Men of Untaught Feelings

Logic wins out over passion. This historical narrative usually begins in ancient Greece. Plato believed the soul was divided into three parts: reason, spirit, and appetite. Reason seeks truth and wants the best for the whole person. Spirit seeks recognition and glory. Appetite seeks base pleasures. For Plato, reason is like a charioteer who must master his two wild and ill-matched horses. “If the better elements of the mind which lead to order and philosophy prevail,” Plato wrote, “then we can lead a life here in happiness and harmony, masters of ourselves.”

Eventually, rationalism produced its own form of extremism. The scientific revolution led to scientism. Irving Kristol defined scientism as the “elephantiasis of reason.” Scientism is taking the principles of rational inquiry, stretching them without limit, and excluding any factor that doesn’t fit the formulas.

In short, the rationalism method has yielded many great discoveries, but when it is used to explain or organize the human world, it does have one core limitation. It highly values conscious cognition—what you might call Level 2 cognition—which it can see, quantify, formalize, and understand. But it is blind to the influence of unconscious—what you might call Level 1 cognition—which is cloudlike, nonlinear, hard to see, and impossible to formalize. Rationalists have a tendency to lop off or diminish all information that is not calculable according to their methodologies.

This scientism has expressed itself most powerfully, over the last fifty years, in the field of economics. Economics did not start out as a purely rationalist enterprise. Adam Smith believed that human beings are driven by moral sentiments and their desire to seek and be worthy of the admiration of others.

Leaders of the British Enlightenment acknowledged the importance of reason. They were not irrationalists. But they believed that individual reason is limited and of secondary importance. “Reason is and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them,” David Hume wrote. “We are generally men of untaught feelings,” Edmund Burke asserted. “We are afraid to put men to live and trade each on his own private stock of reason, because we suspect that this stock in each man is small.” Whereas the leaders of the French Enlightenment spoke the language of logic, science, and universal rules, the leaders of the British Enlightenment emphasized the power of the sentiments and the affections.

And in truth, this debate between pure reason on one side and intuition and affection on the other is one of the oldest. Intellectual history has oscillated between rationalist and romantic periods, or as Alfred North Whitehead put it, between eras that are simpleminded and those that are muddleheaded. During simpleminded periods, rationalist thinkers reduced human behavior to austere mathematical models. During muddleheaded eras, intuitive leaders and artists guide the way. Sometimes imagination grows too luxuriant. Sometimes reason grows too austere.

The Social Animal: The Hidden Sources of Love, Character, and Achievement (David Brooks)

Hard Work…Now That’s Genius

Here is more advice to any students or learners. As Dr. Wills said one class, “There are very few geniuses, most people who come off as geniuses have simply worked hard.“

In 1997 Gary McPherson studied 157 randomly selected children as they picked out and learned a musical instrument. Some went on to become fine musicians and some faltered. McPherson searched for the traits that separated those who progressed from those who did not. IQ was not a good predictor. Neither were aural sensitivity, math skills, income, or a sense of rhythm. The best single predictor was a question McPherson had asked the students before they had even selected their instruments: How long do you think you will play? The students who planned to play for a short time did not become very proficient. The children who planned to play for a few years had modest success. But there were some children who said, in effect: “I want to be a musician. I’m going to play my whole life.” Those children soared. The sense of identity that children brought to the first lesson was the spark that would set off all the improvement that would subsequently happen. It was a vision of their future self.

The prevailing view is that geniuses are largely built, not born.

What Mozart had, it’s maintained, was the same thing many extraordinarily precocious performers have—a lot of innate ability, the ability to focus for long periods of time, and an adult intent on improving one’s skills.

The latest research suggests a prosaic, democratic, even puritanical view of how fantastic success is achieved. The key factor separating geniuses from the merely accomplished is not a divine spark. Instead, what really matters is the ability to get better and better gradually over time. As K. Anders Ericsson of Florida State University has demonstrated, it’s deliberate practice. Top performers spend more hours (many more hours) rigorously honing their craft. As Ericsson has noted, top performers devote five times more hours to become great than the average performers devote to become competent.

It’s not just the hours, it’s the kind of work done in those hours. Mediocre performers practice in the most pleasant way possible. Great achievers practice in the most deliberate and self-critical way. Often they break their craft down to its smallest constituent parts, and then they work on one tiny piece of the activity over and over again.

As Daniel Coyle notes in his book The Talent Code, “Every skill is a form of memory.” It takes hard work and struggle to lay down those internal structures. In this way, brain research reinforces the old-fashioned work ethic.

The Social Animal: The Hidden Sources of Love, Character, and Achievement (David Brooks)

Pascal’s Wager

From Blaise Pascal:

If you “bet” on the existence of God and find at death he does not exist, you have lost very little. But if you “bet” instead on God’s nonexistence and discover at death that God does exist, then you have lost everything eternally.

Graham Tomlin comments:

The wager is designed to blow the myth of neutrality out of the water… Pascal has brought his interlocuter to realize that he is an unbeliever not because Christianity is inherently implausible, but because he simply does not want to believe. It is not lack of proofs, but a deeply irrational distaste for the foolishness of Christianity which prevents his conversion… “your inability to believe derives from your passions,” rather than from any intellectual difficulty. The real origin of this decision not to believe is not solid intellectual objection, or the inherent irrationality of Christianity, but an irrational and unfounded prejudice, based on an inability to see the truth of Christian faith. The problem is not lack of evidence but sin.

Taken from Tim Chester and Steve Timmis, Total Church, 168.

Preach, Preach, Preach

In the first place preach, and in the second place preach, and in the third place preach.

Believe in preaching the love of Christ, believe in preaching the atoning sacrifice, believe in preaching the new birth, believe in preaching the whole council of God. The old hammer of the gospel will still break the rock in pieces; the ancient fire of Pentecost will still burn among the multitude. Try nothing new, but go on with preaching, and if we all preach with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven, the results of preaching will astound us.

[...]

Have great hope yet, brothers, have great hope yet, despite yon shameless midnight streets, despite yon flaming gin-palaces at the corner of every street, despite the wickedness of the rich, despite the ignorance of the poor. Go on; go on; go on; in God’s name go on, for if the preaching of the gospel does not save men, nothing will. If the Lord’s own way of mercy fails, then hang the skies in mourning, and blot out the sun in everlasting midnight, for there remaineth nothing before our race but the blackness of darkness. Salvation by the sacrifice of Jesus is the ultimatum of God. Rejoice that it cannot fail. Let us believe without reserve, and then go straight ahead with the preaching of the Word.

The Soul Winner, Charles Spurgeon, p 179

HT: Reformissionary

Jesus Projected No Socio-Political Programs

I have posted some of this before, and it is probably overstated. However, I still think the following statements are a good offset to what is in vogue today.

Jesus “projected no socio-political programs, he did not demonize the structure of society . . . and he did not call for revolution. This is not to say that he was for a moment blind to the repressiveness of his day” (403-404).

Locating evil in social structures “conflicts with Jesus’ proclamation which so uncompromisingly located evil in man’s heart” (415). It is not the transformation of social structures but the message of the gospel which “puts an end to man’s self-idolatry and frees him for a new obedience” (416).

This is not to give the false impression that the condition of the world is unimportant. To the contrary ‘the conversion of the individual as such brings about changes within the world.’” (417).

Revolutionary ideology “leads to that fatal misunderstanding which says that Christ is gathering ‘the dispossessed so they together might overthrow the mighty.’ What here is laced with Christian terms and so unashamedly ideologized is the very opposite of love and would only succeed in perpetuating human conflict”  (pp. 417-418).

Günter Klein

A Complete Man

he was a great man, and at every moment a complete man, whether he was caring for the children suffering form scarlet fever in his rural parish, or occupying himself with the translation of Plato, or discovering and describing some new plant, or recovering some forgotten utterance of a Father of the Church, or sitting in his study wrestling with some problem of the transmission of a text, or standing on the summit of the Matterhorn and concerned to identify the surrounding mountains…He was a student of the things and the people whom God has created; and in this study he forgot one thing only–himself.

Speaking of Fenton John Anthony Hort (aka Westcott and Hort)

Caspar Rene Gregory

On Grammatico-Historical Interpretation

It is almost the unanimous opinion of interpreters that only the grammatico-historical meaning of Holy Scripture is the true one and that those who interpret it otherwise present, not the meaning of the writings, but their own, or one different from the writings.

But Jesus’ teaching is not merely something historical, nor merely part of history, not simply of a historical nature; it also contains eternal unchangeable, divine truths which one can fully explain to himself and make comprehensible to others, never on the ground of history and grammar alone, but rather by one’s own spirit, meditation, by elevation to ideas of the reason, and from the truths themselves.

Such books (speaking of Scripture), it should be emphasized, must not be interpreted only grammatically and historically, but also morally, religiously, philosophically.  All power of the spirit, of reflection, of emotion, of religious exaltation, must be brought into play to plumb the depths of their meaning.

C.F Stäudlin, De interpretatione librorum Novi Testamenti historica non unice vera (On the historical interpretations of the books of the New Testament as not containing unique truth), 1807.

God’s Kingdom and Our Responsibility

To grasp the biblical message of God’s reign, we must avoid two tempting but false extremes.

The first temptation is to quarantine God’s kingdom safely in the distant future up in the clouds, in “heaven,” sealed off away from the blood, sweat, and tears of the present.  In this view, we would expect the world to be corrupt buy beyond repair.  There’s nothing we can do about it.  The world’s going to hell in a handbasket.  Don’t bother polishing the brass on the sinking ship…In this telling, Christian faith is at worst a story about me-and-Jesus, about saving my soul and little else, and at best it’s about a gospel message that can save souls but has little power to transform the larger world for good…

That doesn’t mean, however, that we will establish God’s kingdom in its fullness through our own good works.  God is responsible for establishing his kingdom, not us.  God came first in humility in Jesus.  He will come again in power and glory.  But that hasn’t happened yet, and we can’t trigger it.  If we try, we won’t just fail, we’ll do far more harm than good.

Money, Greed, and God: Jay Richards

Interpreting Romans 7

…the exegetical data does not all point in one direction.  Much will depend on the particular perspective from which one approaches the passage and which arguments are given greater weight.

Interpreting Rom. 7 is like fitting pieces of a puzzle together when one is not sure of the final outline; the best interpretation is the one that is able to fit the most pieces together in the most natural way.  Because of this, it is inconclusive, and even misleading, to cite several arguments in favor of one’s own view and conclude that the issue has been settled.

The best interpretation will be the one that is able to do most justice to all the data of the text within the immediate and larger Pauline context.

Doug Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, p. 445.

Religious Affections

For although to true religion there must indeed be something else besides affection; yet true religion consists so much in the affections, that there can be no true religion without them. He who has no religious affection, is in a state of spiritual death, and is wholly destitute of the powerful, quickening, saving influences of the Spirit of God upon his heart. As there is no true religion where there is nothing else but affection, so there is no true religion where there is no religious affection.

If the great things of religion are rightly understood, they will affect the heart. The reason why men are not affected by such infinitely great, important, glorious, and wonderful things, as they often hear and read of, in the word of God, is undoubtedly because they are blind; if they were not so, it would be impossible, and utterly inconsistent with human nature, that their hearts should be otherwise than strongly impressed, and greatly moved by such things.

Jonathan Edwards, The Religious Affections, 24, 

Calvin on Romans 1:18-32

It is therefore in vain that so many burning lamps shine for us in the workmanship of the universe to show forth the glory of its Author. Although they bathe us wholly in their radiance, yet they can of themselves in no way lead us in the right path.  Surely they strike some sparks, but before their fuller light shines forth these are smothered…But although we lack the natural ability to mount up unto the pure and clear knowledge of God, all excuse is cut off because the fault of dullness is within us.

John Calvin, Institutes 1.5.14, 15 

C.S. Lewis on Reading Old Books

The only safety is to have a standard of plain, central Christianity which puts the controversies of the moment in their proper perspective. Such a standard can be acquired only from the old books. It is a good rule, after reading a new book, never to allow yourself another new one till you have read an old one in between. If that is too much for you, you should at least read one old one to every three new ones.

C.S. Lewis

The Mediation of Christ

The Christology of Hebrews also undoes forever any notion of mystical communion with God.  By this, I mean that communion which bypasses Christ to have a direct experience of divine enlightenment, or some numinous spiritual feeling…many contemporary worship songs, activities and approaches emphasize the inner psychological/emotional state of worshiper and use it as the criterion to decide if worship has been effective or not.

Hebrews will not let us replace the mediation of Christ with the mediation of the worship leader.

Noel Due, Created for Worship: From Genesis to Revelation to You, p. 181

Worship God as Creator

One of the implications tucked away in the preceding discussion is that worship is not simply our response to grace.

So often it seems that Christian worship, especially in the evangelical tradition, focuses on the act of redemption.  While this is not to be rejected, the Scriptural testimony is much wider than this…The picture of worship given to us in the book of Revelation, especially in chapters 4 and 5, indicates that the worship which is offered in heaven–and which encompasses the whole of creation–is engendered because of God’s intrinsic worth and in his action as the Almighty Creator, not simply because of his action as the Gracious Redeemer.

Noel Due, Created for Worship, p. 44. 

No Need for Altars

When theology errs, the worship practice will inevitably be flawed as well.  If Christ died once and for all on the cross for our sins, and there is now no longer any need for sacrifice, whey then should we have altars in our churches? The use of an altar is confusing to the worshipper, because it fails rightly to proclaim the finished, unrepeatable sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Ligon Duncan, Perspectives on Christian Worship: 5 Views, p. 82.

Why the Success in the West?

Consider this recent statement by one of China’s leading scholars:

One of the things we were asked to look into was what accounted for the success, in fact, the pre-eminence of the West all over the world.  We studied everything we could from the historical, political, economic, and cultural perspective.  At first, we thought it was because you had more powerful guns than we had.  Then we thought it was because you had the best political system.  Next we focused on your economic system.  But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity.  That is why the West is so powerful.  The Christian moral foundation of social and cultural life was what made possible the emergence of capitalism and then the successful transition to democratic politics. We don’t have any doubt about this.

In Rodney Stark, The Victory of Reason, p. 235

Christianity Created Western Civilization

Christianity created Western Civilization. Had the followers of Jesus remained an obscure Jewish sect, most of you would not have learned to read and the rest of you would be reading from hand-copied scrolls.  Without a theology committed to reason, progress, and moral equality, today the entire world would be about where non-European societies were, say, in 1800:  A world with many astrologers and alchemists but no scientists.  A world of despots, lacking universities, banks, factories, eyeglasses, chimneys, and pianos.  A world where most infants do not live to the age of five and many women die in childbirth — a world truly living in “dark ages”.

The modern world arose only in Christian societies.  Not in Islam.  Not in Asia.  Not in a “secular” society — there having been none.  And all the modernization that has since occurred outside Christendom was imported from the West, often brought by colonizers and missionaries.

Rodney Stark, The Victory of Reason, p. 233

The Long Silence

At the end of time, billions of people were seated on a great plain before God’s throne. Most shrank back from the brilliant light before them. But some groups near the front talked heatedly, not cringing with cringing shame – but with belligerence.

“Can God judge us? How can He know about suffering?”, snapped a pert young brunette. She ripped open a sleeve to reveal a tattooed number from a Nazi concentration camp. “We endured terror … beatings … torture … death!”

In another group a Negro boy lowered his collar. “What about this?” he demanded, showing an ugly rope burn. “Lynched, for no crime but being black !”

In another crowd there was a pregnant schoolgirl with sullen eyes: “Why should I suffer?” she murmured. “It wasn’t my fault.” Far out across the plain were hundreds of such groups. Each had a complaint against God for the evil and suffering He had permitted in His world.

How lucky God was to live in Heaven, where all was sweetness and light. Where there was no weeping or fear, no hunger or hatred. What did God know of all that man had been forced to endure in this world? For God leads a pretty sheltered life, they said.

So each of these groups sent forth their leader, chosen because he had suffered the most. A Jew, a negro, a person from Hiroshima, a horribly deformed arthritic, a thalidomide child. In the centre of the vast plain, they consulted with each other. At last they were ready to present their case. It was rather clever.

Before God could be qualified to be their judge, He must endure what they had endured. Their decision was that God should be sentenced to live on earth as a man.

Let him be born a Jew. Let the legitimacy of his birth be doubted. Give him a work so difficult that even his family will think him out of his mind.

Let him be betrayed by his closest friends. Let him face false charges, be tried by a prejudiced jury and convicted by a cowardly judge. Let him be tortured.

At the last, let him see what it means to be terribly alone. Then let him die so there can be no doubt he died. Let there be a great host of witnesses to verify it.

As each leader announced his portion of the sentence, loud murmurs of approval went up from the throng of people assembled. When the last had finished pronouncing sentence, there was a long silence. No one uttered a word. No one moved.

For suddenly, all knew that God had already served His sentence.

Found in John Stott’s, The Cross of Christ, p. 336. 

Greatest Danger for Theological Students

We are frequently told, indeed, that the great danger of the theological student lies precisely in his constant contact with divine things.

They may come to seem common to him, because they are customary.

As the average man breathes the air and basks in the sunshine without ever a thought that it is God in his goodness who makes his sun to rise on him, though he is evil, and sends rain to him, though he is unjust; so you may come to handle even the furniture of the sanctuary with never a thought above the gross early materials of which it is made.

The words which tell you of God’s terrible majesty or of his glorious goodness may come to be mere words to you—Hebrew and Greek words, with etymologies, and inflections, and connections in sentences.

The reasonings which establish to you the mysteries of his saving activities may come to be to you  mere logical paradigms, with premises and conclusions, fitly framed, no doubt, and triumphantly cogent, but with no further significance to you than their formal logical conclusiveness.

God’s stately stepping in his redemptive processes may become to you a mere series of facts of history, curiously interplaying to the production of social and religious conditions, and pointing mayhap to an issue which we may shrewdly conjecture:  but much like other facts occurring in time and space, which may come to your notice.

It is your great danger.

B.B. Warfield

HT:  Justin Taylor

Questions to Ask Before You Preach or Teach

In his message at the National Conference, Francis Chan highlighted the importance of loving the people to whom he preaches. He mentioned seven questions that he asks himself in preparing to preach. Here are the seven questions:

1. Am I worried about what people think of my message or what God thinks? (Teach with fear)
2. Do I genuinely love these people? (Teach with love)
3. Am I accurately presenting this passage? (Teach with accuracy)
4. Am I depending on the Holy Spirit’s power or my own cleverness? (Teach with power)
5. Have I applied this message to my own life? (Teach with integrity)
6. Will this message draw attention to me or to God? (Teach with humility)
7. Do the people really need this message? (Teach with urgency)

HT:  Desiring God