Blue Like Jazz, Chapter 5

Previous Reviews: Chapter 2, Chapters 3 and 4.

In chapter five, titled "Faith", Miller expresses his understanding of faith. This was a difficult chapter for me to understand--and I think that was Miller's intention. He apparently does not want every theological issue in this book to make sense. In remembering further conversation with a friend, Laura, Miller tells us:

I had no explanation [as to why Miller believes] for Laura. I don't think there is an explanation. My belief in Jesus did not seem rational or scientific, and yet there was nothing I could do to separate myself from this belief. I think Laura was look for something rational, because she believed that all things that were true were rational. But that isn't the case. Love, for example, is a true emotion, but it is not rational. What I mean is, people actually feel it. I have been in love, plenty of people have been in love, yet love cannot be proved scientifically. Neither can beauty. Light cannot be proved scientifically, and yet we all believe in light and by light see all things. There are plenty of things that are true that don't make any sense. I think one of the problems Laura was having was that she wanted God to make sense. He doesn't. He will make no more sense to me than I will make sense to an ant. [Page 54, emphases mine]

Miller then goes on to explain faith using the illustration of penguin mating rituals. They have an innate sense as to what to do in order to procreate. To Miller, is faith is an innate sense to believe Jesus:

...They have this radar inside them that told them when and where to go and none of it made any sense, but they show up on the very day their babies are being born, and the radar always turns out to be right. I have a radar inside me that says to believe in Jesus. Somehow, penguin radar leads them perfectly well. Maybe it isn't so foolish that I follow the radar that is inside of me. [Page 57]

Miller does not believe that the workings of faith can be explained. It is a mystery--inexplicable, yet "beautiful and true." Faith is "something you feel, and it comes from the soul." [Page 57]

I don't know where to start in the analysis of this chapter. I assume from this chapter that an analysis of faith would be ridiculous to Miller. So much of Miller's perspective on love and faith and the groundings of them have been exposed in this chapter, but it's so amorphous it's difficult to determine a starting point. I'll start with a comparison of Miller's presentation of faith with that of biblical terms.

To me, Miller seems to have contradicted himself at this point. In chapter 3, the climax of a person's story is his "decision" to follow Christ. In chapter 5, Miller was compelled internally to believe. "There are things that you choose to believe, and there are beliefs that choose you. [Belief in Jesus] is one that chose me." [Page 55] Which is it? Also, I am quite uncomfortable with the emotional orientation of his explanation of faith. That is not a biblical explanation of it. Faith is neither an emotion nor a feeling (neither is biblical love for that matter), but something that is lived. Feelings come and go; that is why I can't stand the "in love" analogy above. Everyday, people abandon marriages because they are no longer "in love." Faith and love are both lived commitments, lived even when it is not felt. It is a trust and reliance upon Christ--and in Him alone. Faith is both objective [as in definable] and subjective [as in experienced], and the experience of faith is mysterious.

However, the reason faith is mysterious is not due to it being inexplicable, but due to the amazing fact that people believe at all. If God were not to move in the hearts of men and draw them, no one would believe. Not one person. Not me, not you. That is the mystery--our faith is of God and He has given it to us (Eph 2:8-9) when we could not believe of ourselves--and he didn't give it do us because we wanted it or searched for it, because we didn't. We may have been wanting or searching, but it was not for a belief in the true and living God. We were looking for an idol to worship. Had God not come to us, we would be worshipping ourselves or an image of God that is creaturely rather than a sovereign Creator. Our innate instinct as fallen creatures is to disbelieve God.

The Bibles does explain why people believe, and it does so quite clearly. This "cause" of faith is not some mysterious, innate instinct; it's God's working in our hearts and drawing us to Himself by an inward calling. (John 6:37-40, 44, 65; John 10:1ff [Christ calls His sheep by name, people do not believe because they are not of His sheep]; Ephesians 2:5ff; 1 Corinthians 12:3; among others) Faith is a trust, assurance, and hope in something not seen (Hebrews 11:1).

Miller tells us that God doesn't make any sense. However, if Miller believes the Bible to be true, and if he believes that God is its source, then why does God go through such great lengths to explain Himself? Why even speak to us if we can't understand it? Bible study would be a fruitless endeavor if God makes no sense at all. What could we possibly learn of God if that were the case? Don't misunderstand me, The fullness of God thoughts and nature are unsearchable and beyond our comprehension--but that doesn't mean that God makes no sense at all. I hope this is what Miller is trying to say.