Some good comments here. I agree that there are Christians who do overlook experience altogether. But all of our experience must be anchored by the sure Word of God.
I think we have become very scared of the mystical (if I may be allowed to use that word) movement of God in our lives. We've turned Christianity into an intellectual pursuit with no "experience" required, and most of the time, experience being looked down upon.
Ah, but I am not sure you
are allowed to use that word "mystical", seeing as it is not used in Scripture. This is not nit-picking at a lexical mote. The definition of "mystical" according to Britannica is "a quest for a hidden truth or wisdom". By definition - and practice - it imagines a different way to God (or God-awareness)
other than the Word of God. Tozer's so-called "Christian mystics" (Julian of Norwich, Madame Guyon, Evelyn Underhill, etc.) pointedly downplay the Bible as a means to grow in knowledge of God. Instead these mystics - and Tozer as well - make much of preparation, but little for study of the Word. "Be still and know that I am God" is taken out of context.
By setting up a too harsh contrast between experience of God and reading God's Word, Tozer overlooks that the plain reading and studying of God's Word by a believing Christian (IOW, one who obeys God) is God's ordinary way of making His own become more and more like Christ. Tozer's method, by contrast, will lead to introspective and subjective naval-gazers.
But I agree with your (and Tozer's) cautions about head knowledge - which is actually just garden variety unbelief. If we believe that the Bible is the Word of Life we will study it as if our life depends on it. If we really don't believe that, we will (whatever else our lips may say) just do whatever we please. This is not "head knowledge vs. "heart knowledge" but unbelief vs. belief.
Tom Riggle
