Bible Reading and Maintaining the Spiritual Life

Blink and you missed it, but today we had probably the most important two lectures we will have in our entire time studying at Moore College: Keith Condie on 'Bible Reading and Maintaining the Spiritual Life'.

The premise was that the greatest danger for Bible teachers is they tend to move from before college studying the Bible for transformation, to simply studying the Bible for information.

Now the mistake most people make to try to solve this problem, is to completely separate personal Bible reading and prayer, from our regular 'work'. This is achieved by perhaps sitting in a different chair, at a different time, sometimes even with a different Bible. The idea being you engage in devotional reading apart from your theological study.

The problem with this solution is it sounds so attractive. After all, it's lifted straight out of page 2 of the evangelical application manual under 'Read your Bible and pray', sub-point 'Daily devotionals'. However what this action does is fundamentally undermine the practice of theology. Our study of God through his word must never be thought of as being performed in a vacuum. Rather whenever we speak or think or read of God, we are encountering not the concept of God but are faced with and examined by the living God himself.

This is what J.I. Packer had to say in, An Introduction to Systematic Spirituality:

I question the adequacy of conceptualizing the subject-matter of systematic theology as simply revealed truths about God, and I challenge the assumption that has usually accompanied this form of statement, that the material, like other scientific data, is best studied in cool and clinical detachment. Detachment from what you ask? Why, from the relational activity of trusting, loving, worshipping, obeying, serving, and glorifying God: the activity that results from realizing that one is actually in God's presence, actually being addressed by him, every time one opens the Bible or reflects on any divine truth whatsoever. This second stage in theological method, as commonly practised, separates the questions of truth from those of discipleship; it proceeds as if doctrinal study would only be muddied by introducing devotional concerns; it drives a wedge between theology and doxology, between orthodoxy and orthopraxy, between knowing true notions about God and knowing the true God himself, between one's thinking and one's worshipping. Done this way, theology induces spiritual pride and produces spiritual sleep (physical sleep, too, sometimes). Thus the noblest study in the world gets cheapened. I cannot applaud this.

Keith suggested the correct approach is not to separate the two, but to always approach our study with six key attitudes to the study of God's word:
1. Be respectful
2. Be responsive
3. Be reflective
4. Be delighted
5. Be intelligent
6. Be prayerful

Now, the danger of over-indulgence was also touched upon, where it is true for most people at college that we take in more than we can possibly ever respond to immediately. And yet an abundance of spiritual food is no excuse for us to refrain from eating altogether! The analogy of a chef was used – A Chef spends a lot of time preparing food for others, but the Chef herself, still must eat.

The only point of the lecture I disagreed with (perhaps, wished for more clarification on) was Keith suggesting that it is a form of arrogance to come to college thinking you know everything you need to know. Now, I understand Keith was attacking those who feel they are only ticking the college box so someone will give them a job. But it is possible to be too reactive to this issue. Whilst we should expect to be challenged, and rebuked, and changed, and humbled as we study at college, provided we came with a sound knowledge of the gospel it is true also that what we are seeking is added depth of belief. In that sense I would consider it a failure to leave college in any other position than the one I arrived in – knowing the truth of salvation, and dedicated to serving Jesus for the rest of my life.

Perhaps this is because I know from experience that my biggest theological lessons have yet to come from any theologians (in that hoity-toity use of the word), but instead from many supposedly untrained saints who have been following Jesus for 20, 30, 40, 50, or 60 years. This is not being anti-intellectual. It is rather informed by the understanding that we must be like children in our trust of God. Though my depth of understanding of Jesus death on my behalf should only increase with more study and reflection, there remains a simplicity to trusting him that I had when I arrived for that first lecture, and I hope above hope remains in me when I walk up to graduate, and is firm within me still when I close my eyes for the last time in this life.

Thinking that you don't need to go to college might arise from misplaced intellectual arrogance, but it can also be an expression of the Christian knowing you won't leave any more saved than when you walked in.

I'm almost certain that these will end up being the two most important lectures we will have in our time at college.