Thinking the way God thinks, seeing things the way He sees them requires us to change. It’s not simply a matter of changing our system of values, deciding to think one way rather than another. What I’ve been suggesting is that the Gospel doesn’t reduce to a set of ideas, it’s an opportunity to enter into a relationship with a person: God Himself. The Word of God, the Bible, has been given to guide us in that relationship. But simply knowing what the Word says is not enough. Many people know what the Bible says, but not all of them know the Lord.

            There are those who know what the Bible says but don’t believe what it says. For them it’s just another document from the ancient world to be studied and evaluated. The only impact it has on them is as a stimulant for their minds, something useful to acquire knowledge: knowledge of history, or philosophy, or sociology. They study it as an expression of human history, while denying that it’s a revelation of a God who seeks to communicate with them.

            Others know what the Bible says but only believe part of it, or view it as incomplete. These people know there’s a God, and they believe that the Bible has something to say about Him. However, either they don’t think everything in the Bible is true, or they think it’s in need of reinforcement through other sources. This take on the Bible is reflected by people of various sentiments: genuine believers and those whose condition before God is suspect. Thomas Jefferson affirmed the existence of God while refusing to believe in the “superstitions” of the Bible such as the resurrection and other miraculous events. This prompted Jefferson to actually cut out portions of the Bible that he considered of no use. In essence he supplemented what the Bible says with what he knew to be “reasonable,” and, in the process, chose to let his reason determine which parts of the Bible to believe. However, as I’ve pointed out, denying the resurrection undermines the basic biblical premise for salvation, rendering Jefferson’s posture before the Lord as precarious to say the least.

            In another way, Catholic teaching supplements the Protestant form of the Bible with other sources that it regards as inspired. The essential teachings of Christ crucified and risen from the dead remain intact, but other teachings, such as the engagement in the sacraments, are also affirmed. However, given the size of the Roman Catholic Church, the extent to which some of these extra-biblical teachings are embraced by Catholics varies, with many embracing a more “evangelical” approach to the Gospel.

            There are also those who believe the Bible can be, and has been, supplemented by an experience with God. This approach has produced the collection of beliefs that are the basis of Mormonism. “Revelations” received by Joseph Smith have been used to supplement the Bible, producing an alternative to traditional Christianity. However, among traditional Protestants, there’s also been a tendency to value personal experience of God as a valid source of revelation. Those who are more conservative will submit their “revelations” to the Bible, only affirming them when they align with what the Bible tells us. Others have tended to let their experiences overshadow the Bible, convinced that they’ve heard from God and don’t need to see if it agrees with the written Word. This is something that can affect a wide range of Christians, especially in situations where there’s increased religious fervor during “revival.” America has a strong tradition of revival that goes back to the first decades of the British colonies in North America. And in many of these periods, Christian experience drastically affected how people practiced their faith.

            Generally speaking, many, if not most, evangelicals tend to affirm the Bible as the final arbiter in determining what’s true about God, and what isn’t. Yet in our handling of the text, we can reflect all the postures presented above. When we come across texts in the Bible that seem far-fetched or strange to us, the tendency is to ignore them and stick with what’s obvious and less challenging. This amounts to something similar to Jefferson’s approach, choosing to be informed by only part of the Bible.

            Sometimes our “traditions” are given pride of place in our practice of the faith. This can result in church teachings that are either not supported by the Bible or can only be sustained by focusing on some Biblical texts and neglecting others. While not as pronounced as the Catholic approach, it nevertheless reflects some of the features of Catholicism in its handling of the Bible; that’s, in part, the reason for so many Protestant denominations.

            The role of experience can be a problem for everyone seeking to know the Lord. Even the most conservative handlers of the Bible, those who are convinced that it’s inspired, without error, and sufficient for knowing God, will nevertheless be tempted to let their experience be their guide when they run up against texts that don’t make sense to them. And what makes sense, apart from the Bible, is primarily based upon the views of the prevailing culture; so this “common sense” changes over time and varies from one place to another, even within the same country. Furthermore, the role of experience can be elevated by the influence of spiritual occurrences such as the exercise of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, or manifestations of the supernatural, something that doesn’t occur that much in the Western world but does happen in other places, such as India or the Middle East.

            These tendencies are illustrated by what happened to some Protestant denominations during the period of our Civil War. In more than one case, the Southern segments of a denomination viewed slavery as a valid institution that was supported by the Bible, while the Northern segments did not. Both were reading the same book while coming to different conclusions on this issue. And the reasons for this were probably due to the weaknesses just mentioned. They were emphasizing texts that supported their views while neglecting those that did not. And they were prompted to do this because of the influence of their respective cultures: North vs. South, with their contrasting traditions and experiences. Now in saying this, I recognize that there were certainly many factors involved in what produced the catastrophe of the American Civil War and its resulting impact on the American church. However, I do think these elements contributed to the animosity between the churches of these conflicting cultures.

            Regarding the particular issue of slavery, someone once asked me if the Bible supports or argues against the institution. It was an unexpected question and I really didn’t have an answer at the time. However, I had only recently received my PhD, and my conceit prompted me to attempt a response anyway. I don’t even remember what I said, but the weakness of my reply and my effort to look like I knew what I was talking about were immediately perceived by the person I was talking to, and he let me know it to my embarrassment. It was only later, after mulling over the question for a while, that I came to realize what was involved with this question. I concluded that the Bible neither supports, nor denies the validity of slavery. In the ancient world, slavery was common everywhere and all kinds of people were enslaved: criminals, prisoners of war, civilians of a vanquished nation, the educated as well as the commoner, and members of the various races of humanity. The Bible, for its part, doesn’t address slavery as an independent social issue; it only addresses it in the light of God’s revelation of Himself. This means that the primary intention of the Scriptures is to point to what God is doing on the earth through the Gospel; social justice is secondary to the kingdom of God revealed in Jesus Christ.

            This brings us back to our challenge to think like God thinks. There are so many ways in which we try to buttonhole the Lord, trying to get Him to think like we do. For instance, being invested in our culture, we want God to bless our segment of the world, and we often desire this so that we can live a life of ease. But God isn’t primarily interested in our comfort, as we define the term; He’s interested in promoting His kingdom and our participation in it. Such participation requires getting serious about God. If we’re not that serious about our faith, He may have to make us uncomfortable in order to get our attention.

            Furthermore, if we have any knowledge of the Bible, we know that sin can, and usually does, lead to some form of suffering. We also know that we’re sinners, and that our sin results in our personal suffering. In fact, if we didn’t suffer when we sinned, we’d be in real trouble. It’s because God loves us that He corrects us with suffering when we sin; if He didn’t it would mean that we weren’t really one of His children. (See Hebrews 12)

            However, our suffering may not have anything to do with sin as such. It’s a scary thought, but sometimes illness or failure or disappointment are just what we need to cure us of what really ails us, namely a limited understanding of God. Because the Lord is who He is, it isn’t easy to get to know Him. That’s because getting to know Him challenges the way we view everything else. That’s uncomfortable, and we tend to resist being made uncomfortable. Even if we’re serious about the Lord, the tendency is to find a place of comfort and familiarity and stay there. And we would stay there if God didn’t come along and rattle our cages. I can’t tell you how many times God has done just that to me. Sometimes the rattling’s been a big thing, like a major change at church, or the loss of a job, or sometimes it was something as simple as a traffic ticket. But as I’ve gone through these things, it became apparent that sin wasn’t always the issue; rather, the Lord was trying to draw me closer to Him. It was uncomfortable, but I was better for it.

            There are also times when our suffering isn’t primarily focused on us at all; rather, it’s what’s required in order for God’s agenda to be realized. Martyrdom is a good example of this, something that most of us aren’t going to experience any time soon but an example nonetheless. Martyrs, by definition, are those who die, not because they’re being punished for sin, nor because the Lord is trying to tell them something about Himself, although I’m sure martyrs learn things about God in their martyrdom. Rather, martyrs die because their death is necessary for the cause of the Gospel. Their blood provides a seedbed for the hard ground of a culture that otherwise would never receive the good news.

            Something less drastic and more likely for us, in this vein, might be the loss of a good pastor. As difficult as this might be, it could be just what the church needs to become more productive, and the Lord won’t shy away from doing what’s necessary in order for his agenda to be realized. Individuals within the church may be doing well, but the church as a whole may not be, so God moves the pastor on, creating no little disturbance in order for His purposes to be accomplished. (See Job 37:13) Accepting such a view of suffering points again to our need to change the way we think: to think like God thinks. It’s a challenge for us because we’ve been trained to think quite differently by the world around us.

            Learning to think like God does require a proper handling of the Word, one that allows the Bible to say what it says, not what we want it to say. However, in order for that to happen, we need to be willing to change; we need to be willing to accept God’s agenda even if it makes us uncomfortable. That’s not easy, but fortunately, we don’t have to do it alone. In fact, we shouldn’t do it alone. Learning how to use good resources, including the resource of your pastor, is essential to a proper understanding and application of the text.

            Above and beyond that is the provision of God’s Spirit whose role includes acting as one who can help us find our way. He’s been granted to us as a first taste of what life in the Kingdom is like. And one of His primary activities is teaching us the ways of God. That’s why any effort to learn about God—including effective Bible study—needs to be undergirded with prayer, not just “now I lay me down to sleep” prayer, real prayer. We need to learn how to seek the Lord in prayer, how to wait before the Lord in prayer, how to listen in prayer, and to expect God to speak to us in prayer. In our world of constant movement and multitasking, it’s difficult to develop this discipline, but it’s absolutely essential.