knowing him.

seminary is a funny thing. i spend so much time studying interpretations of scripture and writings of early church fathers. i sit in my classes this semester and discuss scripture and theology and history and leadership. i love my my professors and i love what i'm learning, but at the end of the day, where does it leave me with God? sometimes i get overwhelmed with all the talking about God and just want to cry out with paul, "indeed, i count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing christ jesus my lord" (philippians 3.8). everything i'm learning is worthless if in the end, i'm further away from knowing jesus. 

fortunately, most of my professors get this. my scriptures 1 prof is a crazy little asian lady that told us on the first day of class that she would kick our butts this semester. everyone knows she's the hardest teacher at the school. all of that to say, i was shocked on tuesday morning at the end of class when she told us that she wants us to learn and wants us to wrestle with scripture in a new way, but if her class does not lead us to a deeper understanding of the character of god, she believes she will have failed as our teacher. wow. i want to know him. i want to know his character. 

i'm still reading philip yancey's disappointment with god. in the chapter i read today, "why god doesn't explain," yancey talked about god's response at the end of the book of job. after all the craziness and all the debates between job and his friends, one would think god would offer some stellar explanation or clarification. nope. instead, he goes off about who he is and who job's not. frederick buechner says about god's speech: "god doesn't reveal his grand design. he reveals himself." interesting. 

i understand that, but i don't necessarily like it. it doesn't make the "why?" questions go away. but what am i wanting or expecting out of god? what possible explanation would satisfy me? yancey suggests this idea:

"knowledge is passive, intellectual; suffering is active, personal. no intellectual answer will solve suffering. perhaps this is why god sent his own son as one response to human pain, to experience it and absorb it into himself. the incarnation did not 'solve' human suffering, but at least it was an active and personal response."

fascinating, huh? as much as i question everything, and as much as i would love some concrete answers, i'm thankful that god sent a personal answer rather than an intellectual one. so maybe instead of asking him for explanations i should be asking him what it looks like to know him and understand his character...because i have to believe that everything else is worthless in comparison.