Existentialism is Dead...(Or Why You Shouldn't Care About What I Have to Say.)

Though the average Christian probably does not claim to be an existentialist, much of it's teaching falls into the church. How many times have you heard questions like, "What does this passage mean to you?" Has a person ever responded to you with, "Well, that may be, but I don't define the word that way?" Now it may be tricky to figure out the author's original intent, and there are obviously multiple applications for God's Word, a proper understanding of verbal, plenary inspiration requires we believe the words used were the words intended. And that the definition of the word at the time of it's original usage, must be the author's desired definition.

We live in a society that claims words don't matter, but they are rather inconsistent about it. Try screaming "Fire" in the middle of a movie theatre. Or perhaps more incendiary, try blurting out racial epithets in a mixed audience. In both situations, you can claim that nothing was meant, but people are still going to get upset. We, as believers, should be even more concerned about words. Jesus sure was (Matthew 15:15-20).

Existentialism is dead. For one, it killed itself.

The very process of explaining existentialism requires words. If, in the process to explain that words only have the meaning I choose to attach to them, I must use words, and therefore you and I must agree on the definition of said words, I have only been able to communicate if existentialism is not true. Furthermore, if I choose to believe that existentialism means that every word has a specific meaning outside of the person using the word, the existentialist must concede that my definition is proper for me, if he is to be consistent. Take meaning away from words, and we can not communicate.

Existentialism is dead. More importantly, Jesus shows it is so.

As just one example, look at Matthew 16:13-17. Jesus asks the disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" At first, the existentialist gets excited, thinking, "Aha, Jesus is about to define Himself by the perspective of others." The disciples go on to explain that there are several different options. Jesus follows with, "But who do you say that I am?" Two things to notice here. One, Jesus begins the question with the word "but." He is implying that the other answers were wanting. In essence, He's saying, "Ok, that's there opinion, but I'm looking for more." This is also obvious by the fact that in the first question He refers to Himself as the "Son of Man" and the second question makes it obvious that He considers Himself to be the Son of Man. Peter's answer, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God!"

But Jesus didn't really care about Peter's response. Take a look, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven." Peter didn't speak anything into being. Jesus didn't become the Messiah because Peter thought He was so. In fact, Jesus didn't become Peter's Messiah simply because Peter declared it to be so. Jesus IS the Messiah and God has declared that to be the case. That's what really mattered to Jesus. Even if God had not revealed it to Peter, Jesus still would have been so.

In a society where words are defined as I want them, and something can have a meaning for you and a meaning for me, it is imperative that we let them know existentialism is terribly flawed. Jesus does not call for us to come to what we think He may be. He calls us to come to Him. We have to gently, lovingly explain to a person that their opinion doesn't really matter. It doesn't change a thing. They must see that they have to come to God, in the way He requires, as He has determined. We don't make the rules, and we don't define the rules.