Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Soren Said...

I have been reading on Existentialism and its prevalence in the current age. Many of its aspects have great appeal to the heart; mine in particular. Not only does it convey philosophical meaning, but it tugs at the needs that the my generation expresses through their art, relationships and general atmosphere.

Kierkegaard's attempt to revive dead orthodoxy, which birthed theistic existentialism, reach into the holes that the current church often leaves unfulfilled among my generation. The need for experience and the ability generally set aside absolutes for meaning defines my peers and a "more personal" faith seems to be the call of their hearts.

Broken families and empty homes have imprinted a void that only people or personalization can fill. When Christianity is viewed through the existential lens, it implants this need right where it is needed. This could be argued simply as contextualization: Betraying a relationship with God vs. Breaking his rules; Committing oneself to a person vs. Believing a set of propositions; Pleasing the Lord vs. Obeying the rules. How much more appealing the personalized list sounds.

It would be dangerous and utterly foolish to limit existentialism to such basic precepts. Particularly since Kierkegaard did not ultimately find the meaning he was searching for and my understanding of this philosophy is surface level at best.

Conversely the Church would claim that a personal relationship with Jesus has always been its goal. While this may be true, I now see 'The 4 Spiritual Laws' repackaged as 'Knowing God Personally' and as culture has moved beyond the modern, should not the church address it accordingly?

Absolute truth must remain, meaning must come from the Divine, Jesus is still the only way to God and knowing God is the only way to know ourselves. These are orthodoxy and cannot be moved. The question remains is the relationship with Jesus something new to this culture and that is why it is appealing to me, or is it a part of orthodoxy that has simply been readdressed?

Like all things, more study is needed to know.

No comments: