Comments on: Reading Blog: Knowing Christ Today, Introduction

By: Pastoralia » Reading Blog: Knowing Christ Today, Chapter 4

Pastoralia » Reading Blog: Knowing Christ Today, Chapter 4 — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:06:55 +0000

[...] part 5 in my series on Dallas Willard’s latest book, Knowing Christ Today. Previous Entries: Intro | Chapter 1 | Chapter 2 | Chapter 3) Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; [...]

By: Ways of Resistance | Bonhoeffer, Munn, and Coker on Disillusionment and Knowledge

Fri, 05 Feb 2010 07:45:35 +0000

[...] I’ve actually got one more link to throw in the mix. Jason Coker posted the beginnings of a chapter by chapter review of Dallas Willard’s new book, Knowing Christ Today: Why We Can Trust Spiritual Knowledge. I [...]

By: Jason Coker

Jason Coker — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 01:30:24 +0000

Jason - Welcome. Your contribution is appreciated! I’m with you, but I suspect that we’ll have to find the real thing in the midst of the “somewhat shoddy and disappointing” version we have. : )

By: Jason Winton

Jason Winton — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 00:32:33 +0000

I’m new here (to the blog), but this caught my attention because I’ve been thinking through the implications of knowledge in relation to the Body of Christ. I haven’t looked at Willard’s book yet, so I’m not sure if he will touch on it. But it’s a rich topic, eh? For example, if we cannot completely identify with any human society (including Christian community) as Christ’s body, in what way can we avoid the temptations to idealize/idolatrize the social power of groups, movements, institutions, or even community? In other words, I am wondering if knowledge of Christ’s actual body is in any way possible or if we must accept the somewhat shoddy and disappointing versions personafied to us by our experiences of them. You might tell by my tone or question that this is one of those areas where I’ve had “experience with the belittling of faith as true knowledge.” Nevertheless, I view knowledge (religious or otherwise) as the substance of human faith. It’s the way we know the world. However, Jesus seems to know things about the world that I will never understand, put faith in, or believe. Peter Rollins, I guess, would want to call me an atheist. But I’m a Christian, a leader, and part of a faith community. This is not the comment I was thinking it would be. Alright, enough typing…

By: Jason Coker

Jason Coker — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 05:29:27 +0000

Ben - You're anticipating at least some of where Willard is going. Spiritual knowledge is inherently knowledge of persons, and in the case of Christianity, a particular person. That is an entirely different sort of knowledge than empirical data, though no less real. Ty - I imagine we've all experiences that anti-intellectual bias (it was only a few days ago another pastor in here called me an "elitist" for my vocabulary!). Some traditions more so than others, for sure. Willard is interesting to me because he's always provided that corrective while never exhibiting a bias in the other direction against the affective side of our relationship with God. Thanks for the comments!

By: Ty Grigg

Ty Grigg — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 03:24:37 +0000

Its interesting that while modernity addresses the “head” more than the “heart” (to use crude metaphors), the modernist church in some ways appropriated the emphasis on knowledge (ie. pastor as professional) but in other aspects completely rejected the intellect. In fact, I think the church has an anti-intellectual bias. Anytime a pastor introduces a Greek word in a sermon and spends a minute apologizing for doing such a thing strikes me as one example. The focus is more on experiential, private, “Jesus in my heart” faith. Dallas has been providing a necessary correction. We need to be renewed in our minds! Thanks for blogging the book!

By: Ben Sternke

Ben Sternke — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:20:27 +0000

Leave it to Willard to think and write stuff NOBODY else seems to be talking about. I really must get this book. You’re right about there being almost no “buzz” surrounding it. I had no idea he had another book out.

On your questions, I think a definition of what “knowledge” is will need to be forthcoming in the book. Part of the problem is probably the Enlightenment redefinition of “knowledge” as scientific certainty that sent pastors and theologians reeling… so we started talking about faith in other terms than “knowledge.”

I guess I have always approached faith as a form of knowledge. It’s just not the kind of knowledge scientists have about the molecular structure of physical reality, it’s more like the knowledge I have that my wife loves me. It’s not “blind faith,” there’s really a lot of evidence that she loves me, but there’s no scientific proof that she loves me. But it doesn’t mean the knowledge is less real.

I would see the limits of religious knowledge (as you put it) the same as the limits on the kind of knowledge that “knows” my wife loves me. Trying to scientifically “prove” it would be silly. But perhaps that isn’t a limitation on religious or relational knowledge as much as it is a limitation on scientific knowledge.

Ah well, just some stream-of-consciousness thoughts. Willard’s ideas do that to me. Looking forward to this series.