Chri stian that I know sometimes likens a meeting with Jesus Chri st to being "hit by a Mack truck! " In oth er words, there is a ce rtain irresisti bility about encoun te ring (in the scripture and the church's procl amati on) one wh ose beauty, love, and authority are so overwhelming that one find s oneself acknowledging him as Lord . Someo ne else told me that at first he di smi ssed the Jesus story as myth or legend, re fusin g to take it seriously, but somehow he could not get it out of hi s mind. Jesus would not go away. Hi s own reasoning processes told him th at Rcvc/ation and Faith 57 so mehow he had to account for the fact of' Jes us, and in the encl , ex pl ainin g away Jesus just wasn't convinc in g. Others mi ght choose a ge ntl er im age th an th e Mack truck. We could also speak of th e ex peri ence of wo nde rful mu sic, say Vi va ldi 's Fo ur Seasons, or the Hun ga ri an Rh apsody, or Tsc haikowsky's Vi olin Concerto in D Min or (perhaps I shoul d mention so mething of th e perform ances of the Celin e Di on, Sarah Bri ght ma n, or Enya)- nrn sic that sweeps upon the li stener, grasping attention, mov in g emoti ons, co mm andin g ad mi ration an d praise. We don't be li eve th e mu sic is bea utifu l because someone argued us in to it logica ll y on the basis of some pre mi se. Nor cou ld we demonstrate its bea uty to someone who di d not hear it. So also, th e gospel story of Jesus, hi s life, death , and resur- rection, bl ows us away with the Sp irit 's gentl e pe rsuasive power, claim ing our acknow ledgment , evok in g our love, reo ri enting our li ves. "Let anyo ne with ears to hea r li sten! " Jes us frequentl y says (Mk 4: 9; Mt 13:9; Lk 14: 35). The One wh o ca n so save us, remake us, in spire us to love, liberate us, and give us meanin g and hope is precisely what we mea n by "th e di vin e. " We mu st acknowledge, tho ugh, th at our fa ith response to .J es us is not always so dra mati c. As we menti oned ea rlier, in eve1y congrega ti on one fi nds many indi - vidu als whose com mitm ent is deep and se rio us, who perh aps grew up in faith and in th e church from in fa ncy, remembe ri ng no dra mati c moment of conver- sion. Yet they are co ntinuall y moved by th e .Jesus story. Such peopl e often do not speak ex pli citly of the Holy Spi rit, nor even of meetin g Jesus. We may name our fa ith ex peri ence in many ways, or even remain relatively in articul ate about it, bu t it may be rea l all th e sa me. Then, too, we are aware of some peo pl e in the churches whose fa ith is so very vague or unin fo rm ed, or so un ex pressed, or so "way out" th at we doubt if th ey ca n be sa id to have fa ith at all . But we could be complete ly wrong about th at. We have to be ca refu l about passi ng negative judg- ments about other peopl e's relat ionship to Go el . It is not fo r us to decide who has fa ith and who has not (especiall y when people say th ey have). One im po rta nt ser- vice that theologica ll y educa ted pastors or teachers may perfo rm is precisely to help Christi ans understan d and name their fa ith ex peri ence. Chri sti an faith , th en, I wa nt to in sist, is not a merely groundless subj ecti vism nor a mere acceptance of ex tern al reli gious auth ority. It has to do with experi- encin g, encountering, and res pondin g to One who stand s over again st us as an objecti ve Other. For Chri sti ans thi s Oth er is not a vague mystical so mething, but the perso n Jesus, the Christ, whose character and deeds are recounted in the Gospels, who is ri sen and present to us by the Spiri t, and , thro ugh him, hi s Abba in whom he tru sted. Of course one could still say th at one has thi s kind of experi ence because one was brought up to have it or because, in our culture, thi s is th e kind of reli- gious experience we are conditioned to have . And there wo uld be truth in that. Had we been brought up in Indi a, fo r exampl e, we mi ght we ll have had a kind of Hindu fa ith , the kind of fa ith fo r whi ch a very di ffe rent culture had equipped us. This is one good for takin g oth er peo pl e's re li gious or fa ith ex peri ences 5 8 Refl ections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality seri ously and bei ng open to th e wisdom they have to offer. In th e mea ntime, we ca n spea k onl y of what we know; we ca n speak onl y "after the fac t"- that it is Jesus and hi s story th at have grasped our minds and our li ves.

2. Faith as Trust and Hope

lfwe peruse the New Testa ment literature, we fin d other specifi c content fo r the word "faith ." The most predom in ant meaning is trust, and thi s is in separabl e from fa ith as hope. In the Synopti c Gospels we find Jes us ca lling hi s hea rers to "beli eve the good news" of the corning kin gdom. This beli eving is believing in the basileia (reign) of God. Jes us frequentl y te ll s peopl e, "Your fa ith has made you whole" (Mk 5:34; Mt 9:22; Lk 8:48). Jes us in spired peo pl e to fa ith and hope in God, which became powerful in their li ves. Ev idently, Jesus himself had fa ith, whi ch was essenti all y tru st in hi s Abba. The author of the Letter to th e Hebrews ca ll s him the "pi oneer and perfec ter of our fa ith" (Heb 12:2). That is, Jesus, as full y human li ke us, also knew th e ri skiness and vulnerabili ty of fa ith. He had fa ith fi rst. We fo llow him in hi s fa ith in God. Yet, already in th e Synoptics, Jesus him- self is proc laim ed as the obj ect of fa ith . In the li ght of hi s resurrecti on and of Pen- tecost, Jesus is seen to be "the Saviour wh o is Chri st the Lord " (Lk 2: I 0). We are enj oin ed to fo llow him , to ca ll him Lord , Chri st, Son of God, and to beli eve in him (Mk 9:42; 6:35). Aga in , in Jo hn , we hear "beli eve in God, beli eve also in me" (Jn 14: I). For John , Jes us is "th e onl y-begotten Son," give n so that "who- ever beli eves in him shall not peri sh" (3 : 16). For Paul , our earli est New Testament author, fa ith is trustin g in God's gra- cious un conditional love (grace) as th is is discl osed especiall y in Jesus' self- offering by hi s death on th e cross. It is "justification by fa ith" (Rom 5: I; etc.) or "accepting our acceptance" (Tillich). We are justified (set ri ght, aqu itted of our , and fo rgiven) and reconcil ed to God (2 Cor 5: 17, 19) by trustfu ll y accept- ing God's free offer of justify in g, reconciling grace. Faith, again, is not merely assenting intell ectuall y to th ese ideas or doctrines, but enterin g into th e recon- cil ed relati onship. Jes us tell s us that such fa ith is chil dlike: onl y th ose who hum- ble themselves and become like little children will ente r God's kin gdom (Mt 18: 1-4 ), because th e truth here is hidden fro m the wise and clever but "revealed to babes" (Lk 10:2 1). Thi s should be taken not as an invitati on to sheer gulli bil- ity but as a ca ll to trustful humility in the fa ce of the mystery of God. Hav ing fa ith in and beli eving in are the same. Fa ith is not onl y beli ev ing, but believing in, in the sense of trusting in. "Beli ev ing in Jesus" is, logicall y, much the same as beli ev in g in the word , th e presence, the integrity of one's mother. But "trusting in God" can seem a rath er nai ve, even childish thing, devo id of life's hard experi ences. Obvi ously it cannot mean some credul ous optimism that everything will go well fo r us and our loved ones, that we will be protected Revelation and Faith 5 9 fro m troubl e, pain , so rrow, or dea th . Rather, faith as tru st is so mething that sus- tain s us th ro ugh, and in sp ite of, such th ings. I we ll reca ll a conve rsat ion th at occurred in a Bible stud y meetin g in my so uthern Afri ca n congregati on, where a middl e-aged white No rth Am eri can woman, an ex patri ate teacher in th at country wh o was stru gg lin g to hold onto her fa ith , encountered the fa ith of a middle-aged Africa n Chri sti an man on the subject of trusting Go el . Tsedi so, who had spent time in prison as a politi cal pri soner, had quoted a favo uri te text: Psa lm 56:2: "O Most Hi gh, when I am afra id, I put my tru st in you. In God, whose wo rd I pra ise, in God I trust; I am not afra id , what ca n ll esh do to me?"

Conversation

JOi\N: You know, Ts ediso, I.find it hard to identijj1 with those words about trust- ing God. I used to be ve1y devout. I prayed every day. Especially 1 prayed for my son, who was a truck drive 1~ out on th ose dangerous roads all th e time; in fact evel'y single day I prayed to God to protect him from an accident. But then early one morning the minister came to my door with a police report. They 'd asked him to come and tell me that my son had been killed during the night when his truck went off' a bridge. Well. I'm s o n~) !, that knocked the .faith right out of me. 1 still believe in God in some sense 1 guess. but I can 't say I trust God. 1 seldom pray any more. ! just can i get overfeeling that God let me down.

T SE DISO: 1 think I understand how youfeel about that. ! f elt that way th e.first time 1 was arrested. I believed I had been doing the right th ing. 1 wasftghtingfor what was right. Then God let me be arrested and thrown into prison. 1 was sleeping on a cold cement .floor with no blankets. They wouldn i allow any visitors. I was so hung1y. Th ey wouldn 't even let me have my Bible. I couldn't sleep because people were shouting and screaming from oth er cells. Th en th ey beat me up something awfii/ and did some other terrible th ings lo me. 1 was so scared 1 was sure God had abandoned me. But in the dark of th e night when 1 was praying, 1 knew that I still trusted God. 1 remembered that something like this, something even worse, happened to his Son. 1 knew Jesus was with me, and that he was suf f ering too. I mean it, seriowJy. I knew Jesus was right th ere with me in that very cell, and he was getting beat up too. And I knew that they couldn i kill me unless God let them. And I knew it was all right. if they killed me, I'd still be with Jesus.

The sheer mi sery and tragedy of so much of our ex istence, the ghastl y, evil things that happen in our world , are more than enough to shake our fa ith that God is in charge of the world. The kind of doubt ex pressed above is something that happens to nearl y all of us. In fact , fa ith and doubt may be sa id to be two sides of the same coin. Prec isely because fa ith is not sight, because fa ith is vulnerabl e and ri sky, we have to face and accept the fa ct of ou r doubts. At times we may fee l 60 l? efl ections on l?eve/ation, Faith, and l?ationality th at our doubts are out we ighin g our fa ith , and we hold onto fa ith by our fi nge r- nail s, pray in g " I beli eve, help my un be li ef' (Mk 9:24). A comm on say in g has it: "We are not ca ll ed to have fa ith , bu t to be fa ith ful. " Alth ough in te ll ectu al hon- esty may so metimes push so meone to aband on fa ith, th ere is also good reason to remain steadfast, in spi te of doub t, holding onto the ori ginal ex peri ence and in sight th at bro ught us to fa ith in the fi rst place . After a tim e of stru gg le, even a "dark ni ght of the so ul ," fa ith may return with a new qu ali ty, a di ffe rent under- standin g and new vi tality. Merely to repress doubt, however, is unhea lth y. Paul Ti lli ch pointed out: " In those who rest on their un shakabl e fa ith , ph arisaism and fa nat icism are th e unm ista kab le sy mp to ms of doub t whi ch has been repressed. Doubt is not overco me by repression but by co urage."20 The rea li ty is, however, that the world as we know and experi ence it does not corres pond to th e goodn ess of God that we see in Chri st. Loss of fa ith ca n lead to cy ni cism and despair. Douglas John Hall spea ks poignantl y of the cyni- cism pervasive in North Ameri can cul ture:

The cy ni c ca n ca rry on ni cely within the offi ciall y optimistic society, mouthing the necessary pl atitudes and go in g th rough the moti ons of bu siness, profess ional and soc ial li fe .... The open arti cul ation of cyn- icism is contra ry to th e social code. But the living of cyni cism is a wel!- docume nted ph enomenon in North Ameri ca today. Its most fa miliar ga rb is shall ow hedoni sm: th e jogger who concent ra tes on phys ica l we ll-bein g and whose devoti on to the cul t of the body has the conve- ni ent bon us of sq uelchin g persistent ques ti ons of th e mind; th e to uri st who is able to fi nd Ca lcutta and Mex ico City " in te resting"; the specta- tor who ca n observe li fe's path os with eyes as dry as th e glass covering of hi s television sc reen.21

The altern ati ve , Hall conte nd s, is not a mindless optimism or a fa lse hope but a deeper hope th at gives us the co urage to look squarely at the darkn ess of th e world . He qu otes Reinhold Niebuhr: "There are ultimate problems of life that ca nn ot be full y stated until th e answer to them is kn ow n. Without th e answer to them, men will not all ow th emselves to contempl ate full y the depth of th e prob- lem, lest th ey be dri ve n to des pair. "22 Thi s is wh y hope is such an essenti al dimension of fa ith . The Letter to th e Hebrews is the onl y New Testament text to offer an ex pli cit defi niti on of fa ith , and here the essential mea ning is tru st, understood as hope: "Faith is the assur- ance of thin gs hoped fo r, the ev idence of things not seen" (Heb. 11 : I). Note that "things not seen" are not so mu ch "things above" as "thi ngs ahead" or "things hoped fo r." Fai th as tru st and confi dence in God's future is linked, then (as in the preaching of the Synopti c Jes us), to the com in g reign of God; th at is, it is "escha- tologica l," hav ing to do with the end-time or goa l of hi story. War and fa mine, impriso nm ent and torture, di sease and early death, environmental di saster- Revelation and Faith 6 1 these things do not correspond to the lov in g God that we meet in the cru cified and ri sen Jesus. Ji.irge n Moltmann is th e th eologian who has made thi s poin t most ra di ca ll y:

Hope's statements of promi se, however, mu st stand in contradi ction to the rea li ty whic h ca n at present be experi enced. They do not res ul t fro m ex peri ences, but are the condition fo r the possibil ity of new ex peri- ences. They do not seek to illuminate the rea li ty whic h ex ists, but the rea lity whi ch is comi ng .. . . It is in thi s contradi cti on that hope must prove its power. Hence eschato logy . .. mu st fo rmul ate its statements of hope in contradic ti on to our present ex perience of suffe rin g, ev il and deathn

As in th e Synoptic Gospels, fa ith as hope is anticipatory participa ti on in th e wholeness of God's re ign now and , as in John , the beginn ing of etern al li fe now.

3. Faith as Following Jesus

Fa ith as fo ll owin g is one of the major emphases of the po litical and libera- ti on , which emphas ize commi tment to social justi ce as fa ithfulness to Jes us in the service of God's re ign. Any genuine faith in the res urrecti on of Jes us implies seri ous commitment to fo ll ow him. We ca nnot in fact "beli eve in" Jes us with out believi ng in hi s way. Beli ev in g in Jesus, then, is not just an opini on about hi s identity or about so mething that happe ned to him ; it is fa ith-ful ness or fi delity to Jes us and to what Jesus cared about, namely, God's reign of j ustice, peace, and wholeness. More than th at, fa ith in Jes us opens up fai th in new possib ilities fo r the world . Jo n Sobrino writes:

/ Jesus makes fa ith poss ible. It is to ld ,..that a power went out fro m him . .. , a power that was contagiqus, that co ul d change peo pl e . . . thi s fa ith is in a God who, coming close, makes us beli eve in new possibil - iti es active ly deni ed to the poor in hi story. It is a fa ith that overcomes fa tali sm. It is fa ith in the God of the Ki ngdom opposed to the ido ls of the an ti -Kingdom.24

To acknowledge Jes us as kyrios (Lord) is to ex peri ence li beration fro m any fa lse kyrios. When the New Testament documents were writte n, the fa lse kyrios was none other than Caesar. To say that Jes us is Lo rd was to say that Caesar was not. Ri chard Horsley points out that the first Chri sti ans, most especia ll y Paul , delib- erately redepl oyed the key term s of Roman imperi al id eology in a way that sub- tly undermined th e oppressive power of Rome. Th e term evangel ("gospel" or "good news"), a Roman announcement of a military victory, was now used to 62 l? efl eclions on l? evelation, Faith, and l?ationality refer to the good news of Jes us' victory over death and a ll ev il powers. The emperor of Rome, who was ca ll ed not onl y kyrios but also safer (Saviour), because he brought "peace on ea rth" (th e pax Romana thro ugh th e terro r of mil - itary fo rce) was now repl aced by Jesus, who had been cru cifi ed on a Roman cross and ra ised from the dead , and so bro ught tru e peace on earth th ro ugh love and reconcili ation. To acknow ledge Jesus as one's tru e emperor, th en , meant fo l- lowin g and obeying him as ky rios. If one did not seri ously fo ll ow him, it was clea r that one's loya lty an d fa ith (pistis) were not in Jes us, but in th e reignin g emperor and his system of violence and injusti ce. 25 From within a social system buil t on the bru ta lity of slavery, Paul dec lared th at th e tru e kyrios was the one who had willingly become a slave fo r the sa ke of others and whose name was now above every name, "so th at at the name of Jesus every kn ee should bend . .. and every to ngue confess th at Jes us Chri st is kyrios" (Phil 2: I 0-11 ). Paul also declares him self a "slave" fo r Jesus' sake (2 Cor 4:5) and ca ll s hi s hearers "th ro ugh love, to become slaves to one anoth er" (Gal 5: 13). In Jesus' new reign, Jew and Greek, slaves and free, male and fe male, are one (Gal 3:28). The ra di - ca l politi cal implications of all of thi s are plain to see: Fo ll ow ing Jesus, in our tim e, as in Ro man times, in vo lves radi cal poli tical commitment and oppos ition to every unjust and oppressive kyrios or emp ire. It is not surpris ing that Paul was repeated ly arrested and impri so ned and fina ll y executed, and that Jes us' most fa ithfu l fo ll owers in any tim e or place are likely to suffe r fo r th eir commi tment to the cru ci ti ed kyrios. However, because th e apos tl e Paul so metim es cont rasts fa ith and work s, fa ith is sometim es th ought to be an ex peri ence or attitude devo id of action. This is a grave mi sunderstanding of th e whole biblical trad ition, in cluding Paul him- self. For Chr isti ans, "foll ow ing" is an integral pa rt of be li ev in g in Jes us. And thi s is in continuity with the Hebrew prophets, fo r whom know ledge of th e holy God is to hear the command to be holy (Lev 19:2). To be li berated fro m the oppres- sive power of imperial Egy pt and the fa lse ly deified kyrios or pharaoh is to become a worshiping, obed ient peo pl e (Exod 20:2). As we have al ready seen, to know th e just God who deli ve red th em from Egypt was to do justi ce: "He judged the cause of the poor and needy; th en it was well. Is not thi s to know me?" (Jer 22 : 16). Jn the Gospels and lette rs of the New Testament also, fa ith is not onl y an epi stemological and soteri ological concept; it is also ethi cal, hav in g to do with being fa ith-ful l. In the Synoptic Gospels, Jes us call s us to take up the cross and fo ll ow him (M t 16:24) and com mands us to love God with all our heart, soul , mind , and strength, and our neighbour as ourselves (Lk 10:27, etc.). It is not th ose who say "Lord ! Lordi" who enter the re ign of God but "those who do th e will of my Fath er" (Mt 7:2 1). We are ca ll ed to "die wi th Chri st" that we may also li ve with him (Rom 6: 11 ), to wa lk "according to th e Spirit and not accordin g to th e fl es h," to li ve in fa ith, hope, and love, "but the greatest of th ese is love" ( I Cor 13: 13 ). In the Johan nin e letters, too, it is clear that anyo ne who kn ows Revelation and Fait/1 63

God as love through faith in Chri st will also live in love ( I .Jn 4:7). One could go on to detail all of thi s vo luminously from sc ripture, but the point is clear and sim- pl e: Fa ith in .J esus implies f() ll ow in g him . Obedience is not merely a consequence of believing; it is part and parcel of be li ev in g. If th ere is no obeying and fol- low in g, faith is simply not there. Justification by fa ith , fo r Paul , however, is a radical rejection of mere sub- mi ss ion, ofa life of abject fear, lived under the law for the sake of reward. Jn this respect, believing and fo ll ow ing Jesus were utterl y di ffe rent from the fearful , abject fo ll ow ing of Caesar. Sin ce God's love is utterl y free and uncond iti onal and ca nnot be ea rn ed as a reward , Paul ca n say to the Ga latians:

We know that a person is not justifi ed by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Chri st. And we have co me to beli eve in Chri st Jesus, so that we mi ght be justified by faith in Chri st, and not by doing the works of the law, because no one wi11 be justifi ed by the works of th e law. (Gal 2: 16)

In the fifth chapter of this same lett er Paul is emph atic, however, that the Ii fe of fa ith includes obed ience:

For yo u are called to freedom ... ; onl y do not use yo ur freedom as an opportunity for se l r-indul ge nce, but through love become slaves to one another. For th e whole law is summed up in a sin gle commandment. "You sh al I love yo ur neighbour as yo urself." (Gal 5: 13- 14)

The Gospels, too, are replete with Jesus' parables of God 's free and gracious love (the lost sheep, the lost coin , th e prodigal son, the vineyard, etc.) and yet within this fait h in God 's free and costly grace come the co nstant ca ll to di scipleship and the co mmand to love- indeed to love rad ica ll y:

" You have hea rd that it was sa id , ' An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. ' But I say to yo u, ' Do not resist an evi Id oe r. But if anyone strikes you on the ri ght cheek, turn th e oth er also; and if anyone wants to sue you and take yo ur coat give yo ur cloak as well ; and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mil e: Give to everyone who begs fro m yo u, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.' You have hea rd that it was said, ' You shall love yo ur neighbour and hate yo ur enemy. ' But I say to you , 'Love yo ur enemi es. "' (Mt 5:38-44)

Such rad ical ge nerosity is co mm an ded prec isely because of God's unmerited grace: "that you may be children of yo ur Father who is in heaven; for he makes hi s sun ri se on the evi l and on the good, and se nd s rain on the ri ghteous and the unrighteous" (Mt 5:45). Fo ll ow ing Jesus, th en , is not a question of avoiding pun- 64 Reflections on Revelation, Faith , and Rationality ishment or seeki ng a rewa rd . John makes the sa me point when he declares, "There is no fear in love, but perfec t love casts ou t fear .... We love because he first loved us" ( 1 Jn 4: 18- 19) . The ca ll to fo ll ow in g and di scipl es hip is not, then, an obli gation consequ ent upon be li evi ng the good news of God 's grace. It is part of th e freedom of li fe under grace. To put it another way, not onl y justifi ca ti on but also sanctifi cation is God's liberation of human beings from the hold of sin upon us. We are liber- ated fo r actual obedi ence and sa nctifi ca ti on (a n emph as is not onl y of contempo- rary libera ti on theo logy but also of th e Wesleyan-Methodist tradi ti on). The Ii fe of sa nctifi ca ti on, however, mu st never become a sel [-r ighteous self- rel iance on one's own good ness or good works. When thi s happens the liberat- in g dynami c of the gospel is lost, and we are once aga in impri so ned in a reli gion of fea r. In fact , fa ith as trust and hope is the onl y thing th at can deliver us from the cy nic ism and mean in glessness that ca n sap us of energy. It takes energy to love and to seek justice, to be in so lidarity with th e weak, to stru ggle fo r peace. Mere adm oniti ons to moral ob li ga ti on onl y sink us further into despair. "Faith- kn ow lecl ge" of God as trust and hope and faith as discipleship are in se parable; thi s is clea r whether we read th e synopti cs or Paul , John , or James. If we im ag- ine th at we "know God" by fa ith without seri ous commitment to the Ii fe 'of love, we are delud ed. But to stri ve dutifully to be lov ing without faith and hope is, for most people, ex haustin g.

Beloved, let us love one anoth er, because love is from God; everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know Goel , for God is love. ( I Jn 4:7-8)

4. Faith as Knowledge

Faith as tru st and hope cannot energize us, though, if it is not fa ith as knowl- edge. Fa ith-talk is not a mere language game, and not j ust morally in spiring rh etori c. We have to believe, se ri ously, that God's love is real and th at the object of our hope is rea l, if our faith is to make any difference to our lives. I suggested above that beli ev in g in Jes us, or believing in Goel through Jesus, is trust in a person and , in th at se nse , a kind of knowledge. But believing in Jesus, unlike believing in another hum an person, has enormous metaphys ical, eschato- logica l, and ethical consequ ences. It is believing in someone, but also believing something about . Because Jesus reveals God to us, faith in him mea ns believ ing th at reality is ultimately trustworth y. Fa ith as hope means that we expect th e hope finally to be fulfilled. That is, faith always involves propositi onal content; it means believing that. . . Believing in God, for example, obviously implies believing that Goel exists: "Wh oever would approach [G od ] must believe that [G od] ex ists" (Heb 11 :6). Paul tells us that, " if we have di ed with Ch ri st, we beli eve that [my emphas is] we shal l also li ve with him , for we know that Chri st Rewlalion and Faith 65 being raised from th e dead will never die aga in " (Rom 6:8-9). Note also the words of Peter spoken to Jesus in John 's Gospel: "we have believed, and have co me to know, th at yo u are th e holy One of God" (Jn 6:69). Believing, then , in escapably involves truth claim s, not vague and ge neral ones but very particu- lar ones. We claim , by fai th , that ce rta in thin gs are actually so and will be so. They are not onl y true for us, but true for God, and true for everyone. This is not to deny the element of mystery that remai ns, sin ce our words and concepts of God always inadeq uate ly refl ect the rea liti es to whi ch they refe r. Nevertheless, we believe th at we speak the truth insofar as this is humanl y possible. When we retreat from th e ri sk of making actual truth claim s, th en our witness loses all ex is- tential sign ifi ca nce, and everyo ne knows we are not seriou s. Yet faith is not sight. Fa ith in th e "fooli shness of God that is wiser than human wisdom" is vulnerable. "With out ri sk there is no faith," Ki erk egaard in sisted. 26 Faith is not a ca lcu lation of probabilities but a pass ionate conviction on whi ch one stakes one's whole life. Here I am in disagreement with Wol lliart Pannenberg's concept of faith. He is ri ght, I think , to in sist that Chri stian beli ef in cludes metaphysical knowledge of rea lity;27 that is, it in vo lves a worldview. But for him , "kn ow ledge" in theol- ogy has to be founded upon philosophical argument and hi storical reason . Hav- ing arrived at secure beliefs about God and Jes us Chri st that are founded on reason, faith , for Pannenberg, is simpl y the attitude of tru st an d hope in God's promise, whi ch is inherent in hi stori ca ll y estab li shed events, primarily the res ur- recti on. Faith, then, for Pannenberg, is "based upon knowledge,"28 and "kn ow l- edge of th e ground of fa ith mu st, as such, logically precede faith. "29 Pannenberg thinks that any rational person mu st to Chri sti an argum ents for the hi s- torical reality of the resurrec ti on. Over aga in st thi s, I suggest th at faith is not an attitude that we take up as a res ult of demonstrated, certain knowledge; rather, faith itself claims to be a kind of knowing, which is not based on previ ous argu- ments or fo undati ons; that is, it is knowledge in rel ation ship. Fa ith is risky. Fa ith is not sight. Faith in the " foolishness of God that is wiser than human wisdom" is vulnerable and intell ectually noncoercieve, just as our God is gently noncoer- c1ve. We mu st turn now to consider the radical difference between fa ith and human reason.

The Radical Disjunction of Faith and Reason

In our di sc uss ion above I have argued that faith is so mething quite different from a human or metaphysical system. Though it claim s knowledge of God and (as I shall contend) mu st be positively related to reason, we must ac knowledge that Chri stian faith is radically di stinct from human reason as such. As an ex peri ence of and relationship to God, as an attitude of trust and commit- 66 l?eflections on l?eve/ation, Faith, and l?ationa/ity ment of a person 's whole life, it is also so mething fa r more than a set of intel- lectu al viewpoi nts or opini ons. As a response to revelati on th at is "give n" from beyond ourselves, it is not the product of human spec ulative or theoretical rea- so n. Moreover, it is not onl y more than the product of human reason; it often pos- iti ve ly contradicts and overturns what seems reasonabl e to the specul ative mind re fl ecti ng naturall y upon li fe and the uni ve rse. A bas ic affirm ati on here is that fa ith is a gift of th e Holy Spirit.

I. Gift of the Spirit

That faith is a gift of th e Spiri t is bas ic to Chri sti an theologica l epi stemol- ogy and is one way in whi ch Chri stians have testifi ed to the di sjuncti on of faith and reason. We kn ow th at if we have faith it is not our own ac hi evement. We have not reached it simpl y by some correct operati on of our human rational fa c- ulti es, nor ca n we take credit fo r hav ing faith. "For by grace yo u have been saved th ro ugh fa ith , and thi s is not your own doing; it is the gift of God" (Eph 2:8). Th e justifie d, reconcil ed re lati onshi p of trust in whi ch we li ve is not so mething we could have accompli shed either intell ectuall y or morall y. It is no t an ac hi evement of the intell ectuall y or ethi ca ll y sensitive indi vidual. To say that fa ith is'a gift of th e Spirit is, again , a way of say in g th at God cann ot be kn own exce pt by God's own self-discl os ure. Not even th e "revealed-ness" of a once-upon-a-time revela- ti on suffi ces to reach us here and now. It is God's present activity through the Spiri t that revea ls God to us now. Thi s statement is itse lf a confess ion of fa ith : "No one ca n say 'Jesus is Lord' except by the Holy Spirit" ( 1 Cor 12:3). The Engli sh wo rd "spirit" tra nslates th e Hebrew wo rd ruah ("wind" or "breath "), whi ch in the Old Testament names God's presence and acti vity in the world . The metaph or of wind or brea th signifi es an illusive ly mysteri ous and li v- in g reality. Wh en the Gospel of John declares that "God is Spi rit" (Jn 4:24) and th at "the Spirit bl ows where it chooses," we are bein g told that God is utterl y free and unpredi ctabl e. The wo rd "spirit," because of its associati on with a mindful, purposeful Goel , also has co nnotati ons of perso nhood. Thus it also ca me to be used to speak of human bein gs (e.g., Gen 41 :8 ; Prov 16: 18; Lk 8:55; etc.), wh o, as persons, are also illusive and myste ri ous, even to themselves. Communi cati on between God and human beings is sa id to be from Spirit to spirit, as in th e state- ment of Paul , "When we cry 'Abba' Father'' it is th at very Spirit bea ring wi tness with our spirit that we are chil dren of God" (Rom 8: 15-1 6). As we sa id above, kn ow ledge of God as fa ith may then be co mpared to knowl edge of oth er persons, fo r the kn owledge of a human person is always a gift of hum an self-revelati on. Such a gift can be received onl y by a kind of "faith ," th at is, a response of tru st in a rec iprocated relati onship of mutual self- di sclosure. An analogy in ordinary hum an ex peri ence is the relationship of mar- riage, which th e Bibl e ca ll s "one fl es h," perhaps th e most pro found fo rm of Revelation and Faith 67

hum an mutual se lf- reve lati on and perso nal knowledge, even of mutual indwelling (see Gen 2:24; Mt 19:6; Eph 5:28, 31). The faith relationship with Go el is also a mutual one. We believe th at Goel has reached out to communicate with us in Jesus and still continues to do so in the Spirit. Wh at Go el communi- cates in Chri st through the Spirit may be sa id to be intimate se lf-com munication , di sc losin g God's passion for us, God's pain , God's joy. We communicate in return through prayer and worship. The scrip ture speaks of this relation ship too as mutual indwelling: We are " in the Sp irit" and the Spirit dwell s in us, and this is identi ca l with the indwellin g of Chri st (Rom 8:9, 11 ; Ga l 2:20). John speaks of the sa me reality when he has Jesus say, "Abide in me and I in you" (Jn 15:4). John begin s to glimpse a trinitari an sense of mutual indwelling, wherein humans are given a share in th e triune life of Go el , "you , Father, are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us" (.In 17:2 1). Both our knowledge of Goel and our eter- nal life are, then , a gracious inclusion in God's eternal life and love. We detect in Paul what mi ght be ca ll ed a "mys ti ca l" participation in God's self- kn ow ledge.

These things God has revealed to us through the Spirit; for th e Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For what human being knows what is truly human except th e human spirit that is within? So also no one comprehends what is trul y God's except the Spi rit of God. Now we have received not th e spirit of the world, but th e Spirit that is from God, so that we ma y und erstand the gifts bestowed on us by God. (I Cor2:10-12)

It is clear in all these texts that the Chri sti an knowl edge of God as fa ith is in so me respects di scontinuous with, and qualitatively different from, oth er kinds of human knowledge, which mi ght be represented generally by the term "reason." It is so mething that, if not graciously gifted to us, would be beyond our ken. God never comes under our control. Precisely because God is God, God cannot be demonstrated or proved by ordinary human epistemological procedures. Th e mys terious hol y On e, whom we beli eve we know by faith, is beyond us and all our natural capacities. We are not fitted to know that whi ch is infinitely beyond us. Yet faith affirm s that God fits God's very Self, in Jes us, to be kn owabl e by us and , by the Spirit's wo rk , also fits us to respond.

2. The Foolishness of the Cross

Th at faith is a gift of th e Spirit is one classic way of speaking about the di s- junction of faith and reason. Another important bibli ca l and theo logica l theme that bespeaks this di sjunction is the foolishness of the cross, wherein the gospel is sa id to be the direct opposite of human wisdom. Paul connects these two in an illuminating way: 68 Reflections on Revelation, Fa ith, and Rationality

I did not com e proclaiming the mys tery of God to you in lofty wo rds of wi sdom. For I decided to know nothin g among yo u except Jesus Chri st, and him crucified. And I ca me to you in weakness and in fear and in mu ch tremblin g. My speech and my proclamation were not with plau- sibl e word s of wisdom, but with a demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so th at your faith mi ght rest not on human wi sdom but on the power of God. ( I Cor 2: 1-5 )

It is prec isely the foo lishness of "Chri st cruci ti ed" that is contrasted with human wi sdom. What could be more foo li sh, what could be better ev idence of fa il ure and lack of wi sdom than to find yourself to rtu red to death on a cross? Youn g people in a confirmation class see the iss ue clearl y, as th e youn g often do.

Conversation

R EV. BRIAN: R em emb e 1 ~ last day we were talking about love as the way ofJes us. We were say ing Jesus has shown us that th e way of' love is th e way of' truth, the way of abundant living. A life of love and caring for others, of service and self giving, is not a drag. This is life at its best.

JASON: Well, OK, but don i you think if' we 're all that loving and selfsac rificing people will take advantage of us ? Wh at '.s· so great about being a sucker all your life/

M ATTHEW: Yeah, like "nice guys .finish last. "

DEBB IE: [Chewing gum as she speak s] I can see being loving and s e lj~sacr ifi c ing to a certain extent. That could give you nice relationships and friendships and all that. But if' you can y it too far you could get hurt. I mean, isn i that what hap- pened to Jesus? f-Je was loving and caring and took the side of' all th e down-and- outs, and look what happened to him. He ended up on a cross.

REV. BRIAN : Well yes, Debbie, I 'd say there is a place for selfcare, or loving yourself. Being radically loving isn i necessarily th e same thing as being walked all over. On the other hand, circumstances may arise where you would actually put your life on the line. Think of th e people who have gollen involved in politi- cal struggles in places like Latin America or Korea or South Africa, and have found themselves imprisoned/or long periods of time, or tortured, or shot. Think of the amazing folk who offered themselves as human shields in Baghdad to pro - tect th e Iraqi people! Do you really think th ese people are just dumb, orjust suck- ers? Now that '.s· th e foolishness of th e cross ' You might j ust consider whether there '.1· a cause that you would actualzy die f or

KIM : [After a moment of stunned silence] Anyway, Debbie, how can you just say he ended up on a cross ? He also rose fro m the dead three days later. Millions of Revelation and Fa ith 69 people believe in him as their Lord and Saviow: His religion is the bigges t in the world. And he '.1· in heaven with God. Now that :,. how he ended up '

R EV. BRIAN : Yes , even secular people say that Jesus is the greatest man who ever li ved, that, crucified or not--in fact because he was cruc(/ied- he '.1· had more impact on hislo1y than any powe1:fi,1I king or politician, or any scientist or philosopher in hist0ty. We number our yearsfi'Oln his birth. But don i let that.fool you. Don't miss the point. His real success was not his .fame or his historical influence. His real success was that he wen/ lovingly lo the cross!

MATTH EW: [Puzzled and skepti cal] Yeah, but may be we've made him a hero because what he said makes us/eel good. Th e stories about him make him seem great, but maybe in real 11/e he wasjust a.failure- maybe a real nice guy, sure, but he ended up dead.

JASON : Yeah, and eve1y body knows he was crucified. Bui most people don i really believe he was resurrected. That'.5jus t faith.

The conversation brings out the contrast between human " wisdom" of a fa irl y basic kind and th e " foo li shness" of th e gospe l. The message of a loving, suffe ring God who call s us to walk in love, the message ofa reign of God initi- ated in hi story by thi s humble, loving, crucified man, does not seem particularly reasonabl e in a worl d like ours. Its tru th is not pl ainl y visible or observable. Love and justice certainl y do not reign in the world as we kn ow it. The words of the Christmas carol "Joy to the World" seem strangely out of touch wi th reality:

He rul es the earth With truth and grace And makes th e nations prove The g lori es of hi s ri ghteousness And wonders of his love

In fact, we know that what " rules th e earth" is economic, military, and political power. lt's money that talks. What works and succeeds is competition, the strong over the weak, the clever over the not so clever. If the chu rch has succeeded in hi story, so th at its Lord is call ed "the greatest and most influential man who ever li ved," even to the poin t w here our years are numbered from hi s birth, does th is not suggest that th e church has departed fro m the message of a lowly, humble man who came to serve, to exalt not himself but to exalt others? We know th at Christiani ty is the " biggest reli gion in the world," partl y because fro m the fo u1t h century it had the Roman army behind it and, later, fro m the sixteenth century, the wealth and power o f the world 's ri chest, most successful coloni a l powers. Does the history of C hristiani ty not itself suggest that economic, mili tary, and political power are what counts in hi story? Has the " tri umph of the cross" reall y 70 Reflections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality

been a triumph of low ly se rvice, or has it often been a triumph of religious and cultural imperiali sm? Sin ce the tim e of Constantine the success of Christiani ty in hi story has been, at the least, a very ambi guous story indeed.30 The foolishness of th e cross and th e min ority theological tradition known as "the th eology of the cross" precisely aOirm th e strangeness, the in cred ibility, and the improbability that Jesus is indeed Lord. It affirms the radi ca l discontinuity of the gospel of Jesus Chri st with sweet reasonableness, yet affi rm s in th e face of all hum an wisdom th at th e tru e God is the crucified God, that th e etern al truth about the mea ning of things is fo und in suffering love, specifi ca ll y in the suffer- ing love of Jesus on the cross. Such truth ca n onl y be known by fa ith , that is, by ri sky response to God's self-revelation. If we choose to li ve th e Ii fe of love, we "walk by faith and not by sight," for the success of love in the world is scarcely evident. As the auth or of Hebrews knew very well , th e peo pl e of faith down through hi story have fo und the Ii fe of fa ith a very dangerous one indeed. Hav ing reiterated many success stories of faith, Hebrews also notes that

Others suffered mocki ng and fl ogg in g and even chains and impri son- ment. They were stoned to death, they were sawn in two, they were ki li ed by the sword ; th ey we nt about in skin s of sheep and goats, desti- tute, persecuted, tormented. (Heb 11 :36-37)

The risk of fa ith is not simply the ri sk of being wrong in our opinions when we take an epi stemologica l leap into be! ievi ng. Th e ri sk comes when we ac tuall y li ve (even a litt le, because few of us manage it to any radical degree) as th ough Jesus is the ri sen Lord , and as th ough love is the truth. It is fa ith as fo ll ow in g that is tru ly risky in a world like ours. Agai n, as we sa id earli er, such fa ith is accom- pani ed by th e in security of doubt, in the sp irit of the father of the epil eptic child: "I beli eve, help my unbeli efl " (Mk 9:24).

Th eology of the Cross: Paul. This is why th e tradition known as the theology of the cross has always rejected attempts to prove th e ex istence of God or to con- vince peopl e by argu ment that faith is reasonable in terms of worldly wisdom. Such a natu ra l th eology attempts to find epi stemological security by building faith upon some indubitable fou ndati on, thu s replac ing fa ith by sight. Theology of the cross begins with Pau l's stark contrast of God's wisdom with human wisdom:

For it is written, " I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and th e di s- cernment of the discerning r will thwart." Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of thi s age? Has not God made foo li sh the wisdom of the world? For sin ce, in th e wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, God decided, through the foo li shn ess of our proclamation, to save those who believe. For Jews aeve/ation and Faith 7 1

de111 and signs and Greeks desire wisdom, but we proclaim Chri st cruci - fi ed, a stumbling bl ock to Jews and foo li shness to Gentil es, but to th ose who are ca ll ed, both Jews and Greeks, Chri st the power of God and the wisdom of God . ( I Cor 1:19-24)

Paul's theology of th e cross derives, of course, fro m refl ecti on upon th e li fe and death of Jes us. We fin d a simil ar theme in the Gospels in words ascribed to Jesus: " I thank yo u, Fa ther, Lord of heaven and earth , because you have hidden th ese thin gs fro m the wise and the intelli gent and have revealed th em to in fa nts" (L k 10:2 1). The simplicity, humility, and apparent foo li shn ess of th e child , Jesus sug- gests, gives the child a certa in adva ntage where the knowledge and reign of Go el are concerned. Also the poor, th e unl ea rn ed, and the "sinner" seem to be in a bet- ter pos iti on th an the ri ch, the scri be, or the "righteo us" person, as Jesus saw it. The latter are self-s uffi cient, or fee l so, in th eir possessions, their lea rning, or their moral ac hi eve 111 ent, and so th ey fee l no need of God's grace. Thi s di sq ual- ifies th em fo r th e re ign of Goel , whi ch is a reign of grace, of un condi tional, unmerited love fo r all. The smart ones tend to be impervious to th e gentle Spiri t that reaches out to th eir hea rts and minds. That is why Jes us freq uentl y wa rn ed about the cl angers of wea lth, made enemi es of th e ri ch and powerfu l, as we ll as the th eologians and cleri cs and "th e ri ghteous" of hi s cl ay. "Those who are well have no need of a ph ys ician," he sa id ironi ca ll y (Lk 5:3 1). The emph as is on foo lishn ess , chil dlikeness, and Jes us' apparent bi as fo r th e oppressed, poor, and sinn ers was largely fo rgotten fo r centuri es. It ca n be fo und in Tertullian and in Fra ncis of Ass isi. But mu ch of th e theo logy of th e Middl e Ages, even at its zeni th in the impressive thought of Thomas Aq uin as , sought to be stro ng and wise, to be intell ectuall y unassa il abl e. Aquinas, making heavy use of the phil osoph y of Ari stotl e, "proved" the ex istence of Goel , together with the attributes of Go el , whi ch, he th ought, could be known by natural reason. 31 Aquinas certainl y left room fo r fa ith, as di stinct fro m reason, bu t in the high Mid- dl e Ages th e va lidity of revelation see111 ecl ass ured by a mag ni fice nt church rul ed over by a hi erarchy of glori ous, powerful men and by res pectable philosophical arguments with their pedi gree in Ari stotle.

Luther: Theo logy of the Cross. It was Martin Luth er, near th e end of the med ieval peri od, who first ca ll ed all thi s into qu estion in terms of substantial theological thought. Luth er vigorously attacked the powerfu l and glori ous church, its expl oitative practices, its va ni ty and pomp, its power-mongering. But most sig- nifi cantl y he attac ked its theology of ri ghteousness and was deepl y suspi cious of the ali gnm ent of scholastic theology with Ari stotle. With characteri sti c drama and colour, he declared: "He who wishes to phil osoph ize by using Ari stotl e with out cl anger to hi s soul 111u st first become thoroughl y foo li sh in Chri st. "32 So sa id the yo ung Luther in th e Heidelberg Disputation of 1518. He was building of course upon the theology of Paul , but also upon the teachin g of Jesus as he read it in the 72 Reflections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality

Gospe ls. "According to th e gospels," he says, "th e Kingdom of heaven is given to children and the humble [Mk I 0: 14, 16] and Chri st loves thern ."33 But most espe- ciall y Luther was bui !ding upon th e sufferin g and th e cross of .J es us as the revela- ti on of God and God's sa lva ti on. In Theses 19-21 of the Heidelberg Disputation Luther characteri zes "tru e th eo logy" as "theo logy of the cross" and the fa lse, domin ant theology of the church as "th eo logy of glory":

19) That person does not deserve to be ca ll ed a th eo logian who loo ks upon the in visibl e thin gs of God as though they we re clea rl y per- ceptibl e in th ose things whi ch have actuall y happened (Rom 20). 20) He deserves to be ca ll ed a th eo logian, however, wh o comprehend s th e vi sibl e and manifest things of God seen through sufferin g and th e cross . 2 1) A th eo logian of glory ca ll s ev il good and good ev il. A theo logian of the cross ca ll s the thin g what it actu ally is.

For Lu ther, of course, every Chri sti an is ca ll ed to be a "th eologian" (thi s is a coroll ary of his doctrine of the pri esthood of all beli evers), and it is not hi s inten- tion to set up an eliti st category of th eo logian s within th e church. They "deserve to be ca ll ed theo logians" all th e more if th ey are humble and unl ea rn ed, kn ow- ing God in th e suffering of th e cross. Luther's expl anati on of Thes is 20 is impor- tant and deserves to be qu oted ex tensively:

The manifest and visibl e things of God are placed in oppositi on to th e in visibl e, namely, hi s human nature, weakness, foo li shn ess. The Apos- tle in l Co r. I [:25] ca ll s th em th e weakness and fo ll y of God. Because men mi sused the knowledge of God through works, God wished aga in to be recogni zed in sufferin g, and to condemn wi sdom concerning in visibl e things by mea ns of wisdom concerning visibl e things, so that th ose wh o did not honour God as manifested in hi s works should hon- our him as he is hidden in hi s suffering . ... Now it is not suffici ent for anyone, and it does him no good to recogni ze God in hi s glory and maj esty, unl ess he recogni zes him in th e shame and glory of hi s cross .. .. For thi s reason tru e theo logy and recognition of God are in th e cru cifi ed Chri st. 34

For Luther, theology of th e cross has essenti all y to do with justi ficati on by grace alone and fa ith alone. Pride in one's own good works and th e attempt to be jus- ti ti ed through them are the very hea rt of sin and evil. That is why he says:

The fri ends of the cross say that the cross is good and works are evil , for through th e cross works are dethroned and the old Adam, who is espec iall y edified by works, is cru cifi ed. fkvclation and Faith 73

Thus hi s main statement of Thesis 2 1, whi ch names and contrasts "theo logy of glory" and "th eo logy of the cross": "A th eo logy of glory ca ll s evil good and good ev il. A theology of th e cross ca ll s th e thin g what it ac tua ll y is." Ev il here is th e pride of a person "puffed up by hi s good wo rks." It is th e strength , wi sdom, and even goodn ess of the pro ud hum an being wh o kn ows Go el by human wisdom th ro ugh the things God has made, and wh o is strong to obey th e moral law. How- ever, th e paradox of God's foo li sh wisdom overturn s what the wise , stro ng, and good person knows.

He wh o does not kn ow Chri st does not know God hidden in suffe ring. Therefore he prefe rs work s to sufTerin g, glory to th e cross, strength to wea kness, wisdom to foll y, and , in general, good to ev il. These are th e people whom th e apos tl e ca ll s "enemi es of th e cross of Chri st" [Phil 3: 18] fo r th ey hate the cross and suffering and love works and the glory of works. 35

Luther's stru ggle aga in st the pride or good works moved him to spea k rather shockin g words : "He is not ri ghteo us who does much, but he who, without work , beli eves mu ch in Chri st. "36 Thi s wo uld seem to cont ra di ct what we hea rd fro m So brino about fa ith as fo ll ow in g Jesus (th ough So brino consid ers that he is doing a th eologia crucis). Yet Luther does not, as it may seem, deny that the way of love is the way of truth . He ex pl ain s, "Not that th e ri ghteous person does noth- ing, but th at hi s work s do not make him ri ghteous, ra ther that hi s ri ghteou sness creates work s. Fo r gra ce and fa ith are infused without our wo rks. After they ha ve bee n imparted the wo rk s fo ll ow."37 Fa ith workin g th ro ugh love appea rs all th e more foo li sh to th e wisdom of th e world. The content of fai th itself ca nn ot be demonstra ted. That Jesus is ri sen is not a demonstrabl e fac t to whi ch all rati onal peopl e mu st assent. "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet beli eve" (Jn 20: 29). It is "just fa ith ," as is com- monl y sa id , fo r God co ntinues , even in the res urrecti on, to be hidden to worldl y wisdom. God's glory continues, even in the resurrecti on, to be abscondita sub contraria ("hidden under its opposite"). That is, God is revealed in the cross as the oppos ite of what we wo uld ex pect- weak and lowly, suffering and humili- ated. God wills to be kn own and loved and obeyed as thi s suffe rin g and lowly One, ind eed as one not ackn ow ledged by the world . Th at Jesus is ri sen, that he is the li ving Lord , mu st remai n so mething fo r faith and not fo r sight. Th e resur- recti on is something ex peri enced by the di scipl es, who were equipped to under- stand and beli eve in him , bu t it is never public fact (as the cru cifixion was), never visibl e to Herod , Pil ate, or Caesar. God refu ses to be publicly visible in power and majesty, fo r God will be wo rshi ped onl y in the shame and sufferin g of the cross . Th at is wh y the res urrec ti on cann ot become grounds fo r a triumphalistic church, glorying in its co nquest of the world. Nor can th e res urrection ri ghtly become the basi s of the church 's worldl y success, since faith , even in th e resur- recti on of Jesus , offe rs no epis temological security. 74 Reflections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality

So also the life of di sc ipl eship offers no guara ntee of success, happiness, or fulfillment. It is tru e that Jesus promi ses joy: "Abide in my love .... th ese thin gs l have spo ke n to yo u that my joy may be in yo u and yo ur joy may be full ," says the Johannine Jes us (J n 15:9- 11 ). Yet we soon find him warning, " If the world hates you, know th at it hated me before it hated you .. . . the hour is comin g when whoever kill s yo u will think he is offering service to God" (Jn 15 :8; 16:2). In all of thi s, the di sc ipl e does not accumul ate credits toward a reward in heaven, nor enjoy the moral or spiritual security of bein g on God's side. 'The greatest secu- rity is the greatest temptati on," says Luther. 38 Hi s th eology of the cross despi ses the spiritual secu rity of indulgences and of good wo rks, but al so th e epi stemo- logica l security ofa th eology of glory, which repl aces fa ith in the crucified Chri st wi th the sight of an intell ectu all y secure philosophi ca l theology. Faith in the God of the cross and fo ll owin g Jesus in the foo li shn ess of love are indeed contra ry to all human reason. lt is not merely additional to wh at can be kn own by hum an wisdom; ra th er, it overturns hum an wisdom. It is trul y fo ol- ish, truly an affron t, an offence, a scandal to human wi sdom.

Theologv of the Cross, , and Rational . Nevertheless, I wi sh to co ntend , thi s ve ry reversal of hum an wi sdom and reasonabl eness has a certain deep credi bility about it. As justi fication by grace alone is welcome ne ws to one who despairs of one's perso nal goodness, so also, th e foo li shn ess of Go el revealed in th e suffe rin g of th e cross is good news to one who des pairs of fin d- ing meanin g or sense in th e observab le world by the use of philosophi cal reason. By "credibility" I do not mean coercive verifi ability. Credibility has to do with relevance as well as rati onality; it has to do with the power to address dee p human needs and to grapple with th e world 's rea l pro blems. Wh atever arguments fo r th e there may be, however valid or in va li d, cogent or in co- gent they may be phil osophica ll y, th ey cannot bring us to a vision of ultimate rea li ty as just and compassionate . The Goel wh om such argum ents reach could just as eas il y be Satan or, alm ost as terrify ing, Ari stotl e's indifferent prime mover. Th e Supreme Being, or Necessary Bein g, or the ens realissimum, or Moral Lawgive r of moral are unimag in abl y fa r from th e God of the cross. Here we join with Tertullian in asking, "What has Athens to do with Jeru salem?" These phil osophic versions of are the radi ca l contrary of the Son who cri es out , "My God, my God, why have you fo rsaken me?" and the gri evi ng Fath er, bound to th e Son by the li fe-giving Spirit. The "Supreme Bein g" etc. are the deiti es of the th eo logies of glory, the god who is beyond th e viciss i- tudes of hi story, th e almi ghty one who "can do anything" (but fo r so me reason wi 11 not). Many theologians, both Jewish and Chri sti an,39 have pointed out th e utter difference between th e immutable, immortal, impass ibl e god of Greek metaphys ics , the god who ca nnot suffer and cannot di e, and the biblical Go el of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the Go el of Moses, of the pro phets, and of Jes us. Thi s Goel of the Hebrews longs fo r the love of th e peopl e, weeps over them, repents, Revc/ation and Faith 75 and rejoices. This is the God of passion, who, accordin g to Chri sti an fa ith , has entered rull y into hum an ll es h, human joy, human suffer ing, and human dea th. In th e latter half of the twenti eth century many thoughtful peopl e have found credibility in vari ous as pects of a th eo logy of th e cross, stemming from Paul and Luther. It is difficult lo add to th e depth and breadth of their thought, but in thi s secti on I sha ll ga ther togeth er some o f' th eir best th oughts and di scuss how th ey bea r on our methodologica l concern . All of them have asked with new urgency: ln th e face of such horro rs as wa r and famine, mental illness and torture, just how does one seri ously beli eve in a lov in g Fa ther in heaven who sees th e littl e spar- row fa ll ? The di sjuncti on of faith and reason cannot itse lf justi fy be li ev ing in what is simply nonsense. How does one be li eve in almi ghty love, while enslaved and systemati ca ll y humiliated and degraded in Au schwitz, or in a rat-infested dun geon, where hum an bein gs go mad with terror? " If it does not make sen se in a concentration ca mp , it j ust doesn't make sense," so meone has said. The hid eous rea lity of to rture, whi ch ca n go on and on with out di vin e interv ention, is itself enough to refute th e Almighty Fa th er. " I ca n forgive God anything but the cen- tral nervous system," George Grant once sa id 40 And lest we attempt a defen ce of God by bl aming it all on human sin , we mu st ask how it is possi bl e still to beli eve in the lov ing God whil e tra pped in agony, hunger, and thirst fo r days or even weeks und er the rubbl e of an ea rthquake, or while one's own beloved child is inn ocentl y and mi serabl y dyin g of some emac iatin g ca ncer, events for which no human bein g's sin can be blamed. Intell ec tual honesty and any kind of emotional or ex peri enti al auth enti cit y would seem to demand that we rebel again st any God who perpetra tes or all ows such things. "The onl y excuse for God would be for him not to ex ist," said 1-1 . Stendhal. 4 1 Albert Camus arti culates poignantl y (what Moltm ann ca ll s) "protest atheism"- th e in adequacy of all cool intell ectual , cos- mologica l, or moral argum ents for God. "I rebel, th erefore we ex ist," wrote Ca mu s. Metaphys ica l rebel Iion seems th e onl y authentic attitude an honest human bein g can have in the face of the nonsense and absurdity of the world . Remark abl y, Camus, as one wh o did not beli eve in the God of the Bible, find s the roots of metaph ys ical rebelli on in sc ripture: "Th e hi story of th e rebellion th at we ex peri ence today is fa r more th at of the descend ants of Ca in th an the pupils of Pro metheus. In thi s sense, it is above all oth ers th e God of the Old Testament who sets in motion th e energies of rebelli on."42 As an ath eist, Camu s grasps with remark abl e cl arity th e signifi cance of th e suffering of Jes us:

The night of Golgotha onl y has so much significa nce for man because in its darkn ess th e Godh ead, visibl y renoun cing all inherited pri vil eges, endures to th e end the angui sh of death, including the depths of despair. This is the ex pl anati on of th e Lama sabachthani and Chri st's gru esome doubt in agony. Th e agon y would have been easy if it could have been supported by etern al hope. But fo r God to be a man, he had to despair.43 76 Reflections on Revelation, Faith, and Rationality

Nevertheless, Camus re main ed a pro test ath eist. Moltmann, empathi zing with Ca mu s, says it well from a Chri sti an standpoint: "The qu esti on of th e ex istence of God is, in itself, a min or issue in th e fac e of th e qu esti on of [God's] ri ght- eousness in the world ."44 The question of th eodi cy (th e de fence or justifi cati on of God in the face of ev il and sufferin g) took on a new po ignancy in the twe nti eth century. Not, I think, because human suffe rin g has been greater in our time than in prev ious tim es. Massacres, refin ed meth ods of tortu re, human sacrifi ce, leprosy and pl agues, hurrica nes and ea rthqu akes, cru cifi x ions and burnings were long part of human- ity's lot. We in the modern West have been relieved of at least some of th ese and, through the di scovery of anaesthetics , from much of th e worst pain of natu ra l ill- ness. But ex pectations are hi gher in our tim e. We no longer accept th at life must be a horror. Th e human wisdom predominant today no longer bows humbly before th e will of an omnipotent, in scrutabl e deity. Hum anity "come of age" (as Di etri ch Bonhoeffer put it) has less need fo r th e hypothes is of God and less tol- erance fo r superficia l theodi cies. Rati onal th eism (beli ef in God based on arg u- ments fo r the exi stence of a Supreme Being), fo r a ll its apparent reasonabl eness, has less credi bility fo ll ow ing th e di sasters and atrociti es of the twenti eth century. The imprisoned Bonh oeffer, aware of what was happening to the Jews under the Nazis and awa iting the ga ll ows himse lf, was the first of th e twe nti eth-century theologians to appl y a theology of the cross to the torm enting qu esti ons about ev il and sufferin g. Bonh oeffer was not spared the time to arti cul ate Paul 's theme of th e wea kn ess of God with any th oroughn ess before he was fi nall y hanged on April 9, 1945. Hi s frag mentary letters and Papers.fro m Prison, co ll ected by a fri end aft er hi s death, have been endl essly provocative in the decades fo ll owing hi s execut ion. "God lets himself be pushed out of th e wo rld onto the cross. He is weak and powerl ess in th e wo rld , and that is precisely the way, the onl y way, in which he is with us an d helps us."45 Perh aps the credible choices are represented by these two mid-twenti eth-centu ry thinkers: Bonhoeffer, the martyred theolo- gian of the suffe ring God, and Ca mus, the atheist of metaphys ical rebell io n. In full vi ew of the absurdity of th e world , th e latter choice may indeed be a matter of sight, while the fo rmer ca n onl y be fa ith and hope against hope. In th e last analys is, though, we may reasonabl y doubt whether Camus' despair can real ly be th e fin al truth. Is humanity now to become God? Human- ity, nobl y rebelling aga in st injustice and absurdity, may indeed seem godlike. Yet so much of what we have to rebel against is humanity's own cruelty, arrogance, and pettin ess. Prometh ean humanity hardl y seems a sui ta bl e candidate fo r our worship, obedi ence, and tru st. We have to ask also whether despair and meanin glessness are rea ll y a cred- ibl e last wo rd . Whence has come thi s nobl e rebelli ous human creature, longing fo r mea ning and love? How has an utterly absurd universe brought forth thi s thinking, philosophi zing, pray ing, rebelling human bein g, cryin g out fo r justi ce? Despi te the absurdity and nonsense of li fe and the worl d, many of us have inti- Revelation and Faith 7 7 mati ons of mea nin g and bea uty, even outsid e of bibli cal revelati on. Most of th e world reli gions tes ti fy to a sense of "holy presence" or transcendent mystery that forbids fin al despair. Parti cul arl y in ex peri ences of human love, and indeed in metaph ys ica l rebelli on itself, one senses a depth and tru th in rea lity more funda- mental than the absurdi ty and nonsense. C. S. Lew is says it we ll :

Ath eism turn s out to be too simpl e. If th e whole uni verse has no mea n- in g, we should never have found out th at it has no mea ning: just as, if there were no li ght in the uni verse and therefore no crea tures with eyes, we should never kn ow it was dark. Dark wo uld be a wo rd without meanin g. 46

Does thi s amount to a philosophi ca l argum ent fo r God from natural reason? Pe r- haps, but of course it rests on no indubitable fo und ation, ca rri es no coercive cogency. I would conte nd that a va lid so rt of reasonin g of thi s kind is app ro pri- ate; it may open us to faith , but in th e last analys is it is onl y th e ri sk of fa ith th at can give us hope in the face of the wo rld 's darkn ess. Fo r Chri sti ans, it is th e story of Jesus that puts fl es h on these vague intimations of meaning and hope. That such a On e has lived and suffe red among us cann ot be ove rl ooked . That he lived magnifi ce ntl y in fai th , that he ex hibited such graciousness and courage, that he shared our des pair an d doub t is precious to us. As cru cified and ri sen, he saves us fr om mea ninglessness and hopelessness and testifi es that we are acceptabl e and beloved desp ite our own parti cipat ion in the wo rld 's ev il. Because of thi s we confess that in thi s suffe rin g One we fi nd th e presence of Deity. Deity is none other than thi s suffering, self-givin g Love embodi ed in Jesus, whi ch comm ands our worship, obedi ence, and tru st. If the true God is indeed like thi s, th en God will often appea r to be si lent and powerl ess in the face of our troubl es. As th e noveli st John Updike puts it,

Th e sensa ti on of sil ence ca nn ot be helped: a loud and evid ent God would be a bully, an in secure tyrant , an all-cru shing datum in stead of, as He is, a botto mless encouragement to our fa lterin g and fri ghtened being. 47

Theology of the cross , then, begin s not with stro ng argum ents designed to com- pel the intell ect but with the beauty and weakness of thi s lov ing human perso n and finds Deity th ere. Despite th e inadequ acy of Ca mu s' co nclusions (from th e point of vi ew of fa ith), hi s pro test atheism ex hibits a nob ili ty of spirit closer to biblica l fa ith than what is often ca ll ed "rati onal theism," for that fa ith itself is a protest again st what is, in the name of what God will s to bring about. The God of exodus is a protest- ing God, again st the typi cal human stru cture of dominati on and oppress ion. The God of Jes us too is the protesting God, standing agai nst the tyrann y of law and 78 Reflections on Revelation, Fa ith, and Rationality self-righteousness, fi ghtin g against inj ustice and lovelessness. The God of the gospel entirely icl enti fi es w ith the lowly and oppressed, with sinners, and with the sick and th e poor. Here is a Goel who wi ll s to move th e whole of creation and humanity beyond the pattern of' survi val of the fittest to the deeper and more pro- fo und rea li ty of agape love. Such a Goel is not the buttress and guarantor of the way things are but the lu re (as the process theologians say) toward an utterly dif- fe rent reality that Jesus called "reign of God." That re ign means ultimately th e end of sin and death, the encl of a ll cry ing and tears (Rev 2 1:4) . Such id eas are a revolution in th e concept of Goel if we compare them to what is commonl y call ed rational the ism. But thi s revolution is not reall y new, sin ce it had its fo undation in God's own self-disclosure with Moses and the exo- dus- the self-disclosure of Goel in solidarity with the oppressed and the poor, the God who is again st the way things are. This same God is the One crucified in our humanity on the cross of Golgoth a. Not Caesar to the nth degree, not the com- mander in chi ef writ large, not the head of a great corporation projected into the heavens, but a strange, gentl e, terrifying ho! in ess, a Wholly Other. Jon Sobrino expl ain s:

God is not simply the one who holds and wields power, as .. . defined by various re li g ions and philosophi es. On th e cross God does not show up as one who wields power over the negati ve from outside; rather, on the cross we see God submerged within the negative.48

We find in thi s liberation theologian , then, as in Bonhoeffer, Moltmann, and Ha ll , the powerful insight of Luther, which he in turn derived from Paul and from the gospel story of Jesus. God is revealed absconditus sub contraria, hidden under the opposite of a ll that we would naturally expect of God. The true God of the cross turns out to be an utter surprise to human wisdom, a direct contradiction to what appears reasonable to natural human thought. Yet for many today this very contradiction carries credibility. For this very reason we have to attempt to understand God more than ever from the death of Jesus. To speak of Goel for Jesus' sake we must "develop a particular theology within earshot of th e dying cry of Jesus."49

The only way past protest atheism is through a theology of th e cross which understands God as the suffering God in the suffering of Christ and which cries out with the godforsaken God, " My Goel , w hy have you forsaken me?" For this theology, Goel and suffering are no longer con- tradicti ons, as in theism and atheism, but God's being is in suffering and the suffering is in God's being itself, because God is love. It takes the " metaphysical rebellion" up into itself because it recogni zes in the cross of Christ a rebellion in metaphysics, or better, a rebellion in God.50

Top View