· """"'-"W~ _:
J
r :r '1'
I~
I):
'I'IIINI{INC_ (~II11IS'I'Il'NS
Mind Renewal in a Mindless Age
James Boice
Join The Bible Study Hour teacher Dr. James Boice
as he unpacks the rich treasures of Romans 12:1 and2 and accept his challenge to live a transformed life.
You'll discover: • What it means to be dead to sin • How to be a living sacrifice • Why God is pleased with us • What motivates us - and why • How our minds are linked to our faith These exciting truths will help you to live a dynamic Christian life!
Available in paperback book or cassette tape. A study guide is also available.
B-MRMA Paperback, $9.00
C-MRMA 5 tapes in an album with guide, $27.00
C-MRMA-SG Extra Study Guides, $4.00
PLUS YOU CAN ORDER THESE BOOKS RECOMMENDED BY DR. BOICE The Christian Mind Harry Blamires
Your Mind Matters John Stott
The classic statement of the lack of a Christian mind in today's world from a British perspective. Blamires says, "There is no longer a Christian mind." This is a great starting point for reading on this subject. B-CM-l Paperback, $10.00
A 61-page denunciation of "mindless Christianity," showing the need for sound thinking in worship, faith, the quest for holiness, knowing the will of God, evan
gelism, and the ministry and its gifts. B-CM-12 Paperback, $6.00
Recovering the Christian Mind Harry BIamires
No Place for Truth Or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology? David Wells
Following up on the statement, "There is no longer a Christian mind," Blamires explores six determining areas of Christian thought: • Our fallen state • Civilization and the fall • Redemption • The alternative Christian ethic • The Christian world • The Christian life There is an excellent section on the breakdown of sex ual ethics - this book exposes some of the primary ways that secularism has influenced Christian thought. B-CM-19 Paperback, $10.00
The modern world has produced astonishing abun dance and comfort-but it has also taken a dreadful toll on the human spirit, emptying it of meaning, depth and morality. People today have increasingly turned to religions and therapies centered on the self. And, whether consciously or not, evangelicals have taken the same path, re-fashioning their faith into a religion of self. In this provocative and penetrating look at the church today, David Wells reminds us that God stands out side all human experience, that he still summons sin ners to repentance and belief regardless of their self-
Method of Payment: 0 Check 0 MasterCard 0 Visa 0 Discover Card 0 American Express
Acct. # _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Exp. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Signattrre _______________________________________
Nrune ___________________________________________________________
Street _____________________________________________________________
Ci~--------------------------s~~a~-----------------------
image, and that he calls his church to stand fast in his truth against the seduction of the modern world. B-NPT-H, Hardback, $25.00 B-NPT-P, Paperback, $15.00
The Mind on Fire Blaise Pascal
-)
Everyone should read Pascal. This remarkable seven teenth century man knew what it meant to think Christianly and did, writing to communicate the Christian faith to skeptics of all ages. He is superb in analyzing man's misery apart from God's grace. Forward by Os Guiness. B-CM-5 Paperback, $10.00
Amusing Ourselves To Death Neil Postman This is the most significant secular book I have read in recent years. It is easy to understand, and it presents the monumental changes that have been brought to our world by television bet ter than anything I have seen. If you only have time to read a few books, read this and Blamires. B-CM-6 Paperback, $11.00
SuJ:pPING & HANDLING
REGULAR DELIVERY
Up to $5 .00 ..............$1.50 Regular delivery takes 2-4 weeks
$5.01 to $14.99 ........$2.00 from the time your order is shipped
$15 to $29.99 ...........$3.00 FAST DELIVERY
$30 to $44.99 ...........$3.50 (add to base cost at left)
$45 to $74.99 ...........$4.00 UPS 2-4 Day est. add $3.00
$75 to $99.99 ...........$4.50 UPS Second Day add $6.00 _- "\
$100 and up .............$6.00 Overnight, add $14.00 ~ Canada andforeign orders, please add 15% of total sale AU orders require three days handling time.
~ CALL: 1-215-546-3696 (M-F 8:30 run-4:30 pm ET) • FAX: 1-215-735-5133 • The Bible Study Hour • Box 2000, Philadelphia, PA 19103
Editor-in-Chief Michael S. Horton
modern"REFORMATION
Managing Editor Sara McReynolds
Writers
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
Michael S. Horton. Alan Maben Kim Riddlebarger Rick Ritchie
Design Shane Rosenthal
Contributing Scholars Dr. John ,iFfnstrong
Dr. Steve M. Baugh
Dr. James Bbice
D r. D. A. Carson
The Rev. Knox Chamblin
Dr. Bryan Chapell
Dr. Daniel Doriani
. The Rev. J. Ligon Duncan ' Dr. Timotlly George Dr. W. RolJert Godfrey Dr. John Hannah Dr. Darryl G. Hart Dr. Carl F. H. Henry Dr. Robert Kolb Dr. Allen. Mawhinney Dr. Joel Nederhood Dr. Roger Nicole Dr. Rod Rosenbladt D r. Robert Preus Dr. R. C. Sproul Dr. Robert Strimple Dr. Willem A. VanGemeren Dr. David Wells
CURE Board of Directors Douglas Abendroth
John G. Beauman
Cheryl Biehl
Robert den D ulk
Dr. W. Robert Godfrey
Richard Hermes
M ichael S. Horton
D r. Robert Preus
Dr. Luder Whitlock
CHRISTIANS UNITED
for REFORMATION
Wanted: Thinking Christians Dr. James M. Boice
Page 4
Vain Philosophies Michael Horton
Page 8
Machen on the Mind
Page 13
There Have to be Differences Among Us Kim Riddlebarger
Page 14
The Well-Read Christian Rick Ritchie
Page 18
In this Issue Interview: Dr. James Montgomery Boice ECT Update: Resolutions for Roman Catholic & Evangelical Dialogue Book Review: The Soul of the American University A Suggested Reading List Glossary of Terms
Page 2
Page 24
Page 28
Page 30
Page 30
Page 31
© 1994 All rights reserved. is a non-profit educational foundation committed to communicatingthe insights of the 16th century Reformation to the 20th ,century church. For more information, call /14..:956 2873, or write us at:
CURE
CHRISTIANS UNITED
for
REFORMATION
2221 East Winston Road Suite K Anaheim; CA 92806
SUBSCRIBE TO
modern REFORMATION 1-800-956-2644
Page 8
Page 18 Page 4
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
In This Issue M i
uC
h a e I
"W hirl
H
0
r ton
is King, having driven out Zeus," declared Aristophanes. Walter Lippmann, in the twenties, used this announcement as the basis for his critique of modern life in America. Not far off from Nietzsche's prophecy of a "weightless" existence that would follow the "death of God , " celebrated historian Jackson Lears describes the shift in striking terms: "As Calvinism softened into platitudinous humanism, Protestant Christianity lost the gravity provided by older, sterner creeds. Lacking spiritual ballast, bourgeois culture entered what Nietzsche had called a 'weightless' period. " The "decline of religion into sentimental religiosity further undermined a solid sense of self. " What resulted was "a weightless cul~ ture of material comfort and spiritual blandness... breeding weightless persons who longed for intense experience to give some definition, some distinct outline and sub~ stance to their vaporous lives. " Again and again, it is secular thinkers who must issue lamentations about the de~ mise of Reformation thought as a chief ele~ ment in the demise of thought in general, even though they themselves do not accept those core beliefs. Meanwhile, popular cul~ ture and with it, evangelicalism, push God out of the way to make room for "Whirl"Â fun, amusement, brain~ dead passivity that we often cloak with pious words like "joy, " "peace," "relevance," "balance," and "unity. " So, in this issue, we will be raising thinking to the top of the agenda, with in~ sightful articles from the writers you count on in modernREFORMATION, as - well as some surprises, as the new contributing writers begin to appear in these upcoming issues. Much like the Middle Ages, the postmodern age is very much visual over verbal. We believe it if we see it, feel it, experience it. Thoughts get in the way of feelings; conversations are less important than "relating. " It's like the ooze at the beach that squirts up between your toes, and the problem is that it is not being adequately Riversicfe, CA resisted by Christians. San Diego, CA Christians have every reason in the world San Fra~1sco, to oppose this trend. First, we are people of Seattle,WA a book. God, we are told, created the world St. Louis, MO by his Word, not by his Feeling. Further, Ventura,CA "the Word became flesh, "not the video. In DC the Hebrew Scriptures, the coming Messiah
2
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
is personified as "Wisdom," and in the New Testament, as "Word" ("Logos, " from which we also get the word "logic"). In both Old and New Testaments, then, the writers have the same idea: our redemption depends on a God who reveals himself through words, becomes "the Word" incarnate, and then sends the written and preached Word to the -ends of the earth. Further, we are transformed by "the renewing of [our] minds" (Rom 12:2) . That is why Christianity is seen again and again in the New Testament as something that must be argued and for which every person must be prepared to have an answer. J. Gresham Machen, earlier this century, declared, "Second~ hand faith is being rapidly swept away. Faith, in this age, must be of sterner stuff. Ifit is retained by ignoring facts, it may be useful to the individual, but it will never conquer the world. " May we have the courage to take seriously again the intellec~ tual content both of our Christian faith and of the objections to it from its despisers, cultured or not. 0 -
modern REFORMATION
e nonsense" "Horton's book is superb and timely." Os Guinness, author of The American Hour
"A very pertinent message for today; one that I do not hear enunciated very clearly elsewhere." c. Everett Koop, Former United States Surgeon General
"One of the strongest critiques of the church that I have read. A significant work at a very crucial time in the history of the church. If we digest this message then maybe all of society will benefit." John Perkins) Urban Family Magazine
"An important and impassioned plea. With the unsparing fervor of a true reformer, Horton points out that the evangelical churches are in no position to confront the world with its unbelief since there is so little interest in the substance of the apostolic faith within their own ranks. He paints an uncomfortable por trait, but one that could ulti mately lead to a genuine return to the Bible, that book so often invoked and so seldom lived." Edward Oaks, New York University .
Available at your bookstore, or 1r 1-800-956-2644
-Mark Noll, Wheaton College
James M. Boice
l' rr 'l'IIINI{INf.
"r
N
I~
I) :
S
ome years ago I read an article in Newsweek about a husband and wife team of scientists who studied ducks. In order to observe their habits, they built a blind by a pond, then settled in to watch. During their investigations, they observed among the ducks incidences of what they called gang rape. While it was not written in so many words, the bottom line of the article was this: If gang rape takes place among the ducks, we shouldn't be surprised that it takes place among human beings, too. And, sad to say, Newsweek is not the only source of this "man is no better than an animal" philosophy. An article in another publication featured a prominent photograph of an adult baboon holding an infant baboon it had killed. The conclusion was that if animals can kill their young, so can we. With media output like this, is it any wonder our society permits abortion and the murder of a million~ and~ a~ half babies in this country every year? You see, . if we do not have a perspective on life that is higher than what we can touch, taste, and see, we cannot appreciate that life is not an accident of evolu~ tion, but a gift of God and so ought to be preserved. Instead, when the only direction we can look is down, we conclude that we have evolved a bit up from the animals. And because we define ourselves by the cre~ ation, we cut ourselves off from God-the source of every good and perfect gift. Is it any wonder, therefore, that we find ourselves and our society justifying sinful, wicked behavior by appealing to the animals? If we do not retain the knowledge of God in our minds, but rather suppress it, we experience what Paul so clearly docu~ ments in the first chapter of Romans: the revealing of the wrath of God. The result is we act like the animals, and in the end we do what even the animals will not. I am convinced the great problem in America today is that people are not thinking. It's a cultural phenom~ enon that has spilled over into the church. It is not just that there is a lack of a Christian way of thinking-a "Chri~tian Mind"-but there is hardly a mind at all. In our day and age people, Christian and non~ Christian alike, just do not think. We act and we react, but we do not consider and contemplate. There are many ways to explain this phenomenon: secularism, relativism, ma~ terialism, or just the fast pace of our lives. But we cannot over~ estimate the fact that our society has become so obsessed with entertainment that it has never learned to think. And this is because we have embraced a television culture rather than the print based culture of our ances~ tors. Do not get me wrong: I am not crusading against television. I would just as soon watch a movie on television as go to the theater. It is cheaper and I can do it in the comfort of my own home. There is nothing wrong with that. But we must stop believing that tele~ vision is making us think. Television does not make us think; it entertains. And I am not alone in this opinion. Let me illustrate it by appealing to a couple of men who, as far as I know, are not Christians, but who understand the television medium.
(~IIIIIS'I'Il'NS
It's not just that there's alack of aChristian way of thinking-a "Christian Mind"-but there is hardly amind at all.
4
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
modern REFORMATION
The "Vanatlzatlon" of America In 1988 Ted Koppel, host of ABC's Nightline program, gave a speech at Duke University. He chose as his subject matter the Ten Commandments. He began by pointing out that they were not the Ten Suggestions but rather the Ten Commandments. He then proceeded by going through each commandment and showing its ¡ relevance to the great moral issues ofour day. He related "Thou shalt not bear false witness" to the insider trading scandals on Wall Street. "Thou shalt not commit adul, tery" was tied to the scandals associated with TV evan, gelists. And so on. But what impressed me most about his address was something he said at the very beginning, in the very first line ofhis speech. He said, "America has been Vanatized." Now he,knew nobody in that audience knew what he meant-he'd just coined the term-so he explained it. It's "vanatized" as in "Vana White, " the very attractive and immensely popular woman on television's "Wheel of Fortune. " She is, without a doubt, the major factor in the success of that program. She's imitated all over the world: there's a Vana counterpart on German, French, and even Australian TV. Ted spent quite a bit of time talking about how popular Vana White is. Then he said, "It's interesting, isn't it, that on that show you never hear Vana say a word?" "How can that be?" he asked. "How could it be that someone about whom we know absolutely nothing is so popular?" "That, " Koppel said, "is the very nature of television. " The reason she is so popular is not because she is telling us who she is, but because she is an image on the screen and we project onto the screen our feelings about her. That is the way television operates. That is the kind of medium it is. So if you are unhappy in your marriage and you say, "Boy, I wish I had a good looking mistress like that, " she fulfills that role. Or if you are a young girl just beginning to go through puberty and a little bit uneasy about yourself and about what you are going to be, she could be your big sister-you're going to grow up to be like her! Vana is anything you want her to be. Koppel said, "That's our world. " You see, we think of ourselves as being the best informed generation in history because of television. Television is everywhere-I read somewhere that there are more television sets in America than there are indoor toilets. Furthermore, they are on all the time: The average household watches television six hours a day. And because of that we think we know more than any generation in history. But as a matter of fact we do not. Instead, what television is doing, if I may put it bluntly, is entertaining us to death. Laughing Our Heads Off Neil Postman is a professor of education and special education communication techniques at Columbia Uni, versity in New York City. A number of years ago he wrote a book titled Amusing Ourselves to Death. It was all about television, about the changes that have come over the western world and especially American society as a result
of television. The book is divided into two parts. The first analyzes the changes television has brought abou t; the second the effects of television's commitment to be entertaining. In the first section of his book, Postman contrasts our age, which he calls the entertainment age, with the prior age, which he calls the age of typography. In other words, he maintains that our age has brought about a fundamental paradigm shift. Our age is concerned with entertainment; the former with communication-and that via a verbal medium. When he talks about the former age as being an age of typography, he is talking about words. What Postman is saying is this: words work in a certain way. For example, if you are trying to commu, nicate in an article, you put down what you want to say. Sometimes you indicate your point by the heading, then you develop it with arguments to explain why it is true and with answers to objections. You then form conclu, sions and make applications. When you come across an article written like that, you read it carefully and with a certain amount of detachment. People admire something that makes sense and is well written, but you do not usually break into applause after reading carefully crafted prose. You see, there is a certain distance there, a distance inherent in the written medium. If you do not understand some, thing you read, if it uses a vocabulary you don't under, stand, the distance allows you to look up the words. If the concepts are new and you need a little bit of time to assimilate them, the distance permits you to do that and continue on. The distance endemic to written commu, nication permits the consideration and contemplation essential to thinking. People who grew up in an age of typography could think in rational categories. Even their verbal discourse reflected that approach to knowledge. Postman details at length what he considers probably the greatest and be.st informed pe, riod in American history, the time shortly before the American Civil War. In the debates that took place between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas, common people would gather in an open area while the debaters stood on a platform and spoke. Lincoln and Douglas would debate campaign issues for six or seven hours and people would stand and listen, following the discussion and grasping the issues. Further more, the debates were written up in newspapers and spread across the country. Those who read the newspaper reports were able to participate in the debates, too. Postman says we have lost all that today because what we have is not a typographical age, an age where where people know how to think because they have been trained to think in words. Rather, we have an age where people are not
I am convinced the great problem in America today is that people are not thinking. It's a cultural phenomenon that has spilled over into the church.
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
5
How Much Do We Know?
Statistics on Christian Ignorance
• Lincoln Barrett, in Ladies' Home Journal, cited in Gallup and Castelli: "Although 95 percent of the Americans say they believe in God, it is by no means clear that they acknowledge the God of biblical revelation, who speaks to man from beyond himself and awakens in him asense ofdependency, moral unworthiness and obligation to obey hiswill." • GaHup and Castelli observe that during a period of heightened civil religion (the 1950's), lithe state of religious knowledge in this period (as' in later decades) was anything but impressive. Fewer than half the respondents in a 1950 survey could give the names of any of the first four books of the New Testament." • Gallup and Castelli: "Americans revere the Bible-but, by and large, they don't read it. And because they don't read it, they have become a nation of biblical illiterates... For example, eight in ten Americans say they are Christians, but only four in ten know that Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount. Fewer than half of all adults can name Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as the four Gospels, while many do not know that Jesus had twelve disciples or thathe was born in Bethlehem...The cycle of biblical illiteracy seems likely to continue-today's teenagers know even less about the BibJe than do adults. The celebration of Easter...is central to the faith, yet three teenagers in ten-and 20 percentof those teenagers who attend religious servicesregularly-do not know why Easter is celebrated." • Barna: Two in five evangeticals believe that "it does not matterwhat religious faith you follow because all faiths teach similar lessons about life." • Barna: 77 percent of evangelicals believe that man is basically good by nature, with 84 percent of them saying that in the matter of salvation, "God helps those who help themselves." Well over half of chutched evangelicals thought that it was, in fact, a quotation from the Bible. • Barna: One-third of the evangelicals surveyed believe that we all pray to the same God and that faith in Christ is not absolutely necessary, so long as one is a good person. • Protestants are more likely than any other group to say that "there is no such thing as absolute truth" (73 %), with those who attend evangelical churches differing from unchurched Americans by a mere five percent in "strongly agreeing" with that , statement. Over half of these church-going evangelicals agreed. • Evangelicals are evenly split between those who agree and disagree with the statement: "Your first responsibility is to yourself." • Yale professor, George Lindbeck: "When I first arrived at Yale, even those who came from nonreligious backgrounds knew the Bible better than most of those now who come from churchgoingfamilies...With the loss of knowledge of the Bible, public discourse is impoverished." •
Test yourself: Can you name the Ten Commandments?
Sources: George Gallup and Jim Castelli, The People s Religion (Macmillan, 1989); George Barna, What Americans Believe in Postmodern Theology, Frederic Burnham, ed. (Harper & Row, 1989).
.(~egal, 1991), Absolute Confusion (Regal, 1993); George Lindbeck, "The Church's Mission,"
6
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
trained to think-indeed are kept from thinking-':'because they are being enter, tained continuously. That is what televi, . sion does; it is an entertainment medium. Now, this does not mean that you cannot have educational items on televi, sion, ofcourse, and Postman admits that. But even with educational programs you do not get what you think you get. After all, in order to educate by means of televi, sion, you must have pictures, and the necessity of pictures itself predetermines the subject matter you can present. You cannot effectively teach philosophy on tele, vision, for example. It is abstract reason, ing. You can, however, educate children about deep sea fishing because you can show nice pictures of being out at sea and catching fish, and you can talk about the ocean. But basically you still have entertainment. In the second section of his book, Postman has a chapter detailing television's effects on religion, and he concludes that when you put religion on television, reli, gion becomes entertainment. It will only survive on television in an entertainment format. And, by and large, the programs that do well are those that are designed to entertain. Either they are a vaudeville show, with the prerequisite song and dance numbers done in Christian guise, or they are talk shows along the lines of Merv Griffin; people sitting around and telling stories. But notice: they are not talking about theology. They are not teaching the Bible. They are telling stories: "Look what God did for me! " and" Lis ten to the miracle that happened in my life last week! " Or they are pitching a product: "What miracle do you want, brother? While you pray, we'll do a miracle. " That plays well on television because that's entertaining. Now, when Billy Graham is on televi, sion, that is an exception. Billy Graham is an exception to everything. If people tune in to watch Billy Graham, it is not because it's good television, but because they want to hear what Billy Graham has to say. There are other exceptions, too. But, by and large, the programs that do well are those in an entertainment format. Listen to what Postman says, "CBS knows that Walter Cronkite plays better than the Milky Way and Jimmy Swaggart comes across better than God." Ever wonder why Swaggart was so popular on TV? It' s be, cause, Postman says, "God exists only in the mind, while Swaggart is there to be
modern REFORMATION
worshipped and adored. " He concludes, "I'm not a theologian, I may not know the right word for this, but I think the word for it is blasphemy. " Perhaps you are saying to yourself, "What difference does it make? If entertainment is the way television operates, why not have religious entertainment? Wouldn't it be better to have that than what the networks offer?" And I am inclined to agree with you here, except for two points. First, if what people expect from religion is what they see on television, then there is going to be (and as a pastor I assure you there already is) enormous pressure on ~hurches to conform to the entertainment motif. Out goes expository preaching, because people cannot concentrate very long. Forget theology: people are not interested in theology, and they can't follow an argument anyway. Let there be funny stories, and let them be short. As for the worship service, bring on lively ditties that make people feel good! Surely God will be blessed. And, above all, do not permit long prayers. Postman asks, "What happens when you put reli, gion on television, what do you lose?" His answer is, you lose everything that is important, specifically, a sense of the transcendent. It is God who is missing when religion is put on television. And I am afraid that when television is allowed to reshape our churches, God is missing from them too. My second objection is a point I' ve already made: we must not believe that television is making us think. It is
not. If we are to learn to think, we must go about it in
. a different way. We'll have to leave the set off more often
and begin thinking.
Thinking and the Church So what is the answer? How do we combat the entertain, ment agenda infiltrating our churches? How do we stop being entertained to death and learn to think? We do it by following Paul's instruction in Romans 12:2: "Be transformed by the renewing of your mind. " That's the way it happens. The answer is to study the Word of God. That is how we learn not only to think but to think as God does. I used to say, "If you're not feeding yourself with the Bible all the time, you will be thinking like the world. " In view of our television culture, I have amended that saying to, "If you are not feeding yourself with the Bible all the time, the world is going to entertain you and you' 11 end up not thinking at all. " This presents a unique opportunity for churches today. The world is filled with enter, tainment and entertainment is fun and people like it and will go where they can have a good time. But sooner or later some will get sick of being entertained-they are made in the image of God, you see, and part of that image is the capacity to think. They will realize that life is more than entertainment, more than just a good time. They will come to a crossroad and
say, "There has to be more to life than this. I'm not here just to be entertained, to be sold products, to spend my money on what people want me to buy. Aren't I more important than this?)) They will come looking for an alternative. Now, it will not be the vast majority of people, but it will be the people with whom God is working. Churches, if they have not sold themselves wholesale to the entertainment agenda, will be that alternative. "Yes, you are more important!" they will say. "You're infinitely more important because you are made in the image of God. God has made you to be like Him! " Then the churches will point them to Jesus Christ and encourage them to be "transformed by the renew, ing of [their] minds." But if churches have absorbed the en, tertainment mentality, if they have themselves lost the ability to think, they will offer seekers noth, ing more than what they have already. Instead of pointing out the path of the righteous which is like "the first gleam of dawn , shin, ing ever brighter till the full light of day, " these churches will be like "clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted" and will leave the lost on a downhill path with the vision of God becoming increasingly dim. Then, like the Newsweek article I referred to earlier said, they will be no better than so many ducks on a pond. 0
If what people expect from religion is what they see on television, then there is going to be enormous pressure on churches to conform to the entertainment motif.
Dr. James Mlmrgomcry Boicc is a successful inner city pastor and articuUac spokesman far tile RcfOlmcd fait II. He is the pastor ofTenth Prcsbyterian Cilurch in Pililadclphia and tile teacller 1m Tile Biblc Study Hour intcmatinnal radio broadcast. Dr. Boice is agraduate of Hanmd University, Princetlm Tileological Seminary, and the University of Basel, Switzerkmd. He is UIC auUUJr of Mind Rcnewal in a Mindless Agc (Baker Book Housc), Amazing Grace (TynJalc) , and Standing on UlC Rock (Baker Book H,JUje) .
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
7
Michael S. Horton
,
a~n •
10S0
•
les
"See to it that no one takes you captive
through hollow and deceptive philosophy.. ." (Col. 2:8)
E
lizabeth was a bright young Christian with a keen interest in learning. Hav, ing been recently converted, she was ea, ger to serve the Lord and when she was led to the Scriptures by her new Christian friends, she was delighted to learn every, thing she could. But Elizabeth's zealous friends grew increasingly worried about her attentive and persistent study of"secu, lar philosophy"-the wisdom of the world. Eventually, Elizabeth was faced with a fork in the road: to continue with Christ or to investigate the ideas of mere mortals. After months of reluctant, but gradual, distancing of herself from her past, she had at last so filled her days with Bible study, prayer, evangelism, and fellow, ship on campus that she had forgotten the pain ofleaving Aristotle's subtle discussions in the shadows of her worldly past. Often, setting aside "worldly wisdom" occurs along, side the burning of the secular record albums, and Elizabeth's story doubtless finds empathetic readers among those working through this important issue of Modern
Reformation. But this tension is not new by any means. "It is philosophy that supplies the heresies with their equip, ment, " declared the great second, century African fa, ther Tertullian. Facing such ominous threats as Gnos, ticism, which attempted to blend elements of Christian, ity, Judaism, and Greek philosophy, T ertullian snapped, "A plague on Aristotle, who taught them dialectic, the art which destroys as much as it builds. " T ertullian appealed to a text that has since been much used (or 8
JULY/AUGUST 1994
How should Christians • View
worldly wisdom?
perhaps abused), where Paul warns the Colossians, "Take heed lest any man cir, _ cumvent you through philosophy or vain deceit, after the tradition of men" (Col 2:8). After all, Tertullian thundered, "What has] erusalem to do with Athens, the Church with the Academy, the Christian with the heretic?" And why? "After Jesus Christ we ha ve no need ofspeculation, after the Gospel no need of research. When we come to believe, we have no desire to believe anything else; for we begin by believ, ing that there is nothing else which we have to believe. "1 On the other hand, there was T ertullian' s contemporary, Justin Martyr, who sought to prove Christianity's intellec, tual and philosophical superiority. Dressed in a philosopher's gown, he opened Rome's first Christian school. He addressed the Roman emperor Hadrian as, "the Philosopher, ...a lover of culture, " and proceeded in his "plea for a fair hearing" by demanding that "Reason requires that those who are truly pious and philosophers should honor and cherish the truth alone, scorning merely to follow the opinions of even the ancients, if they are worthless. "2 Following a line of argumentation and evidence for Christianity's truth, Martyr rested the case finally on the reliability of the witnesses to Christ's resurrection and the fulfilled prophecies. Nevertheless, just as T ertullian' s love for Scripture blinded him to God's common grace among the pagans, so Justin's appreciation for reason often led him to naively embrace secular ideas that undermined the biblical teachings on sin and grace, the nature of the soul and creation.
modern REFORMATION
The famous paraphrase of Augustine's dictum, "All truth is God's truth, " nevertheless kept the bishop of Hippo from falling into the trap of confusing the Gospel with secular wisdom. And yet, Augustine was himself heavily influenced by his earlier immersion in Neoplatonic and Manichaean heresies. At the time of the Reformation, Luther and the other Reformers accused the Roman Catholic Church of having distorted the Gospel with pagan philosophy, whether through the classical rationalism of Plato, the moderate realism of Aristotle, or the relativistic pen~ chant for "reconciling" opposites as advocated by the medieval Nicholas of Cusa (fifteenth century). Instead of exegeting clear biblical passages in order to discover the nature of God, humans, redemption, the Church, and sacraments, theologians were employing philo~ sophical speculation. The Reformers, therefore, lashed out just as Paul had against confusing spiritual and earthly wisdom-not because they believed reason to be ungodly, but because they believed it had no place in determining the shape of "things heavenly. " In each period of great confusion and unfaithfulness on the part of the Church, worldly wisdom has been given the upper hand in shaping the Church's views of God, humanity, the world, history, and every other aspect offaith and life. No one has ever stood up, waved a flag, and shouted, "We're allowing the world instead of the Word to determine what we believe and how we live, " and yet this is exactly what has happened in every period of decline. Karl Barth, in our own century, reacted so strongly against a Protestant liberalism that had reduced Christianity to a species of human behavior to be compared to other religions that he insisted that there was no such thing as natural revelation. God only reveals himself in the living and written word, he declared. To Emil Brunner's defense of natural theology (i. e. , the study of that which can be known about God apart from Scripture, which seems to be sanctioned by Romans 1 and 2), Barth thundered back his famous, "Nein!" If Barth and Tertullian are correct, and an openness to philosophy in religion always ends up per verting both, why don't we simply plant our fingers in our ears, ignore the world, and read only the Bible? Haven't we at CURE argued for some time now that secular psychological, marketing, political, and socio logical ideologies rule our anti theological church? There~ fore, should we even waste our time with worldly wis~ dom, if the risk is so great? Yes, there are plenty of reasons to risk it, and here I will mention only a few.
1. Creation When Paul warns, "See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ, " he is not arguing in Tertullian-like fashion that Christians should regard all human wisdom and philosophy as hostile to the faith. The biblical warning is against confusing "things heav~ enly" with "things earthly, " not against "things earthly"
in general. Paul warns the Colossians against being so earthly~ minded that their minds are not driven by the heavenly, the transcendent. In other words, secular presuppositions con~ tinued to guide theirworld~ view when it should have been driven by theo~ logical, biblical convictions. Like Tertullian, Paul is wrestling with the Gnostics-those who blended Chris~ tianity and Greek philosophy. The result was a speculative mysticism, and instead of seeing Christianity as an announcement of something that happened (viz. , the death and res~ urrection of Christ) with implications for the whole world, it was a "philosophy of life" that sought primarily to guide one toward a happier and more fulfilling life here and now. But unlike Tertullian, Paul does not advocate a total abandonment of philosophy, but instead argues for discernment. On this point, two observations should be made. A Confusing thingsheavenly andearthly trivializesthings earthly
This confusion of things heavenly and things earthly is a dangerous business. First, it trivializes the problems of this world. When people, for example, say that Jesus is the answer to racism, drugs, abortion, depression and broken homes, while these crises persist and very often do so within conservative Christian as well as secular circles, this trivializes these problems. After all, sin is a complicated thing and even Christians are sinful. We have, since the Fall, tangled ourselves up in a web of deceit, exploitation, manipulation, and willful neglect. As a race and as individuals, we have created a situation in which the path of sin is impossible to trace through every complicated turn. Some problems created by this sinful condi~ tion can be affected positively by the new life in Christ and by the influence of other Christians, but since they are sinful, too, the answers cannot always be that black and white. Those who confuse things heav enly and things earthly also trivialize things earthly by assuming that, because of the Fall, there is nothing (or very little) that is true, good, or beautiful in the world that is not specifically Christian. Thus, we have the subculture of "Christian" books, music, art, and paraphernalia. We even have "Christian" entertainment, politicians, cruises, and so on. A "Christian Yellow Pages" allows the fingers to do the walking through the evangelical ghetto. And this was precisely the effect of this confusion during the Middle Ages also, before the Reformation distinguished and returned dignity to these two spheres. Note Calvin's
The biblical • •IS warning against confusing "things heavenly" with "things earthly,"not against "things earthly" in general.
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
9
remarks in this regard, against the "Fanatics" who thought secular pursuits "unspiritual" and, therefore, unnecessary: Whenever we come upon these matters in secular writers, let that admirable light of truth shining in them teach us tha t the mind of man, though fallen and perverted from its wholeness, is nevertheless clothed and ornamented with God's excellent gifts. If we regard the Spirit of God as the sole fountain of truth, we shall neither reject the truth itself, nor despise it wherever it shall appear, unless we wish'to dishonor the Spirit of God. For by holding the gifts of the Spirit in slight esteem, we condemn and reproach the Spirit himself. What then? Shall we de'ny that the truth shone upon the ancient jurists who estab lished civic order and discipline with such great equity? Shall we say that the philosophers were blind in their fine observation and artful description of nature? Shall we say that those men were devoid of understanding who con ceived the art of disputation and taught us to speak reasonably? Shall we say that they are insane who devel oped medicine, devoting their labor to our benefit? ...No, we cannot read the writings of the ancients on these subjects without great admiration. We marvel at them because we are compelled to recognize how eminent they are. But shall we count anything praiseworthy or noble without recognizing at the same time that it comes from God? Let us be ashamed of such ingratitude, into which not even the pagan poets fell, for they confessed that the gods had in vented philosophy, laws, and all useful arts. Those men whom Scripture calls' natural men' were, indeed, sharp and penetrating in their investigation of inferior things. Let us, accordingly, learn by their ex ample how many gifts the Lord left to human nature even after it was despoiled of its true good. 3
B. Confusing things heavenly and things earthly trivializes things heavenly This confusion of things heavenly and earthly also trivializes things heavenly. This happens when well meaning Christians attempt to make God relevant. Heaven is too high, so instead of meeting God where he allows himself to be known (in revelation) through faith, they try to bring him down to earth (in experi ence) through speculation. In other words, they say,
10
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
sermons on God's attributes, the saving work of Christ, the atonement and justification, sanctification and the sacraments-these are all "up there, " removed from the "practical" realm ofdaily living. Therefore, things heav enly are subsumed into things earthly and the result is a message that is neither earthly enough to be timely and "on the cutting edge," nor heavenly enough to say anything really profound and other- worldly to a con fused and wayward Church or society.
2. Taking Every Thought Captive When Paul warns, therefore, about being deceived by vain ,philosophy, he has a particular problem in mind: this confusion ofChristianity ( centered on "things heav enly") with Greek philosophy (centered on "things earthly"), the latter of which was allowed to intrude carelessly on the former to the extent that the definitions of God , creation, human nature, history, and redemp tion were totally recast. Paul was not attacking philoso phy per se, but Gnosticism in particular and the domi nation of theology by secular wisdom in general. That is precisely the problem we see in evangelicalism today, where, for instance, secular notions of the self are imported from pop psychology (which, ironically, has many affinities to Gnosticism itself) . But the same apostle who warns against the incur sions of philosophy also calls on the Corinthian believers to encounter it: "We demolish arguments -and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ" (2 Cor 10:5). How can we demolish arguments if we are (a) unfamiliar with the arguments in the first place, (b) uninterested in the merit of those arguments, and (c) incapable of refuting them? Paul's picture in this passage is crystal clear: It is the image of a soldier who, not content to be on the defensive, is actively pursuing his challengers. Not waiting in the bushes to be ambushed and taken pris oner, or stationed safely behind the lines, the Christian should be eager to take his enemy captive. We always have to be careful with these images, however, in our day of "culture warring. " The enemy is not the unbe liever or worldly institutions, but any and every idea or
modern REFORMATION
'-.....-/
.~
argument that has the audacious temerity to claim Christ's throne in dictating what we should believe about God, oursel ves, redemption, and the meaning of life. The Reformers followed Paul in their love of learning, culture, art, philosophy, and literature. In fact, they and their heirs founded some of the greatest centers oflearning in the western world, and encouraged a revival of the "humani~ ties" (history, philosophy, languages, the arts). N ever ~ theless, when it came to defining the core matters which the Bible clearly addressed, they deemed human wisdom insufficient to penetrate the heavenly chamber. From Genesis to Reve~ation, the Bible appeals to the intellect andheart as one. Unlike the Greek view, in which the mind and heart are split, the biblical perspective is that the heart is the seat ofthe intellect. This does not mean that the emotions have a priority over the intellect, but rather it is to suggest that there is an integration of both in the biblical portrait of human existence. After all, the fear of the Lord (an emotional response) is the beginning of wisdom, but it is the communication of certain facts about God and his activity that induces one to fear and love him, as the Psalms so powerful exhibit: "My heart overflows with a goodly theme" (NRSY Ps 45: 1). It is after the recitation of God's saving work in Christ (predestination, calling, justification, glorification) that Paul leaps to his feet in praise: 'What shall we say in response to this?" In order to respond, either emotionally or in active obedience, we must have something meaningful that merits that re~ sponse.
3. Apologetks Too often, well~ meaning brothers and sisters walk into the middle of the skirmish, anxious to meet their enemy, only to be captured themselves or to be slaughtered before cheering onlookers. That is why we are told, "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have, " albeit, "with gentleness and respect" toward the inquirer ( 1 Pt 3: 15) . The accent here is on being prepared. When Paul walked into the Areopagus to present the Christian claims, in Acts 17, he did not go in with a set of reductionistic arguments or references to his own "personal testimony" of what God had done for him. Nor did he ignore his audience's context. Citing by memory the poetry and prose of secular Greek philosophers, Paul built bridges of understanding with his hearers. He did this not by confusing things earthly ( the Greek philosophy itself) with things heavenly, but by building from earth to heaven by using the natural revelation they had and then jettisoning the ladder once he reached the discussion of those matters reserved for special revelation (Scripture) . Those who do not know the strength of that which enslaves the unbeliever will never know how to free him or her. This does not mean that every Christian must sud~ denly become an expert on all of the branches of wisdom and knowledge in humar.. history, but it does mean that the Christian witness cannot be naive. It cannot simply ridicule unbelief.
Conclusion
If we regard the Spirit of God as the sole fountain of truth, we shall neither .reiect the truth itself, nor despise it wherever it shall appear, unless we wish to dishonor the Spirit of God. ...Shall we say that ¡the philosophers were blind in their fine observation and artful description of nature?
TheReformers attacked the "Soph~ ists" who had turned theclearteach~ ing of Scripture into puzzles and who had turned to secular wisdom to answer the questions they deemed the Bible insufficient to answer. It would be a mistake to see the Re~ formers as anti~ philosophical or anti~ intellectual, since they were champions of learning' s renais~ sance. Even Luther' s rambunc~ tious references to reason as "the devil's whore" must be understood in the light ofthe sixteenth century battle: Human reason, which can never know that God is a forgiving FatherwhosentChristas the sinner' s substitute, must never be allowed to shape theology. When it is given that place, it always turns the Gos~ pel into some form of works righ~ teousness, because that is what makes sense to the fallen heart. "The message of the cross is foolish~ ness to those who are perishing, "
Paul said in 1 Corinthians 1:18, not because it is illogical or rationally
indefensible, nor because it re~
quires a leap of stupidity, often mislabeled as "faith. " It is foolish~ ness even to those who are convinced ofits arguments. Pinchas Lapide, the eminent modem Jewish scholar who ar~ed for the resurrection as a historical event, nevertheless expressed abso~ lutely no interest in it as a solution to the problem between God and himself. It is foolishness to those who do not really believe they are sinners and that God is really holy. The cross misses them completely. But that brings us back to T ertullian's argument: "After Jesus Christ we have no need of speculation, after the Gospel no need of research. When we come to believe, we have no desire to believe anything else; for we begin by believing that there is nothing else which we have to believe. " This is, of course, where many contemporary Christians find themselves. But it confuses things heavenly and things earthly. Just because secular wisdom and knowledge cannot navigate the way to God through Christ does not mean that "we have no desire to believe anything else" that is not dependent on special revelation. That would render reading, writing, and arithmetic quite frivolous indeed. And simply because we seldom explicitly learn about the cross as God's plan of redemption from the arts and sciences does not mean that "after the Gospel [there is] no need of research. " Think of the many victims of disease who have profited from the research of diligent scientists, regard~ less of those researcher's religious commitments. There is much worth knowing about things earthly that the Bible does not take the time to tell us. Further, the believer even depends on his torical argumen ts , logic,
John Calvin
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
11
and philosophical reasoning in making the case for Christianity. And yet, there is nothing about God, oursel ves, and our relationship to God that the world can tell us more truthfully or more wonderfully than God himself has in his infallible Word. With this business of "vain philosophy, "then, we must beware oftwo dangers: First, we must not ignore the promises and perils of human wisdom. God gave and gives even unbelievers wisdom, justice, and civil righ, teousness. Even though these gifts are merely tokens of common rather than saving grace, they are not to be taken lightly. There is, therefore, no need to trivialize things earthly by feeling the need to "baptize" everything with reli, gion. We do not need "Christian" fiction any more than we require "Christian" doorknobs. Second, we must also beware of the impact of secular thought on our own thinking and lifestyle at the point where it does clash with Scripture. There is nothing more obnoxious than the person who proudly despises "worldly wisdom" and avoids the study of secular disciplines, literature, and film, while displaying his or her indebtedness to secular psy, chology, marketing, politics, and sociology. 1'm re, minded of the pastor who warned me against reading secular authors, while he himself speculated on the day of Christ's return by appealing to current events in the newspaper, shared "biblical" tips for self, es, teem (a major topic in the Bible, if you hunt for it, I suppose), and discovered the "biblical" position on every conceivable political is, sue-even if the Bible was not very useful for these ends. This pastor was shaped by secular wisdom just as surely as anyone else, but be, cause he refused to see that "trickle, down" effect in his own thinking (since he did not receive it directly from reading the secular authors) , he was, ironically, more prone to mistaking it for the Word of God. Just as the defendant who can, not afford an attorney will never, theless be given one by the court, so too every person has a philosophical outlook that even influences the way he or she reads the Bible regardless of whether it comes through reading Sartre or watching Oprah, or whether it is sophisti, cated and urbane or merely super,
There is much worth knowing about things earthly tha.t the Bible does not tell us.
12
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
ficial and of only passing relevance. It is an outlook that is either actively pursued or passively received as if by osmosis. If we naively assume that we are unaffected by our own context, we will stupidly miss the ways in which we are unfaithful to the biblical text because of our hidden prejudices. We must bring those prejudices into the open, judge them by the Word, and hold on to that which is good. We must appreciate secular wisdom, culture, art, and thought not just so we can resist their claims with better arguments, both for our own good and the good of others, but also so we can appreciate them. As Calvin warned, scorning them would cast a great aspersion upon the very Holy Spirit who showers even his enemies with gifts of common grace. 0 1 Readings in Christian Thought, edited by Hugh T. Kerr (Abingdon, 1966), p. 38-39. 2 Ibid. , pp. 20- 22 3 Calvin's Institutes, 2. 2. 15 Michael S. Horton is president ofCHRISTIANS UNITEDfor REFORMATION, Educated at Biola University and Westminster Theological Seminary, Michael has also studied for briefer periods in Strasbourg, France, and at Cambridge University, He is a Ph.D, candidate at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford and the University ofCoventry and is the author/editor of eight books, including The Agony of Deceit (Moody Press), Made In America: The Shaping of American Evangelicalism (Baker Book House), Puuing Amazing Back Into Grace (Baker Book House), and Beyond Culture Wars (Moody Press) ,
Friedrich Nietzsche's 1883 work, Thus Spake Zar rat introduces us to the :'Uber-mel'l teach you the Superman. Man is something t-o be surpassed." Neitzsche declared that "God is dead," due in large measure to the failure of Christianity. His goal was a race of Supermen ~ho wo'ul€! tran.scend categories 'Qf,good and evil. ¥Nietzsche was a favorite philosopher ofAdolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin pnd-his predictions of a "weightless" culture in the wake of Cod's alleged demise are f)ef'ltill\g 'ana exact. '
modern REFORMATION
Machen On The Mind:
J. Gresham Machen
(1881-1937), educated at Johns Hopkins, Princeton, and Marburg, recovered his orthodox faith after a crisis of faith in Germany, studying under the greatest minds of liberal Protestantism. As he saw the da'wn of liberalism in his own Presbyterian church, Machen, professor of New Testament at Princeton Seminary and then founder of Westminster Seminary, became the champion of thoughtful, classical Christianity in our century. Even today, he is recognized by leading secular scholars as having presented the most compelling defense of the Christian faith during the fundamentalist-modernist controversy. ... The growth of ignorance in the Church is the logical and inevitable result of the false notion that Christianity is a life and not also a doctrine; if Christianity is not a doctrine then of course teaching is not necessary to Christianity. But whatever the causes for the growth of ignorance in the Church, the evil must be remedied. It must be remedied primarily by the renewal of Christian education in the family, but also by the use of whatever other educational agencies the Church can find. Christian education is the chief business of the hour for every earnest Christian man. Christianity cannot subsist unless men know what Christianity is...
the basis of psychological process of con version or surrender-falsely called faith and then preach the gospel to him after wards; or does the New Testament preach the gospel to him first, set forth to him the facts about Christ and the meaning of his death, and then ask him to accept the one thus presented in order that his soul may be saved? ...Whatdid Peter's [Pentecost] sermon contain? Did it contain merely an account of Peter's own experience of salvation; did it consist solely in exhortation to the people to confess their sins? Not at all. What Peter did on the day of Pentecost was to set forth the facts about Jesus Christ-his life, his miracles, his death, his resurrection. It was on the basis of that setting forth of the facts about Christ that the three thousand believed, confessed their sins, and were saved. Education, Christianity & The State p. 17-18
Christianity & Liberalism p. 176-177
Some of us may desire to ask whether Jesus of Nazareth really made the more abundant life of man the ultimate end of existence.
What many men despise today as "doctrine" the New Testament calls the gospel; and the New Testament treats it as the message upon which salvation depends. But if that be so, if salvation depends upon the message in which Christ is offered as Savior, itisobviously importantthatweshould get the message straight. That is where Christian scholarship comes in. Christian Scholarship is important in order that we may tell the story of Jesus and his love straight and full and plain. At this point, indeed, an objection may arise. Is not the gospel a very simple thing, it may be asked; and will not its simplicity be obscured by too much scholarly research? The objection springs from a false view of what scholarship is; it springs from the notion that scholarship leads a man to be obscure. Exactly the reverse is the case . Ignorance is obscure; but scholarship brings order out of confusion, places things in their logical relations, and makes the message shine forth clear. Education, Christianity & The State p. 20
What is Faith p. 39
The ignorance of the Church is explained by the failure of the Christian family as an educational institution; but what in turn explains that failure? Why is it that Christian parents have neglected the instruction of their children; why is it that preaching has ceased to be educational and doctrinal; why is it that even Sunday Schools and Bible classes have come to consider solely applications of Christianity without studying the Chris tianity that is to be applied? These questions take us into the very heart of the situation; the growth of ignorance in the Church, the growth of indifference with regard to the simple facts recorded in the Bible, all goes back to a great spiritual movement, really sceptical in its tendency, which has been going forward during the last one hundred years-a movement which appears not only in philosophers and theologians such as Kant and Schleiermacher and Ritschl, butalso in a widespread attitude of plain men and women throughout the world. The depreciation of the intellect, with the exaltation in the place of it of the feelings or of the will, is, we think, a basic fact in modern life, which is rapidly leading to a condition in which men neither know anything nor care anything about the doctrinal content of the Christian religion, and in which there is in general a lementable intellectual decline.
... The Epistles of Paul and all the sources make it abundantly plain that the testimony was primarily not to inner spiritual facts but to what Jesus had done once for all in his death and resurrection. Christianity is based, then, upon an accountof something that happened, and the Christian worker is primarily a witness. But if so, it is rather important that the Christian worker should tell the truth. When a man takes his seat upon the witness stand, it makes little difference what the cut of his coat is, or whether h is sentences are nicely turned. The important thing is that he tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing butthetruth. If we are to be truly Christians, then, itdoes make a vast difference what our teachings are.
What is Faith p. 22-23 We are told that our theological differences will disappear if we just get down on our knees together in prayer. Well, I can only say about that kind of prayer, which is indifferent to the question whether the gospel is true or false, that it is not Christian prayer; it is bowing down in the house of Rimmon. God save us from it!
Education, Christianity & The State p. 28 Is this modern anti-intellectualistic view of faith in accordance with the New Testament? Does the New Testament offer a man salvation first, on
Evangelism does not consist merely in the rehearsal of what has happened in the evangelists own soul. .. Christian evangelism does not consist merely in a man's going about the world saying, "Look at me, what a wonderful experience I have, how happy I am, what wonderful Christian virtues I exhibit; you can all be as good and as happy as I am if you will just make a completesurrenderofyourwills in obedience to what I say." Thatiswhat many religious workers seem to think that evangelism is... But they are wrong. Men are not saved by the exhibition of our glorious Christian virtues; they are not saved by the contagion of our experiences. We cannot be the instruments of God in saving them if we preach to them thus only ourselves. Nay, we must preach to them the Lord Jesus Christ; for it is only through the gospel which sets him forth that they can be saved.
Education, Christianity & The State p. 21-22
Christianity & liberalism p. 53 If the saving work of Christ were confined to what he does now for every Christian, there would be no such thing as a Christian gospel-an account of an event which put a new face on life. What we should have left would be simply mysticism, and mysticism is quite different from Christianity. It is the connection of the present experience of the believer with an actual historic appearance of Jesus in the world which prevents our religion from being mysticism and causes it to be Christianity. It must certainly be admitted, then, that Christianity does depend upon something that hap pened; our religion must be abandoned altogether unless at a definite point in history Jesus died as a propitiation for the sins of men. Christianity is certainly dependent upon history.
Christianity & liberalism p. 120-121 For further study on the life of Machen, you might look at D.G. Hart's new release, Defending the Faith: J. Gresham Machen and the Crisis of Conservative Protestantism in Modern America published by Johns Hopkins University Press. Another place to look is Ned B. Stonehouse's }. Gresham Machen: A Biographical Memior. Books still in print by Machen include Christianity & Liberalism (Eerdmans, 1923), What is Faith (Banner of Truth, 1925), Cod Transcendent (Banner of Truth, 1982), Education, the State & Christianity (The Trinity Foundation, 1987).
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
13
Kim Riddlebarger
Dave
.among
M
any of our contemporaries, it seems, have grown increasingly sensitive about the whole enterprise of doctrinal debate. In many quarters, debate over doctrine is seen as "spiritually incorrect." The fear that unity-or at least the appearance of unity-might be somehow compromised has become a form of paranoia in many evangelical circles. ¡ A kind of vague and ill~ defined veil of unity covers an evangelical movement that has no creed and no unifying doctrine, except perhaps the increasingly distant memory of Protestant orthodoxy and the doctrinal system that claims to be no doctrinal system, dispensational premillennialism. But as in Hans Christian Andersen's delightful fable, it seems as though everyone knows the evangelical emperor wears no doctrinal clothes, except the emperor himself, and few are willing to point out the obvious. When differences of opinion arise because men and women of conviction occasionally step forward and dare to proclaim that a particular doctrinal position is biblical, to the exclusion of all other points of view, it is often somehow taken as a kind of personal affront by the evangelical, an outright attack upon his very character and most sensitive feelings. Difference ofopinion is seen as something much deeper, almost sinister, something intensely personal, and the resulting "hurt feelings" that occur because the two parties cannot agree is seen as the worst possible calamity. But as long as this veil of unity cloaks the theological nakedness of the evangelical move~ ment, the appearance of unity is maintained. Everyone is kept happy and the boat is not rocked. The enterprise continues on its merry way. Because there is no ultimate basis for doctrinal unity in this movement, the appear~ ance of unity is maintained by silencing any dissent or questioning, thereby permitting the pretense of unity to continue.
A Superficial Unity But what is overlooked in much of evangelicalism's notion of unity is that the movement faces a consequence even greater than the lack of unity, a consequence that ultimately matters far more than the "hurt feelings" or differences of opinion that may threaten the doctrinally ill~ informed. We must honestly ask ourselves, the question, "Is unity really the ultimate end in itself?" What shall we do about those who are in grievous doctrinal error, and who may even deny key doctrines of the faith, but who profess to be an evangelical because of some "experience" and who are willing to keep the peace? Does their "unity" with other evangelicals tran~ scend their own denial of the faith? What abou t doctrinal error significant enough to perhaps cost them their very soul? Have we forgotten that it is ultimately our doctrine that provides the substantial basis for any real unity that we may have? Does the mind actually take precedence over our feelings in such matters? It was the Apostle Paul himself who said that "there have to be differences among you to show"" hich of you have God's approval" (1 Cor 11: 19). As a rabbi, trained under the famous Gamaliel, and later blinded by the
hy the Evangelical Notion of
nity Stifles the Christian Mind
JULY/AUGUST 1994
modernREFORt\'IATION
' ~
glory of the .risen Lord Jesus Christ while on his way to mys tical body of the Sa vior who has purchased us with his
Damascus to persecute Christians, Paul would, I think own blood (Acts 20:28) .
see things much differently than would many American evangelicals. As one who suffered unspeakable persecu, Evangellc:allsm Has Bec:ome An End In Itself tion for the cause of Christ (see the catalogue of his Therefore, in order to explain the true place for unity
hardships in 2 Cor 11: 16 ff) , the apostle Paul would have . and intellectual reflection upon the content and mean,
little sympathy for apathetic and doctrinally ignorant ing of our faith, I must point out that the evangelical
American evangelicals who have championed a doctrine movement is exactly that-a movement. As such, it is
of unity that has more in common with Haight, Ashbury not the church, nor is it part of the body ofChrist per se.
and "flower, power" than it does with serious refleCtion American evangelicalism in
about the biblical conception of unity, which itself general, is not centered in nor
derives from the doctrine of the church. The long, on a doctrine of the Church,
standing Romantic ideal, popularized for contemporary which alone is the body of
culture in the anthem of the Beetles, "all we need is Christ. Instead, as a move, love, " has its roots in the secularized American culture ment, evangelicalism is often in which many of us in the "under fifty" crowd were centered on charismatic indi, reared. As the older meinbers of evangelical leadership viduals, dynamic personali, begin to retire or to lea ve this world for glory, the younger , ties, enthralling communica, tors, cutting, edge technol, leaders of the movement who take their places demon, strate an increasing ideological influence from a culture ogy, trendy self, help tech, that values "love" and "unity" as the two cardinal virtues niques, and parachurch or,
that transcend all others. In such a culture, feelings ganizations. Therefore, some
experiential, rather than doc, replace the intellect as the barometer and organ of truth. Unity becomes an idol that is used to stifle any legitimate trinal basis for unity becomes dissent and to gloss over the fact, as Barna and Gallup the only possible glue that can continue to embarrassingly reveal, that the evangelical hold this diverse evangelical movement is exactly that-a movement. As such, like alliance together. For if unity every other movement and fad in modern America, it between the diverse factions
too will someday go the way of the hula hoop and the collapses, then the entire aI,
liance crumbles and the huge miniskirt. This is indeed a tragic thing. Now, I know that there are many who will read the evangelical empire falls. Since there appears to be no real above paragraph and conclude that since I am a confes, sional Calvinist and of German descent, I am simply objective doctrinal agreement divisive by creed and by nature. And so, lest there be in the form of a common any such concerns, let me'make it perfectly clear that the confession of faith, the New Testament condemns, without equivocation, those movement's existence is based who seek to cause division in the Church (Rom 16: 17; 1 on an emotional, entirely
Cor 1:10; 2 Cor 12:20; Gal 5:20) . Let me say it again so subjective sense of unity,
that no one misses it: anyone who causes division in stemming from an unbiblically defined experience of
Christ's church for the sake of causing division, or for being "born, again. "The objective ( truth and doctrine)
personal gain and aggrandizement, or to build a religious is jettisoned for the subjective (emotions and feelings) .
empire for his or her own glory, does so under the The-intellect is simply pushed out of the way to make
room for feelings and experience. The mind and
judgment ofChrist, the Lord and head of the church. Such division and faction is sin, plain and simple. The intellect are replaced by the heart and the feelings.
New Testament also condemns outright those who see Doctrine has been replaced by "unity. "
Perhaps even more tragically, many in evangelical,
doctrine as a kind of intellectual game in which winning doctrinal arguments is the goal. It is the same Apostle ism see the movement as a kind of end in itself. Thus,
Paul who warns us about those who "are always learning despite denials to the contrary, the mission and purpose
of the movement and its leaders often transcend the
but never able to acknowledge the truth" (2 Tim 3:7) . Paul also warns us about those who allow their knowledge mission of the church. In some circles, the activity of
to "puff them up" and who take great pride in knowing evangelicalism's charismatic and dynamic leaders are
seen to be much more important to the cause of Christ
more than others ( 1 Cor 8: 1). Thus, acquiring knowl, edge for knowledge sake is as sinful as is willful ignorance than is the faithful preaching of the gospel and the
ofdoctrine. Therefore, knowledge ofdoctrine cannot be . administration of the sacraments, both of which should
seen as an end in itself any more than can unity with a take place without fanfare or the presence of the media.
superficial basis, for true doctrine will inevitably lead us Numbers and noise, instead of faithfulness to the Scrip'
to a knowledge of the person and work of Christ, hardly tures, become the standards by which to judge whether
things we can boast about. True doctrine about Christ or not the movement actually has the blessing of God.
will also lead us to the doctrine of his church, the Evangelicalism's leaders, therefore, zealously guard the
Unity becomes an idol that is used to stifle any legitimate dissent and to gloss over the fact, as Barna and Gallup continue to embarrassingly reveal, that the evangelical movement is exactly that-a movement-a fad in modern America, which will someday go the way of the hula hoop and the miniskirt.
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
15
movement from all challenges and threats to its unity. Not surprisingly then, evangelicalism's historic empha, sis on doctrine rooted in the rich soil of apostolic and Reformation convictions instead becomes a burden, since doctrinal discussion has the greatest potential to divide the movement. After two generations of war with liberals, doctrinal discussion and doctrinal disagreement among evangelicals themselves is something that the movement is simply not prepared to handle. Thus any discussion of doctrine inevitably exposes the superficial, ity of the unity within the movement. Therefore, the self, serving type of unity so often sought by evangelical, ism is often contrary to that described in the New Testament. We must remember that the evangelical empire and alliance itself is not the church, even though many of its members are Christians and, therefore, part of the in visible church and the true body of Christ. But the superficial unity sought by the evangelical movement as a move, ment is not the deep, seated unity centered in doctrine that is to be pursued by the Church as the body of Christ. It is easy to go to the New Testa, ment and cite passages about love and unity to justify using these as the basis for unity underlying the evan, gelical movement. But if you start with the biblical teaching about the church as the basis for understanding unity, instead of starting with the evangelical movement as such, you will inevitably see things in a different light. The Church is that body of believers who are part of the visible body of Christ, who as the Westminster Confession states, "profess the true religion, together with their children; and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God,
Christians are actually united on the basis of obiective doctrines, not subiective feelings or common exper •ience.
16
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation" (XXV. II). As such, the members of the Church align themselves around a specific confession of faith, that is, they are united by a common profession of specific doctrines. Therefore, Christians are actually united on the basis ofobjective doctrines, not subjective feelings or common experience. The Real Basis For Unity - Doctrine
The doctrinal basis for unity is spelled out quite clearly in scripture. It was our Lord who exhorted us to "love the Lord your God with all of your heart and with all of your soul and with all your mind" (Matt 22:37). In his high priestly prayer, when our Lord Jesus prays that we "may be one" On 17:21) , he first prays for those who are his, that is those who accepted his words On 17:8). Jesus prays that his followers 1may be sanctified by the truth because" [God's] word is truth" (v. 17). Thus the truth inevitably takes priority over unity in these matters, since the church is unified by doctrine (the content of Christ's words) , which is certainly cognitive (our Lord speaks of it as truth) and therefore, serves as the only basis for unity. This does not at all mean that unity and love are not involved or that they are unimportant. On the contrary, intellectual priority means that unity has an objective basis (Christ's words, i.e. "doctrine") rooted in something other than subjective feelings and a common experience (our "feeling" as one because of some experience that we all share). Unity is rooted in this common doctrinal confession about Christ and his word (Rom 10: 10) Weare to love those who profess to believe the same doctrines. Love for our brothers and sisters in Christ is based on Christ's own work for us. It is based upon doctrine, not experience. And whatever we conclude, it is obvious from the Scriptures that unity is not based on the denial of the priority of doctrine as it is in much of evangelicalism. While evangelicalism is a movement and is therefore
modern REFORMATION
subject to the whims of cultural trends, public opin~ ion, and the fate of other such fads, the Church is not. The Church is given promises in Scripture that cannot be said to be true about a movement, even a good one, even a movement that may, in part, be ~ proclaiming biblical truth. It is to the Church and the Church only that our Lord's words apply, "the gates of Hades will not overcome it" (Matt 16: 18). There is however, no such promise for a movement, even a movement that has accomplished as much for the kingdom of God as has evangelicalism, and in which many labor who are Christ's. own. Debate Can Be Healthy Therefore, since the church alone has an abiding doctrinal unity based on the profession of common doctrines, there should be no irrational fear that doctrinal discussion will divide the body of Christ. Instead it is hoped that doctrinal discussion will lead us, as Paul says, to a greater knowledge of the truth, so that we can see which of us does in fact have God's approval on a particular doctrinal matter. Iron is said to sharpen iron. Debate and reflection are very good means of discovering the truth about doctrinal mat~ ters. This is why the scriptures repeatedly exhort teachers to be careful about their doctrine ( 2 Tim 2: 14 ff; Jas 3: 1) , and why false teachers are to be avoided at all costs (see 2 Tim 3 and Jude for example). Paul reminds us that we have the mind of Christ (1 Cor 2: 16) and that we as followers of Christ are not to be , confonned to the pattern of this age, but we are instead to renew our minds so that we can test and approve what is God's will (Rom 12:2). Jude (v. 3) exhorts us to contend ( zealously) for the faith once for all delivered to the Saints. Peter likewise exhorts us to always be ready to give to everyone who asks us a reason for the hope that we have ( 1 Pt 3: 15). And the list goes on. It is because the unity of the Church is rooted in doctrine and not in a common experience that we are to seek unity around what we find objectively written in the word of God and not on the common feelings and experiences that we may share with other religiously inclined people in our culture. Thus the only basis for unity found in Scripture is unity around a common profession of faith. In other words, the only satisfactory basis for unity is doctrine. Until evangelicals begin to recover the Christian mind, they are forced to live with a superficial unity, in which no one dare point out that the emperor has no clothes, when, if the truth were known, everyone knows otherwise. 0 Kim Riddleoorger is a graduate ofCalifornia State University in Fullerton. Westminster Theological Seminary in California. and is presently a PhD. candUlate at Fuller Theological Scmianry. He is the executive vice president of CURE. dean of the CuRE Acculemy and a co-host on the White Horse Inn. He is a contributing author to Christ the Lord:The Reformation and Lordship Salvation (Baker Book House) and Power Religion: The Selling out of the Evangelical Church (Moody Press) .
"Ih:eBible on Unity
'·~9m.1?:5~6 May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you a spirit~f unity (imong yourselves as you follow Christ Jesus, ~ that with one heart andmouth,yo.u .may glorify the God and Fath~r of our Lord Jesus Christ. R0IJ1; 16:17.:18 I urge you, brothers, to watch:ouL{or those' who cause ' divisions and put obstacles in your way thai are cOfltraryfo the teachingyou ,.' have learned. Keepaway from them. For sHeh people .are not serving our Lord Christ, buttheir own appetites. By smooth talk ~md flattery they deceive the minds of naive people. · "
1Cor. 1:10 f appeal to you, brothers, in the nam~ of our'Lord Jesus Christ, .that ,~n of you agree with one another so that ther.e may be no divisions Cl~ong ~ou and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.
EpIL'I:3-:- 1 Make every effortto keep the un~ty ofthe Sp1rit through the bond of peace. Tnere.is one body aAd one Spirit-just a~ y,pu w~re ~alled t6 one hope wh~n you were called-one Lord, one faith,*~ne oaptismJ one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in~,all.. ' Eph.4:11-15 It w,as he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to .be pastors and teachers, to prepare Gorl's. people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until weal! reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God ancH~ecome mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. Ttlenwe wiJI no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and hllQwn here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftthes~ of men in their deceitful scheming. Insteao, speaking the truth in love;:we wj'll in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ.
•..On'DivisiDn
tuke12:51-53 Do you thinkl came to bring peace OR earth? No, Itell you,
but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be'divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-ir:l-Iaw and daugh tef-ir:l-~aw against mother-in-law. ' GaI.T :,Z-' ~vidently some people are throwing you into ~onfusion and are ,
tryingto:pervert the gospel,of Christ. Bu.t even if we or: an ~ngel from heaven should prea.,:cha gospel other than the one we preacneoJo you, let him be eternaHy condemned! "
2Tim..3:1-7'Therewill beterribletimesinthelpstd~ys: People will be lovers of themse1ves, lovers of money, boastful, proud,abu$ive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, ' without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the g{)od, treacherous, rash, , conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than ~6vers of God-having a form of godliness but deriying its power. Have nothing to do w.ith them:
JULY/AUGUST 1994
17
Rick Ritchie
THE WELL-READ
CHRISTIAN
W H-Y BIB
~
E
L O VERS SHOULD BE B I BL IOPH I LES
Biblical religion's focus on the written word of God has always led naturally to literacy among God's people.
T
he well, read life was the aspiration of bygone saints. No, not the life that was read by everyone (That was usually fantastical and morbid!), but the life that was spent reading every, thing. For these old saints, heaven on earth was a scriptorium, where illuminated manuscripts and scrolls containing the collected knowledge, wisdom, and mis, information of the ages were available to the literate for their use, enjoyment, and befuddlement. With the rise of printing, we are no longer confined to the viewing of books in a library, we can purchase them for ourselves, in forms that would once have sent many a monk to confession for book lust. From cheap pulp novels to costly full, color encyclopedias, the pos, sibilities are endless. And so are the accessories, from laminated bookmarks to clip, on reading lamps. The reader's world is a true hedonistic wonderland open to the enjoyment of all. But for the serious Christian questions will arise at some point. If we do not ask them ourselves, concerned brethren will. The miserly sun of a winter's afternoon sinks over the horizon. We set aside our dogmatics book, having made .small progress. Youth and eyesight have limits. Jaded, we ask ourselves why we should sacrifice our days to print. Christ proclaimed to us a simple message of good news, while today' s books confront us with complex and confusing messages of sadness and despair. Did Christ purchase our lives at such a high cost, our brethren ask, only to see them invested in vicariously living the lives of fictitious reprobates? I make no claim to offer the one definitive reason why Christians do or should read. Any single reason offered would either be so broad as to tell us nothing about reading, or so narrow as to leave out most of the
18
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
modern REFORMATION
real reasons we read. Most of you who read what follows them into all truth (]n 16: 13). One of these disciples, Peter, refers to Paul's writings as Scripture (2 Pt 3: 16). are Christian readers already. I am thankful that you read. You read for many different reasons and I want to . There is therefore no possibility of driving a wedge between jesus and Scripture, or Jesus and Paul. give you more. I also want to add to your arsenal so that you can defend your libraries against the attacks of But the connection between Jesus and Scripture is ~morbid conscience and narrow, minded brethren. even stronger. Jesus says to his followers: "If you con, tinue in my word, you are truly Why Past Saints Read my disciples; and you will know There are¡ three stages in the history of God's people the truth, 9-nd the truth will make you free" (NRSV Jn 8:31, which can be used to show three ways Christians can 32). Since jesus is God, and benefit from reading. Tradition itself is no infallible standard which can be imposed on the consciences of Scripture is God's word, any, time we say "Scripture says, "we Christians, but if past practice can be shown to be reasonable, we may miss something worthwhile if we can say "Jesus says. "The whole ignore it. Bible, in this sense, ought to be The first stage in the history of God's people with in red letter text! This should lead those who wish to know books c~me with the writing of the Scriptures. Unlike an jesus into the study of all of oral tradition, written Scriptures required literacy ¡in Scripture. order to be understood, so the people became literate. The second stage came with the confrontation of Chris, Biblical religion's focus on the written word of God has tian teaching with pagan learning. When learned pagans always led naturally to literacy argued that Christianity was unreasonable, Christian among God's people. It is com, teachers had to know how to refute, reinterpret, or assimilate the teachings of their opponents. Critics of mon when arguing the authority of the Bible with an unbeliever to be asked the question "But wasn't this paganism became literary critics. The beginning of the believed by primitive people who didn't even know how third stage cannot be located with any precision, but this stage begins for any Christian reader when the ability of to read or write?" The answer is that a written revelation led to a literate society. The synagogue was an educa, a book to set forth possibilities is exploited to a Christian end, allowing the Christian reader to explore the feasi, tional institution which required literacy, as in it the bility of other forms of Christian life. In each of these Scriptu res were read. According to Scripture, jesus read (Lk 4: 16) and wrote (]n 8:6). His accusing questions to '---../stages, a new reason was given for the Christian to take the Pharisees begin with the words "Have you not up books and read them. I wish to explore each stage and read... ?" (Matt 12:3,5; 19:4; 21:16,42; 22:31; Mk see what it has to offer as an incentive to today' s reader. 2:25; 12:10,26) , suggesting that his hearers were read, ers who should have read with more diligence. People of People of the Book Become People of Books the book were always a literate people. Some argue that what we know as historic Christianity is Not only does a religion of a book require literacy, a late development. Primitive Christianity, they say, was an undogmatic, private experience-until basilica, it raises the level of literacy among the already literate. building bishops, seeing that laymen with direct access Most people I meet are literate adults whose public to God couldn't be controlled, foisted upon the church school instruction taught them to read to the point where they can understand what is written in the newspaper. a collection of politically useful documents. The church For many, what Christianity provides beyond this is an has been chained to the Scriptures ever since. interest in reading. Contrary to these revisionists, Christianity has aI, I have met countless people whose interest in learn, ways derived its very life from the written text. In the ing began as a result of their coming to the Reformation Bible itself, the words of Scripture are so identified with faith. The world became more interesting to them. In the words of God that the words "God" and "Scripture" the Reformation world view , although our fallen world are used interchangeably. The Apostle Paul even uses the expression "Scripture says to Pharaoh" (Rom 9: 17) of cannot bring us lasting happiness, it is a purposeful place in which God is active, both supernaturally and through an occasion where Moses speaks God's words to Pharaoh providence. Books are a way of exploring this world (Ex 9: 13, 19) . 1 A high view of Scripture is no late more deeply. Since God has used language in commu, invention of second, century clergy, it is the view of St. nicating about the world to us, we believe that the Paul himself. written word is capable of embodying truth about the But what about jesus? Our revisionist friends often world. Our studies in theology naturally lead us to an accuse Paul of complicating jesus's simple gospel, but interest in the world and trust that we can learn about it they are wrong on this count, too. Certainly jesus is the through print. \ .:enter of Christianity, but we know of him only through I had this experience myself. Early in my college "-...../his words. jesus himself says that his words are spirit and years) before I had discovered the Reformation, Ire, life (]n 6:63), and promises his disciples that the Holy member observing one of the lecturers at my university Spirit will remind them ofhis words (]n 14:26) and guide
The accusing questions Jesus presented to the Pharisees often began with, uHave you not , rea d...., , , sugges t'Ing that his hearers were readers who should have read with more diligence.
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
19
in dialog with some students. He was a pale man who probably spent a good portion of his time in a cramped faculty office poring over some old book or other-a book written by a non, evangelical, no doubt. I felt sorry for the man. Assuming that he was probably an atheist or agnostic, I thought, "How sad that this man who has no share in eternity cannot even en, joy the pr~sent. I later discovered that the man was a Christian, but that was not the only thing to change my opin' ion of him. I sat under him for a course r'eading some of the old classics of Western culture. When he taught on Homer, memorized passages in ancient Greek tumbled from his lips. The same was true of medieval Italian with Dante. The man was an intellectual traveler to worlds beyond my reach. A couple of years later, I saw this professor in the uni versity bookstore. He now appeared to me as an aristocrat. Books were to him as airplane tickets were to others, only he could traverse time as well as space. He could visit not merely Florence, b)Jt the Florence of Machiavelli and Dante. Now I was the wretch. I only hoped that if my professor could have seen the music and the books that I was purchasing, he would have ap, proved. What an advantage for a Christian to be able to understand how the world of the past developed into the presen t world! Without this perspecti ve, we see our own environment as inevi, table, gray, vanilla. We long for some, thing more exotic. Feeling powerless to change the world, we look to stimulation to distract us from our boredom. Access to the past through books changes this. It shows us how the current structure of our lives-our architecture, government, entertainment, technology-is the result of the ideas of many people in the past. One idea suppressed, or another intro, duced at a different time, and the whole landscape would be different. As sinful and frustrating as our world can be, it is not an inevita, bility, but a surprise. It is only when we understand the world that we can transform it. If our present world is the result of ideas, this puts the spotlight on the Biblical injunction to take every thought captive to Christ. It also poses the ques, tion "How are we to take modem thoughts captive if we don't recognize them as thoughts?" In many cases the modem world is lost to the gospel, not on account of blatant anti, Christian propaganda, but because of the acceptance of hidden assumptions which render the gospel implausible.
How are we to take modern thoughts captive if we don't recognize them as thoughts?
20
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
We have seen how a focus on Scripture leads to an interest in books in general, and how this is advantageous to the cause of Christ. Unfortunately, there is an , opposite dynamic at work in our culture. As the culture drifts away from writing as the chief medium of communication, and .toward television, people become harder to reach with the gospel because their concept of truth is altered. The shift from print to television has already had devastating consequences. Social critic Neil Postman has argued that television's very na, ture as a medium changes the way people think. He complains not so much about the drivel that is aired, but what happens to discourse on serious issues. What becomes of seriousness, he asks, when one minute top experts are discussing the possibility of nuclear war in hushed tones only to be followed by the words "And now this from Burger King!"2 Could television's ability to place anything subsequent to anything be what has made relativism so plausible to so many? Television seems oblivious to the law of non, con, tradiction. In the world of the novel, plot and character development rule. People who die stay dead. If not, there is a brilliant explanation. Not so on a soap opera, where Marissabel can be killed off as a result of a contract dispute, and later be re, inserted into the story without apology. It used to be that writers needed to come up with ingenious twists of plot to account for a supposedly dead character's reappearance. Now they have found that no explanation is necessary. Everyone is so happy to see Marissabel back they don't ask questions. A return to print is crucial. People of the book should not only be people of books, they should be people of print. While we could notsay that print itself has a bias towards truth-it is obvious that one can tell a lie quite splendidly in print-it does have a bias towards the conditions of truth: continuity, non, contradiction, pre, cision. A well, written fantasy novel may portray a world where the laws are different from our world, but a commitment to the laws of reason will be manifest on every page. 3 If certain things happen, certain things must follow. This type of connection is absent on television in general. I may not be overstating it to suggest that a mind for truth would be better cultivated by reading fantasy novels than watching the evening news.
Critics of Culture Become Cultured A commitment to reading and knowing Scripture was not enough to prepare the early church to take the world for Christ. Early on, Christianity was besieged by well, educated unbelievers and heretics. In many cases, top' notch argumentation was not needed to keep Titus and
modern REFORMATION
Claudia from abandoning the faith. For a while any argument might do. Besides, pastors had enough to do persuading their hearers to avoid the arena. Over time, however, arguments had to be met, and this meant that someone had to do the hard work of coming to grips with '-....../ pagan thought. One example ofthis, documented in George Grant's Heresy and Criticism, is the way the early church re~ sponded to the ancient practice of literary criticism. Pagan literary critics threatened to undermine the valid~ ity of the Christian writings by attacking their internal consistency on the one hand ( displaying alleged contra~ dictions), and their origin on the other (claiming they were written by someone other than was traditionally claimed, or claiming they had been altered). Christian apologists responded by learning literary criticism and either critiquing their oppoi-tents' methods, or using the critics' techniques to prove Scripture's logical consis~ tency and apostolic authorship. Christians were drawn into the pursuit of pagan learning to combat paganism, and became more cultured in the process. In the Middle Ages it happened again when the universities encountered Aristotle through his Islamic commentators. The result was a breathtaking synthesis of Christian and secular learning which commanded the respect of the learned and still finds adherents in our time. This can happen today as well. In many cases it is the Christian apologists who are our best guides for broaden~ ing our mental horizons. Many will pick up a book by ~C. S. Lewis, G. K. Chesterton, or]ohn WarwickMont~ gomery to learn how to defend their faith against unbelief only to have those authors interest them in any number of other subjects. These were men of broad interest. C. S. Lewis was a poet, a medievalist, and a philosopher. G. K. Chesterton was a journalist. ]. W. Montgomery is a lawyer and a theologian. These men are capable of illustrating the correspondence of Christianity to the known world using knowledge from many fields because they studied all subjects asking the question "How does this relate to what Christianity teaches?" They present not merely a unified field of knowl~ edge, but unlike many Christians today, they present a broad field of knowledge. Many Christian teachers will present a unified field of knowledge by narrowing their field to theology. A parishioner leaves one of their churches convinced that what they have heard on Sunday is the truth about the world, and upon seeing the real world during the drive home wonders how it relates to what the teacher said earlier. How much better for a teacher to be able to show how fields other than theology can be integrated with Christian teaching. How wonderful it is to pick up a . Christian book and be able to say "Here is God's plenty! " When a Christian author engages with a broader slice of , ~ the world, Christianity becomes more plausible to his readers, for it can be shown to be compatible with other known tru tho
Engaging with truth outside of theology is not only attractive, it is necessary. If we neglect it, what is to prevent parishioners from sliding into unbelief because they fear that what their pastors teach cannot really stand up against the real world? Those who present Christianity must be able to relate it to the world their parishioners face and defend it against unbelief. Paul tells us that it would be a strange thing if the evangelist who brought the good news to others should himself end up in hell on account of carnal weakness ( 1 Cor 9:27). But what about intellectual weakness? What about those times where a pastor's grip on the gospel is sufficient to save himself, but not strong enough that he can communicate it clearly to oth~ ers? A shepherd must be able to defend not only himself, but his sheep against wolves. Would it not be odd if a pastor's failure to master the commu~ nication of Christian doctrine became the ruin of all of his parishioners but himself? We could paraphrase the Apostle and say, I pummel falsehood and subdue it, so that after accepting the gospel myself, my hearers should not be lost to the truth. This is not only true of pastors, it is true of academ~ ics. Many are the teachings in the universities today which directly and indirectly under~ mine Christianity. Christian teachers and professors are in a wonderful position to oppose these teachings. In many cases it is not necessary to oppose them in the name of Christianity. When the very possibility of objective truth is attacked, it is the duty of an academic as an academic to defend it. The advantage of the Christian academic is that he or she knows that the fight for truth is God~ pleasing. I think that the eleventh chapter of the epistle to the Hebrews will some day be found to apply to academics. From the roll call of the faithful, I expect to hear the names of college professors read. "By faith Dr. So~ and~ so left his English faculty and their idols of deconstructionism to teach students how to understand the meaning of an old text ... " For if students do not believe that an old text could possibly reveal truth, what chance do we have of getting a hearing for Scripture?
Acommitment to reading and knowing Scripture was not enough to prepare the early church to take the world for Christ. Early on, Christianity was besieged by well educated unbelievers and heretics...someone had to do the hard work of coming to grips with pagan thought.
Past Lives Become Present Options
Many of my readers have seen for themselves that an
interest in Scripture made them more interested in other
books. Some have probably also been led to a broader
interest in God's world through the writings of Christian
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
21
apologists. There is a third service which reading can provide the Christian which is often overlooked, and that is broadening our narrow view of what the Christian life can look like. For this purpose I suggest old Christian books. Even when we have weeded out those deviants who espoused damnable heresies or held to grossly deficient views of grace, the remainder is a surprising lot. Christians of the past who,would have confessed the faith as well as we do, or better, often lived very different Christian lives from our own. Their lists of Christian virtues and pagan vices, if they made such lists, would not match ours. They would wink at behavior which would shock us and condemn as sinful actions we didn't know were sins. How cock~ sure was Jesus' generation of its own moral code? Certainly many, even of the Pharisees, would have confessed to failing to live up to the code perfectly. That there might be something amiss with the code itself, however, was unthinkable. And the same is true with us. After Jesus' lectures to the Pharisees, few
22
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
of us would claim perfection. But everyone is confident knowing right from wrong and the relative gravity ofone offense compared to another. Aside from a re~ reading of the New Testament, a reading of old Christian authors is probably the best way, of challenging our own complacency with our under~ '--..../ standing of the good Christian life. In fact, sometimes it is better. Jesus was able to point out the specific holes in his contemporaries ethics. The inspired writings of the prophets were certainly sufficient to prove the points Jesus made if anyone would make the application. The problem is that we seldom do. And like those who failed to see how the prophets' words applied to new first~ century conditions, we seldom make the application of Jesus' words to our own situation with any ease. Many applications are strained, the most tenuous becoming the favorites of retreat speakers and youth leaders. We believe we are teaching Scripture when we present stale recipes for victorious Christian living, but this has not led to a better understanding of the Christian life. The problem is not with the clarity of Scripture, but with our own perspective on our lives. We take the environment in which we have grown up for granted. It is. difficult to criticize precisely because we cannot see it for what it is. Does the fish criticize the ocean for being salty? A comparison with past ages shows the behavioral codes in our church gatherings to be both prissy and flippant. Would Martin Luther or C. S. Lewis be able to enter our church gatherings comfortably? Luther would shock everyone with his free use of vulgarity, while C. S. Lewis would scandalize coffee hour by lighting up a cigarette (and can't the man wait until we find him an ashtray? What is to become of the new carpet in the fellowship hall?) -and yet both of these men were committed Christians. In fact, I imagine that when those who wished to criticize these men calmed down a little, it would be the late twentieth~ century churchmen who would have explaining to do. What has happened to the historic liturgy? Why do we spend so much time singing about how we feel instead of about what God has done? Why are we so preoccupied about how others use their leisure time, while so little attention is given to their work (aside from the injunction not to steal) ? These are just a couple of examples of the way looking into the past can relativize twentieth~ century standards. The point of this type of perspective is not just to topple false standards, while this is important in itself (Christian liberty is a necessity, not a frill! ). It brings the forgotten wisdom of older standards back into view. Perhaps C. S. Lewis's smoking shows a bad use of the gifts God had given him. This might be sinful, but no more so than the eating habits of other well~ respected churchmen. And it is a trifle compared to the mean~ spiritedness, the lack of reverence, and the ignorance which we put up with on a regular basis. Another of the benefits of reading is its ability to combat what C. S. Lewis's friend Owen Barfield referred
modern REFORMATION
to as "chronological snobbery, " which is the assumption now another. Broad reading is a corrective to our
that the present age is to be held superior to the past tendency see one narrow aspect of a situation neglecting
merely because it came later, that history is a record of other ramifications. Perhaps what we do matters in ways
we cannot guess.
uninterrupted progress. Reading broadly together will keep me from always It is truly a wonder to pick up an old document only to discover that an idea you thought modem could be . being on a new crusade to the bewilderment of Christian friends. The Christian purpose of all of this reading is to found stated, and stated clearly, many centuries ago. For instance, when do you suppose the following words glorify God. Reading alone may do this, but when we become were written? passionate about an issue, it is Perceiving long ago that religious liberty ought not to be nice to have company. When we denied, but that it ought to be granted to the judgment have seen things rightly, others and desire ofeach individu~l to perform his religious duties can support us. When we have according to his own choice, we had given orders that missed the mark, they can cor~ every man, Christians as well as others, should preserve n rect us. It is gratifying, however,
the faith of his own sect and religion. 4 when the ' new viewpoint which
Does this come from one of the writings of our seemed so exciting to me is
American founding fathers, or is it perhaps an article adopted by the others. When I
from the old constitution of the Commonwealth of make a new discovery, it will Virginia? No! It is a line from the Edict of Milan, written often seem implausible for the simple fact that no one around me by the Roman Emperor Constantine in the year 312 AD. My point is that some of us are fortunate enough to sees what I now see. If friends travel the same road, all is differ~ be well~ traveled in the present world. This does some~ thing to combat our cramped prejudices. But there is a ent. Those of my readers who world of the past available to us which can do more for have come to Reformation con~ victions understand this, if they
us in this area for less. have been lucky enough to have
A Prescription fellow travelers. There is so much to be gained from reading, but my call If you decide to take my ad~ is not merely for Christians to read, but to read more, to vice, I have a warning for you. '~ read more broadly, to read more broadly together. While "of the making of books Reading more makes reading easier. The more there is no end, " (Ecc 12: 12) of material you have been exposed to, the more you will be the printing of a particular book there is an end. Not all capable of reading. We need a grid on which to hang of the good books that have been written are currently facts and perceptions. Reading gives us categories, and available at your local bookstore; consequently, used the more categories we have, and (what-is moreimpor~ book stores are a wonderful thing. Not all books will be tant) the more solidly these categories are fixed in our cheap, but the point is that out~ of~ print books can be minds, the more we will be able to glean from what we found. The other piece of advice is to buy in~ print books read and experience. while they are in print, especially in fields of narrow Reading more broadly keeps us from getting into interest. You will be thankful for heeding this advice--or ruts. Narrow reading makes the world itself seem nar~ sorrowful for neglecting it-sooner than you think. row. Broad reading reminds us that the world is enor~ As far as books go, we live in the best of times and
mous. It also allows us to see the same thing from the worst of times. On the one hand, the culture at large
different points of view. is abandoning print. On the other, there is more
Perhaps a new worship service format is adopted at available to the one who will hunt for it than there ever
church, causing controversy. My reading of psychology has been. I wish you a well~ read life, and hope that as
will induce me to examine motives. I will wonder where time goes on we will have more fellow~ travelers to bump
the people on the wrong side of the quarrel (those into. It makes the journey more enjoyable. 0
bothersome people who won't worship my way! ) derived their need to control others. A reading of sociology will 1 For a detailed analysis of this and other ways in which God and Scripture arc identified, sec B. B. Warfield , The lnspiratiinl and AuuUlrity of the Bible, ed hy Samuel S. Craig (Phillipshurg, NJ:
make me ask whether people want to worship one way Preshyterian and Reformed Puhlishing Company 1948) pp. 299· 348.
rather than another because of secular trends. A reading 2 Ncil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Deaul: Public Discourse in the Age of S/lOW Business (New York:
Books, 1985) pp. 104·105. Postman's hook is as profound a piece of social criticism as I
of missionary biographies might remind me that worship Penguin have rcad. His criticism of television news forms chapter 7 of the h(Xlk.
is a privilege which not all have, so I should be thankful 3 For an extended treatment of this phenomenon in a Christian apologetic, read chapter 4 "The
that I can worship either the old or new way. A reading Ethics of Elfland" in Orthodoxy hy G. K. Chesterton.
4 From the Church History of Eusehius, volume I of the Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers (Grand
of theology and liturgical history will have me wondering Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), p. 379.
if our worship has become more man~ centered or God~ Rick Ritchie is a scaff wriccr fnr CURE and is a contributing editor w Christ the Lard: The Reformation
centered. and Lordship Salllatilm (Baker B()()k House). He is a graduate of Cllrist OJ/lege Irvine, California,
My reading might sway me to react now one way, and Gordon·Conwell Theological Seminary, in South Hamilton, MassachusC[[s.
Another of the benefits of reading is its ability to combat chronological snobbery," which is the assumption that the present age is to be held superior to the past merely because it came later, that history is a record of unbroken ,progress.
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
23
An
Interview
••.
.
~.,, ·. ·S ··
II..~I ~~ ~i·.• \.. . • •C.... .... ~
....
,)
•. .' . •
F
.
'··'IJ..·
"'.:,
"
•
;j
..
moving images and attractive personalities. Preachers have a hard job. Today, I do not know how you could do as the Puritans did, for example, an preach three hour sermons. Our culture has created limita, tions in the church. In a given church there might be several limitations. You could be called to a church where the people have never heard a sermon longer than ten minutes. Even a half hour sermon may be difficult for the congregation to endure. But that is why you have to keep in mind what you are trying to do. You can make progress, but you have to work in the right direction. I think we have great grounds for improvement in our worship by moving in the direc, tion of better biblical teaching and sounder theology. recognize that takes time.
".'-r o
",
~
Dr. James
MONTGOM ERY
MR: In general the television has had a profound effect on society, specifically, how much has it had on education and literacy ?
olce
MR: Today the prevailing view is that church is boring and irrelevant. Would you be so kind as to address this?
Dr. Boice: Yes, that is the prevailing view and I think it has a lot of justification. I am in a lot of churches that I find boring and irrelevant. How do you get a church to not be boring and irrelevant? Do you just hire a band to make church fun? In such a case, church might cease to be boring, but it would not become relevant. And in order to make your church relevant, do you give messages on topical issues like psychology and politics? That might meet people's needs, but is it relevant to the church? So the question really requires thinking through what we are trying to do and the place to begin is to discover what is the purpose of church? Well, church is the gathering of the people of God. Then what do we do? What are we there for? Well, we are there for fellowship, to enjoy one another's company. But chiefly we are there to meet with God. We come together to learn from God and worship God. What worship means is to ascribe to God His attributes; to recognize and praise Him. But in order to do that you have to be taught. The Reformers understood that very well and they transformed services from celebra, tion in the Middle Ages into teaching fellowships where the word of God was taught and where the people responded to God on the basis of the teaching. I recognize as a preacher that there are unique problems faced in preaching to a world that is geared to entertainment and use to television with it's fast 24
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
Dr. Boice: I would recommend reading Neil Postman's book, Amusing Ourselves to Death, because he is an educator. Postman has a section at the in his book where he talks about education on television from his own experiences. We are all aware, at least if you have anything to do with education that television has shortened the attention span of people, especially the young. Any grade school teacher knows that it is very hard to sustain the attention span of the child she is teaching. The attention span is just the tip of the iceberg. The real problem is the inability to think and that I suppose more than anything is what Postman recog nizes. I will give you a little illustration. About two years ago Harper's magazine ran a story that was a conversation between Neil Postman, who is a critic of television and a woman who thinks television is wonderful. She teaches in Philadelphia in one of the schools for the Performing Arts. The interview was taken in a very interesting format. They took them to a restaurant, bought their dinner and taped their conversation. So this article evolved from their conversation over dinner. In the middle of their dinner there was this little exchange. Postman said, "The problem was that just this last week I was working with an essay that one of my students had written. He had written two entirely contradictory things on adjoining pages. I pointed it out to him and his response was' What is the problem? ,,, Postman's response was, "This habit comes from watching television, in which first you were told that there was a riot in N ew York City, and then there was a rape in Los Angeles, and then the Mets beat the Cardinals. Things are disjointed. " To which she replied, "Well Neil that's life. " To which Postman replied, "That's insanity. " There are two competing points of view. If you think disjointed is the way to go, well then you will be
modern R EFORMATION
on the side of the entertainment age, but you will not be thinking and Postman, who is an educator, says you have broken the laws of logic and sequence and everything. If we raise up a generation that cannot think, then we have raised up a generation that can ~ be manipulated by people who can think and do not even know it. Television is a great manipulator. We are aware of it in the market place. It manipulates you to buy things you have no need of whatsoever. It is crazy. Weare spending our money on things we think we need. Television will do this in politics too. We could easily be sold a dictator. For all our democratic traditions we could easily be sold something that would just take away our freedom because people will be unable to evaluate them. The exact same thing has happened to theology in the church. We have been sold a horrible bag of garbage, passing as theology, because we can not critique it. I have been in meetings where I have heard somebody say something that is absolute heresy, but they say it in such a whimsical way that evangelical people go out and say that was wonderful and helpful. They really cannot think and that is where the danger lies. MR: Do you think there is any parallel between the Middle Ages and the church today, in terms of being image based, rather than word based? How do you think it effects our worship styles?
Dr. Boice: You might argue that there were excuses it in the Middle Ages. Before the invention of the printing press, most people did not have books so if they were to know anything about the Bible it had to be through pageantry. That is why you have the miracle plays and all kinds of superstitions. At its best, the church was trying to teach. But at its worst, what happens is that you get performance in the Mass. It becomes a celebration, a mystery, and it is performed in Latin which is very impressive. It is a beautiful experience, but the people knew very little. In the providence of God, when the Reformers came along, the printing press had already been invented. The Reformers were very well educated and even memorized literature in Latin. Calvin is a marvelous example here. In debates with Roman Catholic theologians, he could quote sections of the early fathers that they weren't familiar with at all. Calvin was so conversant with the material that he could tell you exactly where to find it on the page. So remember that the Reformation was the work of God. Remember also the tools that transformed the church: the translation of the scriptures, the scholarship and the distribution of the Bible through the printing press, and Luther's theological tracks. People were reading and understanding what they read as the Reformation was beginning to sweep over Europe. ~' lsuppose the most direct response to the question is that in our age we are slipping back into the Middle Ages. Carl Henry wrote an address some years ago
\, J' for
about the new barbarianism. He wrote that the barbarians were coming again. That is what is happen~ ing. Weare slipping back into that kind of an age. Maybe the truth will be preserved in an equivalent to the monasteries where people can retreat. Maybe the monasteries of the next century will be a place where a .group of people can meet to discuss the Bible because they are not satisfied with that superficial diet of the church. MR: Are Presbyterian and Reformed churches experiencing some tension in worship and changing forums? To attract the boom generation many of the elements of worship have been compromised and are being modernized to appeal to for example people who are only comfortable with short popular songs. Where do evangelism and entertainment connect?
Dr. Boice: I think that is a very good question, because it is a pragmatic one. It is the kind of question you have to wrestle with. If, for example, you are working with people who are starving in Ethiopia, you have to feed them and present the Gospel as you do. But your danger, you see, is to substitute social work with the Gospel by thinking that when you have fed them you have done the job. You are really there not simply to save the body, but to save the soul. Now
Television is a great manipulator. In politics, for example, we could easily be sold a dictator. For all our demo cratic traditions we could easily be sold something that would take away our freedom because people will be unable to evaluate them. The exact same thing has happened to theology in the church. We have been sold a horrible bag of garbage, passing as theology, because we lack the ability to critique it. the same sort of principles operate in worship. We do have a superficial entertainment~ oriented culture with its own kind of music. The problem is that you could succeed so well at entertaining that you could forget what you are really trying to do. That is something that really has to be understood. JULY/ AUGUST 1994
25
I talk to the young people in my church a lot. We have fairly traditional services back east, although there is a lot of experimental stuff there, too. The young people like the contemporary music. But understand what you are doing, you are having fun. Do not say it is worship just because you leave the building feeling good. Your feeling good does not make it worship. Now you can worship and feel good. You can also worship and be distraught because you have beLen in the presence of God and you are a sinner and you need to change your life. Above all, what I tell them is to get away from these repetitious man~ tras. Recognize what those things are. They put you in a certain emotional frame of mind to open your mind. And you need to think about what it is that these mantras are opening your minds up to. Maybe that crea'tes the kind of mood in which people are open to the preaching of the Word. But would it perhaps be better to sing something which reflects what it is you are going to talk about so they can begin to think and do not just have a blank mind.
There is an enormous pressure to do away with theology... The tendency today is to say that people cannot follow it, so we will have a religion that does not mean anything. But if we are not talking about anything more significant than how to feel good or how to raise your children then Christianity is iust another self help fad and it will pass away as all fads do. We have made some changes in our worship service. For example in the call to worship at the beginning of the service, I open with the text that I am going to preach on, or a corresponding text. I introduce it that way, at the very beginning of the service, because I want them to start thinking.
MR: How is the church making accommodations to the culture in theology?
Dr. Boice: At the worst, the church has eliminated anything that is offensive. For example, talking about 26
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
sin. They think people do not want to hear about sin so they simply stop mentioning it. There is a great pressure to eliminate anything that appears to be abstract, and that refers to most theology, doesn't it. What did Jesus do on the cross? He died for our sins. What does it mean to say that he died for our sins? That is the doctrine of the substitutionary atonement. What was accomplished by the substitutionary atonement? Christ turned aside the wrath of God. That is propitiation. And by this propitiation Christ reconciled men and women to God. To talk about the atonement, propitiation, or reconciliation, is to talk about very abstract concepts. It is something that was actually done by Jesus Christ. But when you try to explain what it is that he did, you have theological terminology. Well, there is an enormous pressure to do away with theology. You do not have to under~ stand. You do not have know what Jesus accom~ plished. Now if you do that, what are you left with? What kind of faith do you have? We all believe in faith. You have faith in Jesus. But who is the Jesus you believe in? Just the man Jesus? No, he is the divine Jesus as well. But now you are talking about theology again. There is just no way of avoiding that it you are going to have a religion that means any~ thing. Unfortunately, the tendency today is to say that people can not follow it, so we will have a religion that does not mean anything. But if we are not talking about anything more significant than how to feel good or how to raise your children, then Christianity will have become just another self~ help fad and it will pass away as all fads do.
MR: In your view, what role does the Christian Right have in framing a Christian mind!
Dr.Boice: Christians are not only citizens of the kingdom of God, they are citizens of the earthly state . We have a responsibility to the state and that in~ eludes, in a democracy, the right to vote. Christians certainly should exercise their rights as citizens. But what we have to bare in mind, and I think this is where some elements of the Christian Right have missed out, is that even at the best if we achieve what we think we want to achieve we still have a simple human state. We do not bring in the kingdom of God by voting for Christian politicians. Even if they are men or women of absolute integrity , it is still a sinful world. Power corrupts. It corrupts in U. S. politics and is an enormous:problem. Of course, we should pray for them. We should elect them if they are competent. So all of that we ought to do, but we have to bear in mind that salvation does not come through politics. What is our role? As citizens, we vote and we should be responsible. But our role as Christians is to think and act as Christians, and that is always going to set us apart from the state. Christians are always going to have a part in the governmental process
modern REFORMATION
because the role of the church is to remind the state that it is responsible to God, and will be judged by God. When we have a political agenda it is very easy to forget that responsibility and become just another .Jolitical interest group. When Jesus said, "Render ~ u nto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's, " he set up a polarity in terms of the church and the state. There are some' people who believe that the state has no legitimate authority. The only authority is God working through the church. They tum their backs on any kind of involvement in society. Then there are those who believe the state is the only legitimate institution, and the church is illegitimate. Folks such as these believe the only real authority is secularism. Then, there is the position that bqth the church and the state are under God, but the state is dominant. Now that is the position of cowards, because if you have God in the picture at all, the state should not be dominant over what God is doing. The best position with church and state is with God over both. The church and the state are both responsible to God, and the role of the church is to remind the state of,its responsibility as well as reminding itself of that. We are not there to do politics, but we are there to obey God.
MR: What is the role of the Bible and the Holy Spirit in renewing our minds? ~Dr. Boice: The Reformers had that wonderful
combination which we need to be remind of again and again. They said you need Word and Spirit together, because whenever you separate the two you get in trouble. If you have the Word without the Spirit, the , Bible becomes a dead letter. You can study that in a university from an unbelieving professor and you can spell out the theology with accuracy, but that is not religion, that is just academics. On the other hand you have people who put a great deal of emphasis on the Spirit. The Spirit told me this, or the Spirit told me that. They detach it from the Bible creating excess and subjectivity. If you claim God told you to do something, I am unable to critique that apart from the Bible and you are unable to critique it yourself. Therefore, the Reformers stressed that you have to have the Word and Spirit together. So that is why when we study the Bible, first of all we study the Bible, and secondly, as we study the Bible, we pray asking for illumination. The same Holy Spirit who 'inspired the Bible also illuminates our minds to understanding the Word.
MR: How do we as Reformation Christians build a bridge to reach those people who are under the sway )f entertainment religion?
religion. We tend to become elitist. It is not inten~ tional. However, what do you do about the masses out there who really are illiterate? In Philadelphia, 60% of the high school graduates are functionally illiterate. There are students who have completed grade school and they cannot write two consecutive sentences. If people do not think and are only being entertained, what do we do? I do not have any simple answers. I do know that in the Reformation we can find some answers. In the Middle Ages, for example, most people could not read or write; books were not available. Bu t when the Reformers came along, they helped to educate the masses and to increase the literacy among the people of God. An~ other thing that is not said much abou t the Reforma~ tion, which I think is very important was the growth of small groups throughout Europe. I think there is a great advantage to small groups. One of the advan~ tages is that you conduct them on whatever the level of the people in the group, with a leader who can work with them one on one. Enormous progress can be made there.
If the Christian church in America would actually turn from its wicked ways, confess its sin, pray, and actually seek the face of God, then maybe we 't'will begin to see reformation.
MR: Is it not perhaps too late to reverse the trend caused by television and the lack of a print society? Dr. Boice: I hope not. I am not a prophet, but how can it ever be too late for Christians? Would we have said that about the Soviet Union, after the revolu~ tion, it is too late? "They had their chance. They sold out to communism and, look, it is destroying them. " Who would ever have imagined that in 1989 they would have that change? The power of the Holy Spirit is unchanged. If the Christian church in America, which is numer~ ous, would actually tum from its wicked ways, confess its sin, pray, and actually seek the face of God, then maybe we will begin to see reformation. And we can contribute to that. If we would do that -and really do it-who could tell what God might do. God never automatically just rights something off. Take Israel for example, with all of her sin, generation after generation. And yet time after time, reprieve after reprieve, God withheld his judgement from her. Maybe God will give us a reprieve. Certainly, that is something for which we should pray. 0
Dr. Boice: I think that is a great problem we have when we get into this kind of thinking persons JULY/ AUGUST 1994
27
Resolutionsfor
Roman Catholic &Evangelical Dialogue
The following statements of evangelical belief are offered as material for dialogue between Roman Catholics and Evangelicals, following from the recent document, "Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium," drafted by Richardlohn Neuhaus and Charles Colson, with others. We the undersigned offer this response in a spirit ofirenic debate on issues arising from that important joint statement. As that document was crafted to encourage cooperation on the basis of a consensus deemed sufficient for the purpose, though confessionally incomplete, so the following statements seek to identify issues of concern to evangelical Protestants that the thrust of the document raises. What follows is intended to encourage further discussion of the possibilities and problems ofacting together. It is drafted by Michael Horton and l.I. Packer. ..
1. While both Evangelicals and Roman Catholics affirm the ecumenical Creeds, we do not see this catholic consensus as a sufficient basis for declaring that agreement exists on all the essential elements of the Gospel.
2. The doctrine of justification by grace alone through faith alone because of Christ alone has since the Reformation been acknowledged by mainstream Protestants ~s "the article by which the church stands or falls, " and the tenet that distinguishes a true from a false church. While affirming an indissoluble bond between justification and sanctification, this doctrine insists that justification itself is God's present forensic declaration of pardon and acceptance, and that the righteousness required for this declaration is neither attained by human effort nor infused or worked internally by God . in the human soul, but is the righteousness of Jesus Christ imputed to those who believe. The Council of Trent anathematized those who embrace this doctrine, and all subsequent magisterial declarations, including those of the Second Vatican Council, continue to bind Roman Catholics to the conviction that this Gospel of free justification by faith alone, apart from works, and the assurance ofsal vation that springs from it, is not consonant with Roman Catholic teaching. While gladly noting in modern Roman Catholic exposition a growing emphasis on Christ and the biblical promises as objects of faith and trust, we see justification by faith alone as an essential of the Gospel on which radical. disagreement continues, and we deny the adequacy of any version of the Gospel that falls short at this point. 3. Furthermore, while rejoicing in our agreement that God in the Gospel offers salvation in Christ to all who will receive it, we radically disagree with the teaching of the Second Vatican Council that unbelievers may be saved by their good works, apart from faith in Christ. .
4. The extent of the creedal consensus that binds orthodox Evangelicals and Roman Catholics together warrants th~ making of common cause on moral and cultural issues in society. Roman Catholics and Evangelicals have every reason to join minds, hearts, and hands when Christian values and behavioral patterns are at stake. Yet it is incorrect to regard such cooperation among Christians as common ecclesial action in fulfilling a common ecclesial mission. The mission of the church as such is primarily the fulfilling of the Great Commission of Christ through the ministry of Word and sacraments, and cultural, moral, political and social concerns in which Christians rightly engage must not be thought to determine the relationship of ecclesial communions, or allowed to become decisive in the setting of their respective agendas.
5. We affirm that Christ's prayer for unity requires vigilant patience and diligence as we seek a greater visible unity. _ We deny that this prayer refers merely to the spiritual or invisible church. We further affirm that the unity we seek is shaped, bounded, and controlled by the teaching of the canonical Scriptures, the written Word of God, comprising the Law and the Gospel in its message of reconciliation with God and new life in Christ. To this Word the church must submit and by it must correct its understandings, so that its unity will be unity in truth. The Roman Catholic Church claims to be graced with an infallibility that attaches to conciliar declarations and Papal pronouncements ex cathedra, such that these are in principle irreformable, and must be treated as decisive guides to the theological interpretation of the Bible. We deny that the defined doctrines of the church's infallibility, Papal primacy, justification according to Trent, transubstantiation and eucharistic sacrifice, and the immaculate conception and assumption of Mary, can be proved from Scripture, and we cannot accept any form of joint action that appears to imply agreement with them. Also, we deny that visible unity has been or can be achieved where a common confession of the Gospel in all its essential elements is lacking.
28
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
modern REFORMATION
6. We affirm that individual Roman Catholics who for whatever reason do not self, consciously assent to the precise definitions of the Roman Catholic Magisterium regarding justification, the sole mediation of Christ, the relation between faith and the sacraments, the divine monergism of the new birth, and similar matters of evangelical conviction, but who think and speak evangelically about these things, are indeed our brothers and sisters in Christ, despite Rome's official position. We perceive that the Roman Catholic Church contains many such believers. We deny, however, that in its present confession it is an acceptable Christian communion, let alone being the mother of all the faithful to whom every believer needs to be related. 7 • We affirm that the Great Commission of our Lord requires every Christian and every congregation to be engaged in witness to Christ, and that this is concerned not merely with conversion, but with the catechesis , nurture, and discipHne of converts. Therefore, 'we deny that is it advisable to imply that whether one is in a church where the Word is rightly preached and the sacraments are rightly (that is, biblically) administered is no longer important; and we insist that every Christian, Roman Catholic no less than Protestant, needs regular exposure to accurate, Christ, centered preaching and exposition of the Bible. © 1994
CURE
Signers of the Resolutions for Roman Catholic and Evangelical Dialog~e John Armstrong, Reformation and ReVival Ministries, 'Chicago Steve Baugh, Westminster -=rheological Seminary, Caljr,onlia James M.i3t:l)iee, T ettthRl'esf!.yteriariChurch ,PhiladeLphia Dr. Timothy Brewer, Central Presbyterian Church, St. Louis Dr. Edmund Cl()wney, Westminster Theological Seminary, · Californja The Rev. , J. higf,Jn Duncal,11 Refoj·m ed Theologica;l Semirtary, ~acksO'fl f:)r. RicHard Gat£in, Westminster Theological Seminary, California Dr. Ronald Gleason, Dii:ector of Ligonier / Canada The Rev:erend Mi,c hael J. Glodo, Reforrn,d The icalSemjnary; OdandCl Dr. W. ~0bert Godfrey! . Westm~ster Theological Seminary, California Dr. Darryl Hart, West~inster Theologicl,'ll Seminary, Philadelphia The Rev. Michael Horton, Christians United for Reforma,.E;ion, Anaheim Qt. Eral),k Jatnes\ Reforroed The61agic:al~Seminary, Orlanao ' DenFlis Johnson, Westminster Theological Seminary, California The Rev. Kenneth R. Jones, Christians United for Reformation, Anaheim Dr. Richard Land, Southern Ba~ti:st Co(),vei:ttion,Nll;tshviU~ [Jr. Art~indstey; C. S. Lewis In~tute, Washington, DC Dr. Erwin Lutzer, Moody Memorial Church, Chicago James Martin, Pennsylvania State University Allen Maw'h:\Dney, Ret<l)rmedW[he.ologkal Seminary, Orlando John Warwick Montgomery , Lutheran author and apologist, Professor of law and humanities, Uniyersity -of Lutton, En:gland Mr. John Muethe'(, Reformed ~Theologica~eminary!, Orlahdo
J§)r. :!forn Netties, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield
Dr. Roger Nicole, Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando
Dr. Ron Noel, Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando "
Dr. ]os€ p h Pf.. fipa:, Jr. " Wes.trni'hster TFl'eological Semina.ry,
Dr. RQoert Preus, Coneordia Seminary, Fort Wayne
Dr. J. 1. Packer, Regent College, VancQuver
The Rev. KirilRiddlebarger, ChJ?flstians Unitee' for Reform~tion, ~na'heim
' Dr. Rod RosetlbLadt, C~nc6rdia University, California Dr. ~. C. Sproul, Ligonier Ministries, Orland.o ' Dr. Ropert Strimple, Westminster Theological Se~inary, ~,~lifol'ni~ , Dr. WWlem Vaiif'l0Gemeren, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield Dr. David Wells, Gordon, Conwell Theological Seminary, South Hamilton" Dr. John White, Geneva Colle.~e, Beaver Falls,PA
mol'.
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
29
BookReview
The Soul of the American University: From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief, George Marsden {Oxford University Press, 1994).
Hardback, 444 pp. , $35. Reviewed by Michael Horton.
"Â
"E very one shall consider ~he main End of his life and studies, to know God and Jesus Christ, which is Eternal life, John 17:3. " It might surprise many readers to learn that this was part of the stattftes for Harvard College, founded in 1636, with the motto, I "Truth, For Christ and Church. "There are many such surprises in the new book by a veteran historian of American Christianity. Marsden charts the rise (and fall) of Protestant ortho, doxy and influence over America's academic life in fascinat, ing detail. Having broad experience with higher education, at Calvin College and now at Notre Dame, Marsden tells the story in an engaging, almost journalistic style, without compromising the subtle philo, OF sophical, theological, and socio, Ttl}; ",<' , " rIlE logical twists in the road toward secularization. UNIVERSITY What many readers of Modem Reformation will find especially in, triguing is the extent to which Christians themselves compro, mised and lent their aid to the process of secularization. It was notintentional, butusuallydriven , ' , ,,"" .' " by the passion for relevance that " , George M. ty1;:u:scien we see all too often as the motiva,
For Further Reading...
First, we recommend that you begin by reading authors directly before reading books about them; the former are often easier to read. To that end, you might want to start with a few of the inexpensive classics published in paperback by Penguin. You can find them in any secular bookstore. To learn more about the movers and shakers in western intellectual history, lOok for the "Past Mas, ters" paperback series, published by Oxford. Each book is no more than 100 pages, and it is very helpful for becoming acquainted with the best representative works.
Good Books to Start With: Adler and Van Doren, How To Read A Book (Simon & Schuster, 1972). This wonderful guide to interpreting various types, styles, and genres of literature is ex, tremely helpful. It will even help you in your reading of the Bible.
" " SO " 'U'L
Leland Ryken, Realms of Gold: The Classics In Christian Perspective (Harold Shaw, 1991). Dr. Ryken has writ,
'AMER AN
ten on the connection between the literary arts and Christianity more than any other evangelical. What is so helpful about this volume is that Ryken takes us by the hand and walks us through the classics, beginning with Homer, to Shakespeare, and Camus.
tion for the contemporary Christian witness in so many other fields. The reader is constantly reminded how easy it is for us, in hind, sight, to see the undue compromises with secular intellectual trends, and how difficult it is for us to notice them when we ourselves are making them in our time and place. Beginning with the Reformation's impetus for the renais, sance and founding of universities, Marsden takes us through the influences of Arminian, Enlightenment, and Unitarian beliefs, pointing up the significance of theological presuppo, sitions for the broader curriculum. He moves through the positive engagement with science and its seismic impact on the paradigm by which intellectuals explained the world, to the eventual displacement of theology by the secular world, view. At a time ~f simplistic "culture war" rhetoric about an alleged hostile take, over of Christian America by "secular humanists, " Marsden's thorough account should force us to recognize that ~t was often believing Christians themselves who sowed the seed~ of their own destruction and made concessions to the Enlightenment that made their institution's secularization inevitable. Here is one more lesson in how essential it is for us to understand our own Christian faith and the seriousness 'o f its intellectual rivals in any generation. 0 I
30
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
James Sire, The Universe Next Door (IVP, 1976). It goes in and out of print, but this trusty guide has been useful for many as an introduction to the competing world, views out there. If you're going to be reading modern secular authors, you should read this first in order to have some sort of a grid for analyzing the representative world, views in literature.
Other Recommended Books... Robert Bellah, et ai, Habits ofthe Heart (Harper & Row, 1985).
Harry Blamires, The Christian Mind: How aChristian Should Think
(Servant, 1978) j Recovering the Christian Mind (IVP, 1988).
Allan Bloom, The Closing of the American Mind (Simon &
Schuster, 1987).
Harold Bloom, The American Religion (Vintage, 1992).
JamesM. Boice, Mind Renewalina Mindless Age (Baker, 1993).
Richard Hofstadter, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life
(Vintage, 1962-Pulitzer Prize winner 1964) .
Ann Douglas, The Feminization ofAmerican Culture ( Doubleday,
1977) .
Michael Horton, Made In America (Baker, 1991).
J. Gresham Machen, What is Faith (Banner of Truth, 1937).
Alister McGrath, Intellectuals Don't Need God & Other Modem
Myths (Zondervan, 1993).
Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death (Penguin, 1985).
John Stott, Your Mind Matters (IVP, 1972).
David Wells, No Place for Truth, Or Whatever Happened to
Evangelical Theology? (Eerdmans, 1993); God in The Wasteland
(Eerdmans, 1994).
modern REFORMATION
.Glossary ofTerms
Aesthetics The primary focus of the study of aesthetics is upon the question of whether beauty is relative to the observer. The answer has a direct being on the practical problem of whether standards should be imposed upon the creation, appreciation, and criticism of the art works. A Christian view ofaesthetic theory differs from a secular perspective on the discipline in showing how the field and its development relate to the lordship of Jesus Christ. Ethics The inquiry into man's moral nature so as to discover what are his responsibilities and the means by which he may fulfill them. Ethics shares with certain other human enterprises the quest for truth, but is distinct in its concern for what man ought to do in light of the truth uncovered. It is not simply descriptive, but prescriptive in character. The field of ethical inquiry can be divided into philosophical, theological and Christian ethics. Philosophic ethics approaches man's responsibility from what can be known by natural reason and in respect to temporal existence. Theological ethics deals with what may be gained from the alleged insight of any given religious community as to this life or that to come. Christian ethics is the Christian instance of theological ethics. It allows that "God, after he spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets, " has "in these last days spoken to us in his Son" (Heb 1: 1,2). It weighs man's moral obligations in the light of this distinctive revelation. Epistemology The branch of philosophy that is concerned with the theory of knowledge. It is an inquiry into the nature and source of knowledge, the bounds of knowledge, and the justification of claims to knowledge. Religious epistemology is the inquiry into the nature of knowledge about God and the justification of claims to religious knowledge.
/
Knowledge The problems that are raised by the biblical revelation are chiefly two: first, what is the nature of God' s knowledge, and second, what is man's knowledge, particularly man's knowledge of himself? Perhaps the fullest summary of the biblical material on God's knowledge is found in Stephen Charnock's Discourses upon the Existence and Attributes of God. The main point in considering God's knowledge is his omniscience, that God knows himself. The idea of omnipotence, perfection, and blessedness requires God to know all things always. His knowledge is eternal. Such an immediate and uninterrupted knowledge has frequently been designated as intuitive. God sees all things at a glance, as it were. He does not learn. He was never ignorant, and he can never come to know more. Charnock says, "As nothing that he wills is the cause of his will, so nothing that he knows is the cause of his knowledge; he did not make things to know them, but he knows them to make them ... If his knowledge did depend upon the things, then the existence of things did precede God's knowledge of them: to say that they are the cause ofGod's knowledge is to say that God was not the cause of their being." Logic Distinguishing good reasoning from bad cannot be done scientifically for the ability to make distinction is presupposed by all thinkers, scientific or otherwise. The philosophical field oflogic seeks to ascertain the principles of the thought patterns one ought to follow if reality is intentionally not being reflected in one's thought or utterances. Thus logic is the normative discipline of correct reasoning as such. Praise The Bible is full of praise and adoration to God. Praise may be defined as homage rendered to God by his creatures in worship of his person and in thanksgiving for his favors and blessings. Sacrifice (Lv 7: 13), testimony (Ps 66: 1,6), and prayer (ColI: 13) are activities where praise finds expression. Praise may be public as well as private (Ps 96:3) ; it may be an inward emotion (Ps 4: 7) or an outward utterance (Ps 51: 15) It is rendered to God for his salvation (Ps 40: 10) as well as for the greatness of all his marvelous works (Rev 15:3,4). He should be praise for his inherent qualities, his majesty (Ps 104: 1) and holiness (Is 6:3) . Understanding A cognitive activity that surpasses in depth and richness any mere acquaintance with facts or events. Whereas "to know" generally signifies perception and observation in an impersonal, objective mode, "to understand" means to grasp the meaning of the phenomena that are meaningful to persons either because they are expressions of persons or because they form an important part of person's lives. To understand means to see the cause, and, effect relations and the purposes of the phenomenon into the broader context of human choices and actions. Biblical understanding is a very lively field of intellectual interest, as philosophers and theologians have come to realize rthat there is more to understanding biblical texts that merely to exegete them. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, edited by Walter A. Elwell (Baker Book House, 1984)
JULY/ AUGUST 1994
31
.:. .:. .:. .:.
W ould CALVIN recognize American evangelicalism? Like to see an evangelical and a Catholic debate Mary? More interested in the GOSPEL than the CULTURE WAR? Does GENERATION X have a theological clue?
If these are the kind of questions that get you up in the morning, then you need
to subscribe to:
Regeneration:
a journal of orthodox engagement
for • graceful polemics between Christians; • a generational twist on mere Christianity; • fresh voices on the theological, cultural, and political questions of the day.
There are a lot of NEW TAPES in the new 1994 CURE Resource ,Guide. ,
We just thought you might want to know.
Call and order one today, free of charge. 1-800-956 2644
The Official 1994 CmISl1ANSUNnm
CJL~ Resource
Guide ,....-~O'C:"W)I ..
32
JULY/AUGUST 1994
Regeneration is a quarterly journal committed to providing a venue for theological, cultural, and political issues to be engaged across the divides that often separate Christians. To Subscribe Send $14 to: The Regeneration Forum P.O. Box 587, Princeton, N.J. 08542
Consider supporting CURE today as a Friend, Innkeeper, or Architect: Join us today by calling 1·800·956·2644 Friends of CURE commit to a monthly gift of $25 or an annual gift of $250 and receive: · A copy of Putting Amazing Back Into Grace '. A subscription to Modem Reformation · A Tape, of, the- Month subscription
Innkeepers commit to a monthly gift of $100 or an annual gift of $1,000 and receive: · All the benefits given to the Friends of CURE · Gift subscriptions of Modem Reformation to five of your friends · Copies of all books published in association with CURE, as they are released during your membership year · Free admission to all CURE conferences
Architects commit to a monthly gift of $200 or an annual gift of $2,000 and receive: · All the benefits given to the Friends & Innkeepers · Invitations to special conference luncheons · A special dinner with the hosts of The White horse Inn (including a visit to the studios for a live broadcast) .
I'"
modern REFORMATION
~