Is God Real?

Like many others, I am happy to have a good, robust discussion on what the Bible has to say about certain topics. Unlike some, I can’t use Hebrew and Greek to back up or oppose many points. However, as I have delved into the world of various online forums, I have to say I struggle with the definitive way in which some seem to put their point of view about what the Bible says. Not that I want this blog to be about what truth is and what is not and how we might read and interpret the Bible. Far from it. What I would like to propose, though, is that we can know a stack about God without being any different, fundamentally, to the person who knows nothing about Him.

I don’t think I am by any means the first to suggest this. Just the other day, I was reading Oswald Chambers’ My Utmost For His Highest, when I came across this: 

“When a man fails in personal Christian experience, it is nearly always because he has never received anything. The only sign that a man is saved is that he has received something from Jesus Christ. Our part as workers for God is to open men’s eyes that they may turn themselves from darkness to light; but that is not salvation, that is conversion – the effort of a roused human being. I do not think it is too sweeping to say that the majority of nominal Christians are of this order; their eyes are opened, but they have received nothing. Conversion is not regeneration...When a man is born again, he knows that it is because he has received something as a gift from Almighty God and not because of his own decision. People register their vows, and sign their pledges, and determine to go through, but none of this is salvation. Salvation means that we are brought to a place where we are able to receive something from God on the authority of Jesus Christ...” 

Another book I read some time back was Your Kingdom Come, by Daniel Kolenda, where he states,  

"A person who hears the gospel should have an experience that needs an explanation, not just an explanation of something that is in need of an experience...And the demonstration of God’s power should be the norm”.

And I guess from this you can see where I am heading.

A number of years back I came to the conclusion that if all I have to offer to others from my faith is a “nice life”, then I really don’t have much to offer. Many people already have that and don’t need faith in God to get there. I came to the conclusion that evidence of the power of God in my life had to be the difference. 

This topic also takes me back to conversations with my father in my mid-twenties. It came to a point where I felt as though every time we got together, he would be telling me about all these people who had shown that the Christian faith was a fraud or based on wrong beliefs and lies. One time, I was tired of it, so I (gently) told him that I felt as though he was constantly trying to persuade me not to believe what I believed, but the problem was that he would not be able to. I said that my relationship and experience of God was not something that I could be talked out of because it was simply that. My experience. I cannot “un-have” that experience. For some reason this put an end to those sorts of discussions. I would like to that it was because he realised my faith was not about following form and tradition but about a real relationship with God.

And so, I come back to where I started. I know that the history of the Church over the past few hundred years has included the battle to prove itself equal to “science”, and hence the desire for “proof”. However, I will come back again and again to the idea that experience will always trump a good argument – you cannot take my experience from me. You may choose not to believe I have had that experience (like a friend whose two broken wrists were miraculously healed just days after they were shown as broken on x-rays, and were confirmed healed by the second lot of x-rays – the doctor simply couldn't cope and told my friend to go away), or you may like to try to provide more “rational” reasoning of what happened, but I know differently, because it is my experience.

I also realise that experience is subjective and can be misinterpreted. However, without personal experience, faith is very dry. And besides, I further believe that God is faithful to His promise to send His Holy Spirit to teach and guide us in all things (John 14:16, 26 for example) and also that His sheep know His voice and follow Him (John 10:4). One of the biggest arguments for theology and doctrine is the fear of people being led astray, or leading others astray if they don’t have “good” theology and doctrine. However, I would argue that this is not particularly good theology. If God has promised His Holy Spirit, do we not trust Him to convict, teach and guide His people? Or does He only use (imperfect) human agents now?

I have titled this blog “Is God Real?”, because sometimes I wonder if for some, their theology is way more important than God to them. If we only ever talk about God in an abstract, theoretical way, have we actually been impacted and changed by Him? Tell me about the reality of God in your life and you give me something I cannot argue with.