Which is more important?

[RustyAngeL]

I have heard it said that it's okay to forgo an intellectual knowledge of God so long as we experience Him. In other words, we don't necessarily have to explain the experience, we just have to know it has occured. There is a "leap of faith" in believing in God.

On the flip side, I have heard people saying we must have an intellectual knowledge of God but don't necessarily have to experience Him to know who He is.

So which one is right? And yes, this is open for debate.

I think experiencing Him brings knowledge.

[Laces Out Dan]

Yeah that is what i think too.

When I get filled with God's word, i seriously cant help but to go around telling people about Him.

Doesn't it say that God will provide us with the words when we try to speak to the officials?

i think, and i guess that means he provides us with the words to turn people to Christ.

[David from New Bern]

The chicken or the egg...which came first? Something tells me that you probably could argue both sides of this... I somehow I think we are going to get trapped in a semantic quagmire. But I will bite... I voted that experience precedes knowledge...We are born with a grasp of general revelation according to Romans. Special revelation beyond that is given by God and comes not by education. After salvation God honors study by giving us continual enlightenment

We have seen proof here on this forum, individuals with seemingly high IQs or at least a large vocabulary that they turn over, but they can't seem to grasp the simpliest of spiritual concepts. And they confess an intellectual campaign to find God and haven't met Him. I also think of Apostle Paul educated by Gamliel, but it took a Damascus road encounter that blinded him and a miraculous healing to open his physical as well as spiritual eyes. The Bible says prior to regeneration, we are blind until we experience an encounter with the Lord. Now I am not a real emotional person and my worship involves my intellect heavily, but God has convinced me that my intellect often gets in the way of what He wants me to experience. My natural need to be convinced gets in the way of my faith walking.

For we walk by faith, not by sight. 2 Corinthians 5:7 NKJV

Edited March 10, 2006 by David from New Bern

[David from New Bern]

When I say "knowledge" keep in mind I am refering to being able to defend your beliefs in God using logic and empirical evidence...basically an "intellectual" knowledge of God.

Please clarify for me...theological knowledge of God or intimate knowledge of God...and which one of these would you suggest the Bible refers to when it says, "knowledge of God?

[apothanein kerdos]

When I say "knowledge" keep in mind I am refering to being able to defend your beliefs in God using logic and empirical evidence...basically an "intellectual" knowledge of God.

Please clarify for me...theological knowledge of God or intimate knowledge of God...and which one of these would you suggest the Bible refers to when it says, "knowledge of God?

Theological knowldge...I attribute "intimate knowledge" to be comprised of both experience and theological knowledge.

Basically, the entire point of this thread is mean tot see where people stand and possibly discuss/debate. I happen to believe that both are equally important. I can expirience God, but if I cannot explain it, what good is it? I can have a theological knowledge of God, but if I can't experience Him, what good is it? Bsaically, too often people see the ability to parse Greek verbs, use exegesis, or provide a 20 page dissertation as somehow "limiting" our expirience of God. On the other hand, people who talk of being broken down, of crying because they felt His presence, are somehow viewed as "supernaturalists" that seek to take out the intellectual aspect of Christianity.

THis is my attempt to unite the two.

Also David, I apologize. I was not refering to "which came first" but instead that, once in a relationship with Christ, which is more important? My apologies on not being clear.

[Laces Out Dan]

Yeah dude, ive done that a few times, just crying at the altar or in my room just being overwhelmed. not that this lends anything to the purpose of this

Question: What is the difference between God and the Holy Spirit? I understand that Jesus is God in human form, but i cant understand the different between God and the holy spirit....

[David from New Bern]

When I say "knowledge" keep in mind I am refering to being able to defend your beliefs in God using logic and empirical evidence...basically an "intellectual" knowledge of God.

Please clarify for me...theological knowledge of God or intimate knowledge of God...and which one of these would you suggest the Bible refers to when it says, "knowledge of God?

Theological knowldge...I attribute "intimate knowledge" to be comprised of both experience and theological knowledge.

Basically, the entire point of this thread is mean tot see where people stand and possibly discuss/debate. I happen to believe that both are equally important. I can expirience God, but if I cannot explain it, what good is it? I can have a theological knowledge of God, but if I can't experience Him, what good is it? Bsaically, too often people see the ability to parse Greek verbs, use exegesis, or provide a 20 page dissertation as somehow "limiting" our expirience of God. On the other hand, people who talk of being broken down, of crying because they felt His presence, are somehow viewed as "supernaturalists" that seek to take out the intellectual aspect of Christianity.

THis is my attempt to unite the two.

Also David, I apologize. I was not refering to "which came first" but instead that, once in a relationship with Christ, which is more important? My apologies on not being clear.

Well now your poll is incorrect...I am in agreement with you, they are equally important...an over emphasis on either will hinder your development. I met a pastor who relied totally on spontaneous unprepared preaching. My friend you could tell...when he opened his mouth. His whole sermon were stacked stories of miraculous occurrances that defied good hermaneutics. I sometimes get out of balance, I need to remind myself to close the books, shut off Worthyboards and just praise and commune with God with no intellectual aids. I don't do it enough.

[His Ambassador]

Trusting God, taking Him at His word and walking in obedience to Him is far more important than the two options listed.

[Iryssa]

Trusting God, taking Him at His word and walking in obedience to Him is far more important than the two options listed.

I think this falls in the "both are equally important" category...I see all these things as being part of knowing and experiencing God, which I think are equally important.

[mike2]

I have heard it said that it's okay to forgo an intellectual knowledge of God so long as we experience Him. In other words, we don't necessarily have to explain the experience, we just have to know it has occured. There is a "leap of faith" in believing in God.

On the flip side, I have heard people saying we must have an intellectual knowledge of God but don't necessarily have to experience Him to know who He is.

So which one is right? And yes, this is open for debate.

I think most , if not all people have a knowledge of God and some do not persue an understanding of Him past that.

Any number of cults would be an example of extreme cases where God is acknowledged but people have made deliberate efforts to ignore Him.

However, after experiencing God, to actually feel the warmth of His presence in your very being, and then know from that experience that He is real, would make it very hard to ignore Him.

I have no way to prove it, but I truly believe that everyone has had, or will have, an intimate experience with God. I believe this, because I believe that when the judgement day comes, there will be absolutely no way that anyone will be able to say 'I never knew'.

Which is more important ?

my check-mark goes on experiencing God, everything else happens after that.