As Mark has indicated, this little gig is looking at the ‘knowing ourselves’ part of the knowing God/knowing ourselves learning curve we are all involved in. One of the things that has recently surfaced again for me is the ubiquitous personality test—mostly because they have been pattering about all over Facebook like so many hobbits. So I thought it might be time to evaluate these critters again, and work out their strengths and weaknesses. Having a tool is all very well, but we need to be sure we’re using it correctly and not (to use a metaphor) digging a hole with a hammer.
Before we ask ourselves what the strengths of the personality test might be, we probably need to quickly summarize what personality tests are.
Personality tests probably fit best in the pop-psychology category, and they give us an idea of how we tick as people. Personality tests assess the aspects of ourselves that are fairly static and that make us who we are. They analyze and describe how we think and feel, and how this translates into behaviour. They are observations that certain positive, neutral and negative traits tend to group together in relatively distinct clusters. A cluster of traits tends to then be given a label. Depending on the test, the label might be ‘choleric’, ‘ESFP’, or even ‘Hermoine Granger’. Here’s my summary, based on a bit of reading and observation over the years (please note it is not by any means conclusive):
- There’s the popular ‘four humours’ type (with lots of variations), dividing people into ‘melancholic’, ‘choleric’, ‘sanguine’ and ‘phlegmatic’. These categories highlight what our behavioural tendencies are in relationships and conflict, and what we value, among other things.
- The Myer-Briggs test is different again and is fairly widely used. It gives a basic idea of how someone is wired by where they get their energy (extroversion or introversion), how they process and acquire data (sensing or intuition), how they make decisions (feeling or thinking) and how they organize their world (judgement or perceiving). A person is identified as having a stronger tendency in one of each, and each combination functions differently.
- Even tests like ‘Which character are you in a Jane Austen novel or Schwarzenegger movie?’ are similar questions to personality type tests. They might not be as precise, but they have the same kinds of concerns. In addition, our experience of life sometimes helps us create good personality type categories, which we can use to help us understand people. Mrs Marple, the famous ‘detective’ in Agatha Christie novels, is a good (if fictional) example. She determines what priorities a person might have based on who they remind her of from her past—as though she has set up a very complex set of categories of personality (intuitively) and is using these to understand people. There’s no reason why this ability shouldn’t be one that actual human beings might have.
There are variations on these, and there are others, and of course, these descriptions are far too brief to do justice to the aims of the tests.
So here’s my question: if you find out that you or someone you love is a ‘sanguine’ or an ENFP, does it really make a difference? Is there any advantage in knowing this? Part 4 will follow this post with some of the weaknesses, but here I’m thinking about strengths.
Here is my (truncated) list of strengths:
1. They help us love other people better
Not everyone is like me, and that doesn’t mean that I’m deficient or that they are clueless. What it does mean is that I have to work hard to understand them and love them to at least a certain extent, in terms they can appreciate and understand. (The weakness of this would be manipulation; we’ll leave that for the next post.) It doesn’t mean that we’ll always get it right; some personalities seem to really struggle to understand other personalities. But instead of walking away or being profoundly awkward, it gives us the tools to try and get it right. My neighbour might be a melancholy and always worried about details, but instead of confronting the worry and telling her not to, I might instead focus the conversation on positive details about something, distracting her anxieties. My other neighbour might be a sanguine who never worries about anything, including some fairly important details that could do with some attention. So I might offer to attend to some of those by doing them with her, and letting her talk throughout the entire task and doing very little of it. Frankly, I would have been completely confused as to how to respond to either woman without being able to think about who they are and their relating style (helped along by personality tests). I would not have loved them because I would not have known how to love them. With all the goodwill in the world, it is really tough to love people wired differently to ourselves. Personality tests can help.
2. They can help us get some clues as to where our besetting sins might lie
One of the merciless things about personality tests is that they often coldly and without pity list our weaknesses. Sometimes they do them in a kind of golden retriever upbeat kind of way. But I never seem to get to read those. Mine are always laid out in a damning list, and they make me cringe. But once my pride gets back up off the floor, I am encouraged by this. My heart will always tell me lies about how wonderful I am (not too wonderful, because then I would suspect something and look into it a bit more …). The truth is that I’m like everyone else: I sin and I need to repent—ruthlessly and with energy. And so these weaknesses, listed so bluntly, help me to see where that repentance energy needs to go. Sometimes the weaknesses are fairly neutral. But mostly they have a sharp edge. There is at least part of an aspect of them that God in his word emphatically rejects.
So the ‘J’ part of the Myers-Briggs personality test is judgmental, and, in some personality profiles, can be judgemental to the point of wanting to inflict the Wrath of Doom on others—particularly those with no love for organization. Matthew 7:1-4 is fairly blunt about this kind of thing. Yet a ‘J’ will always be able to justify their indignation as ‘righteous’—or, at least, less bad than the person’s sin they are currently judging. So a godly J will recognize that this weakness is normally a sin, and at that point, instead of going with a tendency that their personality often has, will learn to be humbled by finding this sin so entrenched within the deepest part of themselves. They’ll work out ways to subvert it or redirect it, deliberately repenting of it at each appearance. They’ll also learn to recognize the times it’s useful (e.g. in relentlessly doing 1 John 4:1-3), and use it in the service of Christ.
3. Personality type tests reinforce that life is not fair
This is always useful because we get sucked into the lie that life is somehow meant to be fair and easy. But some people are born with tricky personalities that seem to make living more difficult—for them and sometimes even for those around them. Yet some people have personalities that seem to open doors for them and make life easier, or at least more enjoyable, for them. It’s not a level playing field any more than life is a level playing field in terms of our sporting ability, intelligence, beauty, wealth, circumstances, strong family relationships, physical abilities, and so forth. But our lives are ruled by God, and he is wise and good, and gave us each our personalities, and will accomplish his purposes in us to glorify his Son (1 Cor 1:26-31).
4. Personality type tests can be a good place to start developing self-knowledge
Different times, places and cultures look for different traits and see slightly different patterns. As demonstrated by the frequency by which tests appear on Facebook asking ‘Which Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle character are you?’, personality is a way of thinking about ourselves that fits naturally for us at present. (Generation—Builder/Boomer/Gen X/Gen Y—and class are two other perennial ways of categorizing as well.) Generally we learn best when moving into a new area by advancing in small steps. Often this means trying to build from what we already know, and using categories of thought that come naturally to us. So with trying to develop self-knowledge, sometimes trying out a couple of personality tests can be a good starting point. Most of us tend to ‘get’ the idea that we have different personalities. A bit of investment into working out how a particular test interprets us and comparing that to some of the other distinct categories that test offers can help us begin to understand ourselves as having our own distinct set of traits—positive, neutral and negative. In addition, it can help us realize that others may experience and interact with the world very differently from us.
What do you think? What are the strengths of personality type tests?
Thank you Jennie. I am finding this series really helpful.
I think for me what is most helpful was the realisation that I wasn’t less than someone else; as an extroverted, feeling driven, judger, I had always felt less Christian than my introverted, truth driven, perceiver. I think understanding more about what God made me has made a big difference to my confidence.
In addition, I am much more aware of how overpowering my extroversion can be, and try to use it for good instead of evil (e.g. being the person who speaks up at church or bible study).
Dear Georgina,
Your experience sounds very similar to mine. But I’m an introvert, so I saw all these fantastic Christians extroverts pouring out relational energy and felt condemned that I was exhausted after just a few conversations! I agree that it is so liberating to realise that God made us and can use us as we are. And helps us to get off the merry-go-round of ‘what people think’ which is often really not helpful.
And it is excellent to hear that you are using your great power for good and not for evil. (After all, with great power comes great responsibility…)
Lol! I do try
Jennie, I did the facebook quiz “Which Mr Men character are you” and got the result
“You are Mr Lazy!
“Your favorite activity is sleeping, so u dont get much done. You should try to do more things!”
Honestly, with personality test feedback like that, I hardly felt I needed the rebuke of Proverbs 6:9.
Hi Jennie
I think I must be the personality type that likes to weigh up strengths and weakness all in one go! And please hear ‘friendly’ when you read my comments.
I am yet to be convinced that ‘personality testing’ is a valid ‘starting point’ for pursuing the goal to self knowledge. For me, this proposition seems to ignore the difficult to understand yet real link, between knowledge of God and knowledge of self represented in scripture.
Some thoughts:
Re Personality tests helping us to love better….
When I meet someone I am to love them. This will involve such things as recognising they are sinful like me, Christ died for them, they have needs and I am to try to meet them, they need to be listened to, I am to put their interests before my own, I am to speak graciously and to build them up, have their interests more important than my own….(and the list can go on and on). I can’t really see how personality (preferences) are the starting point to love. We have enormous knowledge about how to love others, it is just that we fail so often, but not primarily because of a failure to know personality types, but a failure to love our Lord.
Re Personality tests can give us clues about our besetting sins….
I’m not sure that morality is attached to any of the personality preferences in say Myers-Briggs. From memory the ‘J’ is not about judgementalism but rather ‘judgement’ in relation to the way one prefers to judge certain things and how one organises life. Please correct me if the manual says otherwise.
I suggest personality tests are generally to do with preferences of ways of thinking, decision making, judging and perceiving. None wrong or right in themselves.
Going to personality tests as a ‘starting point’ rather than scripture seems like a very dangerous route to take in regards to self knowledge.
The fact that the heart is so sick and deceitful means that I need the word of God to penetrate me. As for those in ministry, the biggest problem is faithfulness, whatever the personality preferences in matters of life. God’s power and our weakness are often linked in scripture, showing that God really is at work.
Cheers Di
Hi Jennie,
I keep forgetting to tell you and Mark how much I am enjoying and benefitting from your series! So thank you!
I agree with Di that personality tests should never be our starting point for self-knowledge, but I do think that they can be a useful complement. I keep thinking of Kirsten Birkett wrote in Case magazine:
The Bible points out to me my sinful behaviour. But it cannot identify the details of, say, what pushes my particular buttons and causes me to see red. Yet without knowledge of those particulars, I find it extremely hard to change my behaviour permanently.
I disagree slightly with Di on this point:
I agree that that’s sin at its essence—a failure to love our Lord. But sometimes I think we think we’re doing something loving for another person, but they don’t see it as such. For example, I may think I’m loving my husband by tidying up his things and putting them away. Instead, he may see that as me being a controlling fusspot who’s too concerned about cleanliness, and now he can’t find anything and that’s way more frustrating for him! (Not speaking from personal experience or anything … ;P)
In addition, there are situations when we don’t know how to love others. I think I have only learned how to love others from watching Christians do it; in my own family situation, my non-Christian parents didn’t interact much with the world, and when they did, love usually didn’t form the centre of their actions. As a result, I often struggle to know what to do or say, and have only developed the amount of other-person-centredness I have from many years of hanging out with Christian brothers and sisters.
Thanks Karen for your thoughtful response.
I have written a draft response but would like to reflect before posting. I’ll search out Kirsten’s article.
Appreciating the conversation and am very happy to be corrected and challenged.
This is an emotional topic for me having seen the abuse of personality stereotyping to do with Myers-Briggs.
Back in a while.
cheers Di
I think we are much in agreement, Karen.
I think where we might, as you kindly say, disagree slightly, is in relation to the relative importance of psychology.
The idea of identifying a sin from scripture and counselling the person to ‘go, make an effort and change’ without understanding grace, is not in scripture at all. (Titus 2:11-15). Change is always in the light of grace. Not only does grace drive us to change but it also is the source of insight (including self knowledge). The spiritual insight and discernment from the Spirit through the scriptures given for His people is often traded very quickly for ‘psychology’ (often with worldly presuppositions).
Grace shows up my ‘buttons’ more often than I care to want to see. Grace shows me my faults in a matter and gives an understanding of the sin of others. For me, the hard part is to admit I even have the sin.
In the end, I am concerned that perhaps we are too quick to give credit to psychology as our helper and go too close to robbing scripture of the credit. The Spirit is our counsellor and helper and he renews us by the word of God.
As you say, most warmly, we do learn from our brothers and sisters. They model Christ to us, they are our family and they can tick us off and help us to understand ourselves as we seek to follow Christ together. It is a beautiful thing. We should never underestimate how much we can help one another as we serve one another.
Yes psychology can have a place (not too keen on those personality tests though
but lets realise how much we can care and help one another in our difficulties (‘Grace therapy’) maintaining a scriptural view of scripture.
Thanks Di
Gordon,
LOL. I suspect that if I ever did that test I’d get “You are Mr He Who Must Not Named. You like taking over the world in wrong-headed attempts to grasp at immortality. You should try harder not to be a long-running plot device.”
Karen,
You are very welcome for the series (and the same goes for Matt and Mark who made a similar comment on the previous post in the series), we’re glad it is of some use for some people.
I think you and Jennie and I are pretty well on the same page with what you’ve written and you’ve added in some great stuff. Obviously there’s an issue with the language of ‘starting point’ which I’ll hold over to discussing the things Di has raised. Thanks for advancing the conversation so well.
Di,
My good wife is unfortunately completely tied up for the foreseeable future, so has exercised her domestic right to tag me in on the comments (hence my previous comment rather than it coming from her).
I’m glad you’ve raised the issues, as Jennie and I were brainstorming the series we thought the things you’ve highlighted were some of the ways in which a discussion might profitably move. I certainly read your words as the concerns of a ‘friend’, but if you think you need to challenge us even more seriously than that, that would be fine as well. First, though, I’d like to quickly address two specific things you’re concerned about. As is my wont, it is going to be several lengthy comments to discuss what you’ve raised.
I quite agree that personality tests can be misused. And it’s going to be a key point in my next post about their weaknesses. If you don’t think I say that well enough there, please make sure you raise it again in the comments for that post.
As far as “J” being judgemental goes, it’s an interesting one. I agree Judgement on Myer-Briggs does not mean judgemental, it means that one relates to the outside world by seeking structure and order and preferring to make decisions. However, more than once when Jennie has looked at discussions of her personality type on the Myer-Briggs schema (a type that has a J component) listed there in the weaknesses is a form of words that we look at and interpret as ‘must watch out not to be judgemental of others’. (Incidentally, if that ever was an issue for her I don’t think it is that pressing at present. But don’t tell her I said that.) So J is not judgmental, but some J-type personalities do seem to have a possible weakness to watch out for of being judgemental, that does seem to arise out of their ‘J’ness -albeit not directly.
This isn’t a great surprise to me – even without personality tests I’d noticed that people who are decisive and/or very disciplined and ordered seemed to be harsh on others not like that a little bit more frequently than such judgementalism occurred from indecisive/undisciplined people towards them. Not everyone in either camp was or was not judgemental, but there seemed to be a weakness often associated with the strength. I think Jennie’s point could be made just from observation, or even by switching schemes and appealing to the choleric/melancholy tendency to set high standards for others whereas sanguine/phlegmatic people tend to be more laid back in their approach to others.
That’s enough for a single comment, we’ll pick up yours and Karen’s common concern with the next one.
Di,
You (and Karen) question whether personalities can be a place to start developing self-knowledge.
I agree that a Christian knows themselves as someone made by God; as a sinner devoid of life and under condemnation; and as someone in Christ, justified, and a son of God, with a glory still to be revealed. Eternally speaking, that is the only self-knowledge that matters.
But some Christians know all that about themselves and yet still seem to be somewhat clueless about themselves in their concrete daily interactions with their world and with others. It shouldn’t be that way, it is incongruous, but it is a real possibility. Being a Christian and having an eternal wisdom doesn’t automatically make one wise in the more typical way that term is used in the Bible and in standard speech – the kind of wisdom that involves daily decisions and relationships.
And the converse is true. It is quite possible for people to not know God and yet still display staggering levels of wisdom and self-understanding that enables them to function well and make good decisions and treat people well. The wisdom of Solomon and Daniel is compared to that of pagan wise men and women – it is greater, but in many ways is seen to be of the exact same kind of insight that is available to any human being, believer or not.
So we have two kinds of wisdom or self-knowledge here, a sort of practical observation of patterns that occur and a supernaturally revealed insight arising out of salvation history. Both are found in Scripture; the practical wisdom is the only one that human beings can have without God, and only God’s Word can give the eternally valuable wisdom. And as Tony Payne pointed out in his very insightful comment on the first post in this series, the two kinds of wisdom are not hermetically sealed from each other. Each feeds into the other, and people (he focused on churches) that have the two dimensions engaging with each other are the ones that he finds truly impressive. (I think he muddied the waters a bit by calling the two wisdoms ‘knowledge of God’ and ‘knowledge of self’ rather than two kinds of knowledge of self, but the basic point is still clear.) In such a dynamic the eternal wisdom from the Word of God must be the senior partner, and must have the authority – there’s no level playing field between the two wisdoms. But it is the contribution of both that creates progress. Indeed both wisdoms together is arguably how it is meant to function, with the eternal wisdom giving us the framework to correctly evaluate the ‘practical wisdom’.
Given that the series is fairly clearly being aimed at Christians, who have the eternal knowledge and wisdom of themselves that can only come through the Word of God, is there some place to look at what knowledge of the self (or wisdom) can come from outside of the Word of God? I, and Jennie, would offer a resounding ‘yes’ to this: Christians can benefit from a whole host of resources that help advance our understanding of ourselves.
All that is presumed by the language of ‘starting point’. (To be honest, two years out of Sydney and we’d forgotten that ‘starting point’ is almost a technical term that was going to be a red flag for people there.)
So let me put it this way. You are a Christian with a good grasp of the gospel and what its implications are for you – both who you are, and the demands that God places on you. You think that fulfilling those demands is going to require more than just the decision to obey God – it is also going to involve making wise decisions. You can see that it is a matter of both will and knowledge/insight. And you assess yourself as needing to work on your understanding of yourself – what you are good at, what you are bad at, what sort of people you naturally ‘click’ with and what sorts you seem to struggle with and so on. None of that kind of knowledge comes from Scripture. How does one develop both the skill of knowing oneself in that kind of way and of developing actual knowledge of oneself that way? A good starting point to develop that kind of knowledge given that one already is a Christian might be personality theories.
And that’s purely because that’s a way of organising our world that comes fairly naturally to us at the moment. It’s not a starting point because it is so valuable, but because it is relatively easy – and first steps should be baby ones. “Starting point” is not always a signifier of importance, even though it often is in theology.
From what you’ve already said I think you’ll disagree with this a fair bit, so I’m going to pick up the two other big issues that stand behind this one in the next two comments. As I said at the start, I think you’ve helpfully raised some of the big issues about what Jennie and I are doing, hopefully the ensuing discussion might push us all along a bit as well.
Di,
Re Personality tests helping us to love better….
When I meet someone I am to love them. This will involve such things as recognising they are sinful like me, Christ died for them, they have needs and I am to try to meet them…<snip> I can’t really see how personality (preferences) are the starting point to love. We have enormous knowledge about how to love others, it is just that we fail so often, but not primarily because of a failure to know personality types, but a failure to love our Lord.
When you say that a failure to love a person is due to a failure to love our Lord, it seems to me that that is a way of saying that all failures to love people ultimately derive from failures to choose to love God with our whole being. That is, all ungodliness is a failure of will.
I agree that ungodliness is often a failure of will. But it is not always so. When Solomon was presented with the case of the two prostitutes each claiming the surviving child as their own the issue was not one of will. The case was so murky as to be nigh-on impenetrable. The potential for an injustice to be carried out was high, simply due to lack of knowledge as to who was the real mother. Solomon applied wisdom, not wisdom that particularly derived from his knowledge of God or the like, but insight into human nature in general that seems like it arose from astute observation. The result was a verdict that established true justice in Israel and, in the context of being done in relationship with God by faith, was genuinely pleasing to God.
Godliness is about willing the right thing. That involves both a good will, and a knowledge of what is the right thing to will in those circumstances. Good will and wrong knowledge are generally considered to be nothing more than sincerity and good intentions. One can be sincere and be sincerely wrong. And for good intentions, they often make good road-building material for highways going to infernal destinations. Knowledge is a key component of right actions.
So the question becomes, does the Bible seek to give us all the knowledge we need to make all decisions? It seems to me that, by and large, we think it doesn’t and was never intended that way. It was meant to interact with, and govern, our knowledge of the world and the combination of the two give us the knowledge we need to live in ways that please God.
I’ll offer a few examples to try and make the point concrete.
Many of us think that there is a place for marriage counsellors when a couple are facing difficulties that stem from places other than overt decisions to not love God with our whole hearts, or to not love their spouse.
Children’s work is continually in dialogue and being tweaked in light of new insights arising out of child development theory. Most of us think that is good, and would be fairly aghast to encounter a children’s ministry programme that treated four year olds as though they were ‘little adults’. It is difficult to find any clear scriptural command for our approach, let alone many of the substantial principles that distinguish children’s ministry from adult ministry. Most of the relevant knowledge comes from child psychology.
We generally recognise that missionaries need more than a knowledge of the Bible to love the people they are with. They need to know the language. They also need to know the culture. Without a knowledge of both they are significantly limited in how well they can love people there, no matter how much they grasp Scripture’s moral exhortations.
Finally, most of us hold that the real power in ministry comes from the gospel itself (Rom 1:16). But we also think that preachers should learn how to speak well in public if they don’t just naturally and intuitively take to that, and that small group leaders will be more effective if they have some training in small group discussion techniques and some knowledge about small group dynamics. We even have debates over using church growth techniques derived from advertising, psychology, sociology and management techniques. Few people seriously want to claim that someone who is completely unable to speak in public should be called on to engage in an ongoing preaching ministry. And yet the Bible does not teach public speaking techniques.
I suggest that all these are areas where we acknowledge that knowledge from outside the Bible has an important part to play in godliness and/or ministry. Very few of us will reject every single example I’ve offered as illegitimate. Sooner or later we give non-biblical knowledge a place. So I’d say that knowledge from outside the Bible is a gift from God, and should be used for his glory for the edification of his Church and that this will happen as it serves and is subject to the Word of God.
You raise another important issue about the place of grace in godliness in your more recent comment and I’ll turn to that in my next comment.
Great answers, Mark!
Hi Mark
Thanks heaps for your gracious and very thoughtful response.
I’m appreciating the conversation. It is am important topic and has many implications for how we live our lives.
I’ve gone through about 6 cups of tea (it’s ok, its green!!)and will respond as soon as I can.
Karen, that was a very short response from you – you need to drink more tea
cheers Di
Karen and Di,
Glad you guys managed to wade through all that. I’ve appreciated the conversation as well and agree that it’s a very important group of issues. Here’s my thoughts about Di’s important comment about the place of grace in the pursuit of godliness. Like the stuff before it’s meant to prompt further thought rather than be a definitive answer. So if people are inclined to take the conversation further I think that’s very warranted.
Di,
You made the points:
I want to both heartily agree with this and disagree at the same time.
I agree that grace teaches us to say no to ungodliness, and that the Cross is often used in the NT to deduce how we should live and as a motivation for us to do so. The death and resurrection of Christ, the gift of the Spirit, and the power of the Word is the dynamic that changes us more and more into the full stature of the measure of Christ Jesus. The Christian life is unapologetically supernatural or it is nothing at all.
I also think that we often trade in Scripture for worldly wisdom, although possibly not the way you suggest here. I think it happens when we apply Scripture (or exegete the implications of Scripture for people who don’t like talk of “applying Scripture”) and the application is simply contemporary wisdom being passed off as the Word of God. I am disgruntled when Titus 1:7 ’s “ not given to drunkenness” is explained as “must not drink” or “should not be the leader in drinking” by a teetotaller. I am similarly disgruntled when people try to suggest that the Bible requires mothers to stay at home and look after their children – a pattern of behaviour generally only ever common in middle class families that historically have been distinguished by their ability to not have the wife work, and their inability to hire domestic help. It’s not that I don’t think both can’t be argued on other grounds (with varying degrees of success), and that some of those grounds can relate to principles that are found in the Bible. It’s that it passes off human wisdom as though it is the life-giving Word of God.
But I think what you’ve said is too one-sided in a way that I find all too common in our circles (or at least did up until two years ago. There may have been a sea-change since then).
I would want to argue that fundamentally, it is the Law of God that teaches us what righteousness and sin is. Grace does that only because it comes in the context of Law and as the answer to the problem of the breaking of the Law. Without Law grace does not teach us to say no to ungodliness, it simply becomes cheap grace, indulgent love. Whether it is the ten commandments, the sermon on the mount, or chapters four to six of Ephesians, I learn about sin and righteousness from the commands of God. Grace confirms, and even deepens that in important ways, but it does so in partnership with God’s commands and exhortations which ultimately derive from his character and our nature as creatures in his image.
That’s enough for one comment. Let’s finish this up in the next one.
Finishing up…
To suggest that knowledge of our obligations to God and others derives entirely from grace sets us up for three related problems.
First, a difficulty to explain to non-Christians why they should do what is right. We seem to fall into the trap of thinking that right and wrong are just household conventions for living in the Church, and not genuine obligations that apply to all people. If morality derives from grace then only Christians are obligated to do right, because only Christians have been caught up by grace. And so we find it hard to say to a non-Christian ‘that’s wrong and you must not do that’. What is there in spades in the prophets’ denunciations of the nations around them is almost entirely absent in our face to the world around us.
Second, as a consequence we struggle to keep the final judgement a key element in our preaching and knowledge of God. If knowledge of right and wrong comes from grace, and non-Christians never enter into that grace, they can have no knowledge of right and wrong. So what can be judged? Certainly not their actions. And so we struggle to challenge people’s self-righteousness and complacent view of themselves as basically good people. Instead we try and put all the weight on people’s rejection of God – which only adds to the impression that the problem isn’t that they are evil doers but that God is happy to eternally punish basically good people who just happen to not believe in him.
Finally, we have to keep addressing a gut-feeling people have that what the Bible says about how we should live might be right but it isn’t good. Because we think that what we should do derives entirely from grace, and not from who we are as human beings, we don’t immediately see that what is right is also inherently good for us. We keep being tempted to think that the good life and the moral life aren’t necessarily the same. And given that sin often tempts us to choose sin because we’ll be better off that way, that’s a bad division for us to be working with.
I’d want to say that God expects people to do right simply because it is right (among a whole host of other reasons the Bible offers). And it is right because of who he is and who we are. And I’d even want to say that sometimes people can change without ‘grace’. Nineveh repented at the preaching of Jonah, and they were given no salvation history act before that repentance (except for the notification of coming judgement with no explicit mention of possible mercy). Yes, even with Nineveh I’d argue that grace was operating, but not, I suggest, in the full-blown led by the Spirit kind of way that you are highlighting. Observation shows that people can ‘get their act together’ without coming to faith in Christ. So some kind of change is possible without the Spirit, even though even it is as filthy rags to God.
This is one of the reasons why we’ve run with this series – because it sneaks up on some big issues that you’ve put your finger on and that I think we might benefit if we revisited them again. Raising the question of the place of non-biblical knowledge of ourselves (through the concrete example of personality) indirectly raises the question of the admittedly secondary but still important issue of morality as something that is not just from grace but is universal to all human beings because Christ is Lord of all.
Hi yall,
Thanks for some fruitful conversation and an enjoyable procrastination while I avoid my assignment.
Mark and Jenny, again I’m thankful for this series. It’s especially helped me think about extra-biblical knowledge theologically, whereas it didn’t have a theological place before.
A big issue this series has raised for me is how we communicate the word of God. I’m becoming more and more convinced that we focus on the power of the word of God to change people, to the detriment of using extra-biblical knowledge of people (either individuals or groups) to help in the communication.
If this is something that resonates with you I’d love to hear some of your thoughts on it.
Matt
Hi
Thanks for challenging us Mark.
Because we are created, then the greatest knowledge of the self for godliness and ministry and all of life is to know what God thinks. One’s knowledge of one’s self is to line up with God’s knowledge otherwise it is a false or deceived view of self. God is the reality check for self-understanding and he is the one from where this understanding derives. He is the only one who can fully know our hearts and minds (as the heart is deceitful).
Godliness and ministry (and everything else in life – marriage, raising children, work, going to the movies, playing sport, cooking…..) is all about living by the wisdom from the knowledge of God. The more one knows God, the more, by God’s grace, informed the self becomes.
His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire (2 Peter1)
It is God who determines what is wise and what is foolish. James reminds us that there is God-wisdom and not-of-God wisdom.
Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom. But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth. This is not the wisdom that comes down from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice. But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere. And a harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace (James 3)
God gives his wisdom generously to all who trustfully ask. When we lack wisdom about how to live we are to ask God for wisdom and read the Scripture as our first and primary response.
In relation to learning from what is around us I see no issue if we learn with the wisdom and knowledge of God. It’s God’s world and therefore his word addresses all of life.
This world is full of people busily ‘creating’ their knowledge with complete disregard for their creator. With the knowledge of God through his Word we see people with depraved minds, opposed to God, futile in thinking, darkened in understanding. In Christ, we are saved, we are enabled to live righteously and to make wise and sound judgements for living, by His Spirit and Word.
I understand Proverbs to be saying that we can’t really learn wisely from the world unless it is viewed with the fear of God in our hearts. This fear stops us from falling away from Him as we live, making judgements and decisions.
I can’t think of one decision I have had to make in my life that was not needing to be informed by scripture and hence by the cross. Of course I fail miserably to do this. Scriptures show me what is important and what isn’t important in any given situation of life. It addresses my manner, my attitudes, everything in the end. I’m happy to be challenged on this. I couldn’t think of one thing.
cheers Di
Hi Matt,
I’m glad to hear that. I think that having bits of our view of the world with no theological ‘home’ is potentially problematic in the long term. Such a-theological vagabonds can sometimes become toxic if we can’t work out how to relate them to our knowledge of God.
Just recognise that what we’ve done is little more than flag the issue and point in the general direction of where the answer might be.
To try and push forward you obviously want to have your Bible open. Then, to help direct your meditation upon Scripture I’d suggest returning to those sections of Calvin’s Institutes that I referred to in my extended answer to Tony Payne’s comment on my blog – and reading as much of the material around those sections as you need to grasp how and why Calvin is reading the Bible that way.
I’d also suggest taking up Graeme Goldsworthy’s Gospel and Wisdom. Both works are examples of good theology that address this kind of question, because both are a sustained exposition of Scripture that seek to address both specific texts and the message of the Bible as a whole.
Read and digest those works, and compare their expositions to those passages of Scripture that seem particularly germane and I think you’d be well on your way to giving this vagrant a place to live.
I’ve mulled this over today and I have to say that it doesn’t, if by ‘resonate’ you mean ‘substantially agree’. But that may be because I don’t quite get what you are getting at. If you feel up to it, and if it’ll help you get out of attending to that pending essay, you might want to write out your thoughts a bit more at length and post them in the comments here. Even if I don’t agree that doesn’t mean that the conversation between us mightn’t benefit both of us and whoever else might read it.
Di,
Thanks for your follow-up. I’m going to reflect on it overnight and possibly all of tomorrow before posting a response. Thanks for being part of conversation I’ve found quite stimulating.
Hi Di,
I can’t quite work out from your latest comment whether you think I am in denying something that needs correction or whether you are simply wanting to restate clearly the central role of the Word and the Spirit in the Christian life as the discussion has focused on issues outside of that and you think it’d be good to just put that peg in the ground firmly again. Either way, I think it’s a valuable contribution – I’m just going to have to cast my net a little wider in my response to try and cover both angles.
I want to sign off on everything you say up to the quote from James about two kinds of wisdom – the wisdom from above and the wisdom from below. At that point I’m not sure that James himself would think that his ‘wisdom from below’ is the same as my ‘non-Biblical wisdom’ – which seems to be the direction your comment was moving. I’d suggest that his ‘wisdom from below’ is closer to what the rest of the Bible calls ‘folly’.
Here’s three examples of wisdom from other parts of the Bible:
I don’t think that James would recognise any of these ‘wisdoms’ as having anything much to do with either of the two ‘wisdoms’ he is speaking of, except tangentially.
“Wisdom” and “knowledge” are categories with a whole range of meanings and objects in the Bible. The use of common words suggests that they do relate to each other, but I’m not sure we can just go to James, see that James speaks of a wisdom from God and a wisdom not from God and think that is the same as wisdom from Scripture and wisdom from observation. All true knowledge and genuine insight comes ultimately from God irrespective of how we got it. God is the giver of every good gift (James 1:17) – not only those good gifts that come through the Bible. There is a wisdom that is opposed to God root and branch. And there are wisdoms that God gives generously to various people – even his enemies. And there is a wisdom that comes only from faith in Christ by the Sprit. And as Tony said, they aren’t hermetically sealed off from each other, even though they need to be distinguished from each other.
And again, in case I haven’t yet made it clear enough. Wisdom from Scripture, whether it is theological self-knowledge of myself as a sinner and a son of God, or whether it is observation wisdom from Proverbs, is the word of God. It has a life-giving nourishment and an absolute authority that means it illuminates the path of life and rules over all other knowledge and wisdom from other sources.
Once again, that’ll do for one comment. I’ll take up your final three paragraphs next. It’s going to be pretty heavy going I think, but I think it’s beyond me to communicate it any better than what is going to be there.
Di you said:
Here are five possible examples of decisions that might not particularly involve Scripture:
1. When you are thirsty do you quench your thirst?
2. What colour socks should you wear today?
3. Does 1+1=2?
4. Are you a man or a woman?
5. Do you exist?
I wonder if whatever issues between us might be in your words here – and are hinted at in my five putative examples above. If so, we are going to have move into some relatively deep territories to address them. It seems to me that you are raising the question of whether my view that people can know the right action and do it without faith in Christ, Scripture or the work of the Spirit is a denial of total depravity – the idea that we are sinful through and through and need God to act upon us to enable us to see what is right and to do it.
Assuming that is the case, let me try and place what I think the issues are by putting down some basic pegs with two of the thirty-nine articles:
Everything done outside of faith in Christ is sin. That’s the basic point here. Let’s take the following extreme example:
According to Article 13, if that was the only act that person did in their entire life they would deserve to go to Hell for it. That act, done by someone at enmity with God and enslaved to sin, the devil, and the world would be sufficient grounds for eternal condemnation. As the article says: Works done before the grace of Christ are not pleasant to God but have the nature of sin.
In this, the article is capturing the implications of passages such as Isaiah 64:6
“All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.”
So even good acts by an unbeliever are sin and deserve damnation.
The situation is similar but different for believers and we’ll turn to that in the next comment.
Again, picking up the thirty-nine articles:
Everything done by faith in Christ is still absolutely riddled with sin and deserves God’s condemnation. Let’s return to the example:
According to Article 12, if that was the only act that person did in their entire life they would deserve to go to Hell for it. If God determined their destiny based upon that act, they would be eternally condemned. That act, done by someone who has faith in Christ and expresses that faith in saving another’s life at the cost of their own ‘cannot endure the severity of God’s judgement’. Sin is still so pervasive even in the believer’s good works that those good works cannot stand on their own before God’s jugement.
Nonetheless, unlike the case of the unbeliever, God is well-pleased with such acts. And this is because he accepts them in Christ and only for that reason. Even as Christians our actions can only please God because of their connection to Christ himself, they aren’t ‘good’ outside of that relationship.
Again, without going into all the Scripture behind it, I heartily agree with this article and state that it is a great exposition of the Bible’s teaching on that point. And this is a big part (although not all) of what is generally referred to as ‘total depravity’ – we are sinners through and through.
Hopefully, you and I more or less agree on these points and I’ve made clear that want to strongly affirm total depravity. So we’ll finish this comment here and move to where I think the disagreement is in the following one.
Finishing…
Di,
In the paragraphs I’ve quoted you seem to be implying that your experience suggests that people cannot know right from wrong in any sense without the Bible and cannot do what is right in any sense without the Spirit and the Word.
Hence, what appears to be discomfort with my sketching out a place for the non-Biblical wisdom. You seem to be saying that all such wisdom is the product of people who don’t fear God and so cannot have any real wisdom about the world, and who create a ‘wisdom’ that is erected in denial of God and thus cannot be trusted.
I’m used to this way of thinking in discussions with some creationists who seem to see ‘science’ the same way. Same issue, different players – which, just goes to show how important the issues you’ve raised are for us at the moment.
If that is the issue, I want to say quite strongly that I fundamentally disagree. A person can make all kind of good decisions even as a wicked sinner.
A person can work out that they exist, that they should keep themselves alive by quenching their thirst, that they are a man or a woman, that they should lose their life to save the life of a baby.
Those are all good things. And unbelievers see and do them all the time.
Human beings are evil. Really, truly, wickedly evil. But we’re still not all sadistic torturing serial killers who can’t even make 1+1=2. Even among the ranks of the evil, some actions are more evil than others.
Our Lord said:
Even evil human beings treat their own children with basic kindness and concern. Most parents don’t go out of their way to torture and kill their own kids. Those that do are generally condemned by others – even without the benefit of the Spirit and the Word.
We are evil. Truly, desperately evil. But we aren’t absolutely evil. I don’t leave the house every day terrified that some random non-Christian will push me in front of a passing truck. I tend to just assume that, even without God, they’ll recognise that that is wrong and choose not to do that. They don’t earn credit with God for that, but it’s still something, God sees a difference between ‘pushing in front of a truck’ and ‘not pushing in front of a truck’ even for unbelievers. There are actions that are unheard of ‘even among the pagans.’
Or take Paul’s instructions in Romans 13: 3-4
Rulers are God’s servants to bring punishment on wrongdoers. Given that in chapters 1-3 of Romans Paul has already articulated what Articles 12 and 13 try to capture – that everyone of us is a wrongdoer – does Paul envision that rulers exist to violently execute every single human being? I’d suggest no.
At one level, everyone is evil and a wrongdoer.
At another level we recognise that some people are wrongdoers, others are basically decent citizens, and still others get publicly honoured for acts of bravery or dedicating their lives in service to others.
It seems to me that you are wanting to completely reject the distinction that Romans 13 makes between sinners and run only with the kind of evaluation summed up in the articles.
I agree, if parents, being evil, do usually give their children snakes and stones and God wants governments to use the sword on every man, woman and child then the world is nothing but a place of evil and corruption.
But that’s not the whole story of the Bible’s view of our wicked human race. God still continues to give good gifts even to his enemies. And I’d want to say that this extra ‘bit’ is where non-biblical knowledge of ourselves fits in.
The Bible is not the only source of knowledge and Christians are not the only people who know anything at all. The Bible is the ruling source of knowledge and the only source of knowledge of God.
There’s a whole raft of things that can be known that God graciously makes available to all human beings. And Christians are to use them in the service of Christ and to the glory of God.
Hopefully that might make clearer what I am and am not trying to say and why.
in Christ,
Mark
Hi Mark,
I haven’t had the time yet to reply, but I’ll endeavor to do so in the next day or two.
Matt
Hi Mark
Re decision making and scripture informing all of life:
When you are thirsty do you quench your thirst?
Yes, as long as it is not at the expense of my thirsty brother standing beside me. It’s like that for lots of things – do I take the big or little bit of cake? What is my motivation for anything in regards to my actions?
What colour socks should you wear today?
Some days they would be white to obey my employer (or I could be rebellious), be loving and don’t wear red ones because my husband doesn’t like red socks; or be influenced by fashion mags; and some days it would not matter what colour. The scriptures have informed me of what matters matter here.
Does 1+1=2?
Yes, that knowledge is a reflection of how God orders his world.
Next two were harder…because I did not decide, did I?
Are you a man or a woman?
I am a woman – God made that decision. You grow in awareness of it rather than decide. And the scriptures inform me hugely about what this means as I live as one.
Do you exist?
Yes, because I was created to exist. I did not decide this, but grew in awareness of it. And the scriptures inform me hugely about what this means, especially in regards to purpose.
Do my answers help in seeing where I’m coming from?
Thoroughly agree on total depravity.
I do think people know what is right to do – they just fail to do it.
And I do think they have some ‘wisdom’. But I would think their wisdom is God given. (God cares for all – the rain falls on just and unjust)
I heard an interview yesterday with a well known architect and he said that it took him ‘effort, love and suffering’ to design and see his buildings completed. I thought quite a bit about what he said. However, I sought to understand his underlying philosophies because if I just adopted those as my next motto for a task I might find I just absorbed a whole lot of appealing, yet not Christ honouring, approaches to my work. Does this make sense?
Same in the marketing world – there is heaps and heaps of advice floating around about how to grow whatever….and much of it sounds pretty good advice. But when I sit and analyse critically, as best I can in the light of scripture, I am often shocked about how unwise in God’s eyes some (not all) of the strategies are. (Some I would adopt, some I would change and many I wouldn’t use.)
Definitely not down the line of Christian worldview approach which demands a Christian teacher to teach my kids maths. (Similarly some Creationists views).
You’ll be pleased to know that I thoroughly agree with your statement:
There’s a whole raft of things that can be known that God graciously makes available to all human beings. And Christians are to use them in the service of Christ and to the glory of God.
I think there is a real danger in how we adopt and use any knowledge and understanding around us. It must always be with the wisdom that comes from our fear of God. I suspect I probably don’t have a category of biblical and non-biblical knowledge/wisdom. The wisdom and knowledge in our world is all from God. I’m a happy user. However it may be used wisely or unwisely. So we must be alert to all that would lead us away from Christ and his glory. Such is happening in many churches in Australia from what I hear and read.
It’s all God’s world, so when my kids walk on the netball or rugby field they are encouraged to be generous in spirit towards others appropriate in the context. The scriptures provide all we need for living God’s way in the face of all that is in the world. It’s very liberating really, knowing that in every situation God’s word informs and directs. The foolishness comes in when we fail to live by his word, trusting the works of our hands rather than trusting Christ. We mustn’t be unwise to a world opposed to its creator.
I think as churches and in our home culture we must be very careful to not blindly absorb the culture that is opposed to God, with its values that lead our families away from Christ.
So I’m thinking we are encouraged from scripture to think of only two wisdoms…the one that comes from God and the false or deceitful wisdom (Jeremiah 4:12 They are ‘wise’ – in doing evil! But how to do good they know not).
How to live by the wisdom from God is the challenge. We have to have the wisdom from God (Word of God and Spirit) to be able to interact with all knowledge that we are confronted with to work out what is wise in the eyes of God. Therefore for me to use a personality test I would want to be aware of any underlying philosophies, assumptions and presuppositions in order to evaluate the wisdom or necessity of using it.
Thanks brother
Di
MISS Marple, puh-leeze!
As a character she does illustrate Jennie’s point well.
Di
Mark, thanks for your reply.
I could have been clearer in what I was getting at before. I’ll try to expand a bit more.
I should acknowledge first, that that my sweeping statement,
“We focus on the power of the word of God to change people, to the detriment of using extra-biblical knowledge of people (either individuals or groups) to help in the communication”,
was too sweeping. There are lots of places we do well at implementing the extra-biblical knowledge in our communication of God’s word.
Also, (and not to justify a sweeping statement) I think there is a significant point which we don’t do well at when communicating God’s word, and perhaps the overemphasis in my statement just quoted is a window into how significant I feel this is. I’ll try to explain what I think this significant point is.
When we’re communicating the word of God I think we tend to do poorly at seeing and engaging with the issues behind the person (why they do what they do/ say what they say). We don’t anticipate well what people may think and what barriers they may put up. Consequently, instead of connecting the word to people (issues, barriers, pre suppositions and all), we preach the word and expect that it will connect itself to people.
For example,
When we hear a sermon from 1 Cor 6, we hear: flee sexual immorality; it’s despicable; it’s like uniting Jesus with a prostitute; don’t do it! All good things to hear. However, none of these directly engage with the reasons someone might be sexually immoral. Eg. I might not have a high view of holiness; I might not hate the sin of sexual immorality; I might not trust God that he will give me a husband/wife in the future and so try to take what he hasn’t given and may not give to me; I may not trust that God knows what is best for me and so do what I think is best etc. If the preacher doesn’t do the homework regarding what his audience is struggling with, then, even though they may have been encouraged from the Scriptures, they’re all still going to go home and struggle.
Another example,
Every time I’ve been part of a discussion about talking to non-Christians about Jesus, one of the main questions posed is: “how do I bring every conversation back to Jesus?” This, of course, must be what we do in big picture terms. However, this also seems to be what we try to do in the nitty gritty. So sometimes we end up having to do awkward conversational gymnastics to get from Labradors to Jesus. Tongue out of cheek, even if a loved one asked a question like “do you think I’m going to hell?” it’s not an opportunity to jump at two ways to live. We need to understand what the source of the question is for our loved one. Perhaps they are just wondering what the bible says about why one goes to heaven or hell – and so two ways to live might be appropriate. But what if the source of their question is “does my loved one love a religion more than me?” To engage with them, we need to do a bit of work around understanding what’s going on for them before we launch into a recited answer.
I acknowledge that this issue isn’t one that you’ve discussed here, but it’s one your series raised for me. So I hope it’s not too bad that I raise it here :D
Also, Mark and Di, you were talking about the two kinds of wisdom from James and the biblical and extra-biblical knowledge. Where does natural revelation fit in to your frameworks?
Matt
Di, thank you for coming to Jennie’s defense. Unfortunately, David McKay doesn’t only have her in his sights, he’s also got her on radar, under satellite surveillance and being tracked by a couple of other fancy modern military targetting systems.
The character’s name is Miss Marple, not Mrs Marple and, as Jennie pointed out to me as she began ritual flagellations over this, being a spinster is absolutely critical to Marple’s character. Hence, I take it, David’s “puh-leeze”.
I don’t think Jennie could be any more disgusted with herself if she’d been caught saying anything nice about Charles Dickens or the Bronte sisters.
Definitely worth a good supportive husbandly chuckle this morning.
Di,
Thank you for your recent comment responding to my three ‘page’ epistle-like comment, I think it’s moved us forward again.
It seems to me that your actual practice (with the architect and marketing approaches) seems to be fairly close to what Jennie and I are advocating, but there are a couple of secondary but (in this case) significant differences in our theological understanding – and those seem to have a big effect on what each of us are advocating.
So you reject any idea of a Christian culture. But you also state that Australian culture is the enemy:
You say that you don’t want to say that only a Christian can teach maths. But you also argue that you only recognise that 1+1=2 as a reflection of the world that God made. That’s surely saying that there’s a Christian way to do maths, isn’t it? Not even 1+1=2 without Scripture? (Incidentally, I really enjoyed your answer about the socks question, but I think your answers to the others bring us to the same point as your answer about 1+1=2.)
I’m not sure why you think a non-Christian can teach maths properly if we are not even supposed to decide that 1+1=2 without reference to the Bible.
And when you say:
Then I really can’t see any place for non-Christian maths teachers. They’ll see what they should do (teach maths) and ‘just fail to do it.’
I suggest that if you are going to say that we aren’t going to do Christian maths, then you are going to have to say something positive about Aussie culture, and say something positive about non-Christians’ ability to do something right.
It’s similar with the issue of the wisdom. You begin by saying that non-Christians have some wisdom and that it graciously comes from God. You then say:
And finish by saying that Scripture encourages us to think in terms of just two wisdoms in the James sense.
I find it hard to bring all that together.
If Scripture wants us to think in terms of just two wisdoms (divine and diabolic) than either that is really what is the case, or Scripture wants us think something that is wrong.
But if there’s only two wisdoms and you don’t have a category for nonbiblical wisdom, and you think all the nonbiblical knowledge and wisdom in the world is from God, then that would mean nonChristians all have the wisdom from above – and you don’t seem to want to say that (and I’d agree with you).
So I have a problem with your theological approach to ‘wisdom’ which advocates only James’ two categories as the ones we should operate with.
We’ll finish here and conclude in the next comment.
concluding…
I think this issue of dealing with nonbiblical wisdom is the key issue.
I agree with your observation made a couple of times, but this example is representative:
I mightn’t be quite as hard on Aussie churches. We might be in days of small things, but I think the gospel continues to be the power of God among evangelicals. Just like with the seven churches in Revelation, the removal of the candlestick is a real possibility in many places, but ‘twas ever thus and always will be until our Lord returns. Our constant cry is “Lord I believe, help my unbelief!”
Nonetheless, I agree with your basic point.
How we deal with ideas coming from a world that is at war with God is a test of faith. A test that individuals, churches, denominations and movements have failed; a rock that they have smashed upon.
Let culture and even true and right human wisdom dictate and you have Liberalism. That seems to be your big concern, if not in those words, and I agree with it.
But “Just say no” (or “nein” if you’re German) is no answer either. It is the equivalent of advocating asceticism: of constantly fasting to avoid gluttony, rejecting property ownership to avoid greed, rejecting marriage to avoid sexual immortality, and rejecting alcohol to avoid drunkedness.
It has a form of wisdom but no power to produce genuine godliness, because it is a strategy based on a lack of confidence in God – it is a lack of faith, even as liberalism is outright unbelief. It avoids worshipping the creation rather than the Creator, but still falls short of receiving everything good with thanksgiving and using it in God’s service. And in this, is still a failure to confess that God is truly Creator: “We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth, of all that is, seen and unseen. It avoids Liberalism for Gnosticism.
Which is why I think Tony Payne’s observation is so helpful. There’s two ways to fail, and only one way to live on this matter. We have to meet the challenge head on.
And that means we all have to do what you do – look at each thing case by case and say ‘yes’, ‘no’, and ‘yes here but not there’. We need to be aware of presuppositions behind something, of whether it fits with the actual world we live in and how it is to submit and serve the Word of God.
And to do that, I’d suggest that we need to have a place for non-biblical wisdom and a place for total depravity in our theology.
in Christ,
Mark Baddeley
Matt,
I’ll get to your recent comment probably Monday my time. I have an important exam ensuing and my available time is contracting rapidly. Really enjoyed reading it, and am looking forward to talking the issue over with you.
Ahh, Mrs Marple, Miss Marple’s mum, was the reason for her daughter not marrying. She broke up a youthful affair and Miss Marple cried for a week This explains her low view of men that surfaces on occasions! Her view of men was from an unspiritual mind! lol
Mark, I’m sorry I can’t interact more thoroughly with your mind as it deserves.
However all this is very helpful for me as I think through how I live my life. Thank you for your patience. Hope your exam had a question on wisdom in it!
I’d like to put out the dot point challenge. Hoping I can challenge you to do likewise!!
I’m going to try and put my logic steps down and then I might see my faulty thinking.
1. All people are created by God
2. All people are living in God’s world, whether they acknowledge this or not
3. All people rebel – all depraved
4. All people see and hear and experience all the same things in the material world – observations, knowledge, skills. (All knowledge is a gift from God- it is the human mind struggling to understand the world that God has placed him in, whether they acknowledge God or not.)
5. Non-Christians are users of God’s wisdom but they are not wise. Any correct observation a person makes is simply an observation of the wisdom of God by which he created the world. Christians are to wisely observe.
6. Christains, by the grace of God, have the knowledge of God and therefore perceive all things radically different compared to those who don’t.
The Psalmist sees the mountains and sees the handiwork of God (wisdom).
Christians see Jesus and see Lord and Saviour (wisdom) while others don’t.
7. Christians can give thanks and enjoy the creation (including all knowledge, skill in its various forms eg music by Beethoven, art of Lloyd Rees, dark chocolate and the 1+1 genius, and even blue socks) Others will enjoy, use and ‘create’ (albeit often differently) this knowledge of the creation but not give thanks to God.
8. However Christians with the knowledge of God are not to ‘learn the ways of the nations…for the customs of the people are vanity’ (Jer 10) They are to recognise wisely that ‘every man is stupid and without understanding’ (Jer 10). So we are not to be wise in our own eyes, not to worship what we create with our hands and minds. Enjoy yes, but live wisely, not in folly, using, ‘creating’ but not worshipping such things.
9. With the revealed mind of God (Word, Spirit) we can live wisely and therefore differently. We are to observe, draw conclusions and make decisions and live in the same world as the non-Christian but with the mind of Christ. The scripture gives us all we need for life and godliness
10. So there are two cultures (fear-of-God culture and the no-fear-of-God culture) and the two ‘wisdoms’ correspond with these cultures.
11. The Word of God is essential and sufficient for all of life and godliness. God speaks directly of many things that we are to do and not do. They are the best way to live in this creation. Such knowledge of God also equips those in Christ to live in the reject-God culture. We don’t reject the material world (we know its Gods, we don’t reject ideas and creations of non Christians but we do make judgements and critique ideas so that we continue to live wisely, fearing God.
Proverbs 1:7
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge;
fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Proverbs 9:9-11
Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be still wiser;
teach a righteous man, and he will increase in learning.
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom,
and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight.
For by me your days will be multiplied,
and years will be added to your life.
12. There is no wisdom apart from God.
cheers Di
Hi Matt and Di,
With my ensuing exam on Thursday my time, I think I’ll have to hold back on responding to you both until after it is over. My apologies for that, but expect something a day or two after Thursday.
in Christ,
Mark
Hey Mark. I know you’re busy. Just wanted to say that when you do get some time I’m still keen to hear your thoughts!
Matt