Skip to main content

Brain Bypass Surgery

Having recently moved. My wife and I were visiting churches looking for a place to call home. One of my big surprises was how much sentimentality and emotion pervades the ministry of worship and the word. Worship and sermons often left me feeling as if I had underwent brain bypass surgery.
It is apparently, not just a local phenomenon.  Just today a friend and colleague forwarded me an email he received that is designed to entice the recipient to sign up for a webinar on Christian witnessing. The lead in line for the webinar was that a famous Christian apologist came to faith by first making an emotional decision, and then later backed it up with reason. The email went on to say that nearly every buying decision is made emotionally not intellectually. So of course I need to learn to bypass the mind and appeal to emotions, which the webinar would teach me to do.
I understand and even appreciate the emotional aspects of faith. Yet, the idea that I need to first get someone to make an emotional commitment to Christ, and only later help them find reasons for their faith is not only manipulative but it is unbiblical. Why? First, I think there is a false dichotomy here. But hold it, big word alert! What is a dichotomy? It is just a fancy way of saying that the two things being compared, in this case emotion and reason, are opposed to each other or entirely different. So a false dichotomy is one in which two things are made to oppose one another, when they really don't.  In other words, emotion and reason are not opposed to each other. Instead we find that emotion is to be controlled and informed by reason. Joshua was told not to fear because God was with him (Josh. 1:9), Ruth was told quell her fear because Boaz would be her redeemer (Ruth 3:11), Joseph was to set his fear of taking Mary as his wife aside because her conception was a work of the Spirit, and of course Jesus told His disciples to rightly fear God because He can destroy both soul and body (Mt. 10:28). Note the pattern here; fear was to be controlled by reason. I think that is the relationship between emotion and reason throughout the Bible. Emotion is to be subject to reason, not the other way around.
Second, when God invites His people into communion He appeals to their minds first. Check out Isa. 1:18 where God says “Come now, let us reason together…”. When Paul visited synagogues on his missionary journey the Bible does not say that he appealed to their emotion. Instead it says that he reasoned with them (Acts 17:2, 18:4). In fact the Bible says that the noble-minded responded to Paul by examining the scriptures and comparing them with what Paul said, that is they thought through what they had heard.  Lastly, Jesus gave a warning about those who have a strong emotional response to hearing the word preached. He said that the person who hears the word and immediately receives it with great joy is the one who is rootless and his reception of the word is only temporary (Mt. 13:20-21).
Now, don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that our apologist friend isn’t deeply rooted in the word with an enduring faith. By God’s grace I pray he is. No, what I am saying is that this is not the way the Bible tells us to engage with others. The example we see in the Bible is definitely not people making emotional appeals to “buy” the Gospel of salvation by faith alone in Christ alone.  Rather, we see a simple and hopefully winsome appeal to consider the facts of God’s grace and align our emotions, and worldview, accordingly.
By the way if you are privileged to fill a pulpit please respect the people who you shepherd enough to make an appeal to the whole person: mind, emotion, and will.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No Need to Mind the Gap

The “Gap Theory” of Gn. 1:1-2 holds that there was an indeterminately long gap of time between Gn. 1:1 and Gn. 1:2.  During this period of time Satan fell, a pre-adamic race populated the earth, sin entered into the world, and God brought judgment in the form of a flood on His original creation.  Gn. 1:2 therefore is not an account of original creation but rather an account of the re-creation of the earth. This view was held Thomas Chalmers, Franz Delitzsh, Arthur Pink.  Some early dispensationalists such as Arno Gaebelein,  C.I. Scofield and Lewis Sperry Chafer.   Sweetnam and Magnum in their work “The Scofield Bible: Its History and Impact on the Evangelical Church” believed that the gap theory was adopted by Scofield as a way to reconcile the emerging evidence of an old earth, with the biblical account of creation.   Three arguments, syntactical, contextual, and historical are usually advanced to support a gap between Gn. 1:1 and Gn. 1:2. First, syntactically some con

Spiritual Poison: the Many Faith Destroying Mistakes of the Jesus Project

If you have been following along with my posts you will have noted a long list of the errors of the Jesus Project.   In this post I will revisit some of those and point out some others.   Certainly, the staff of the Presbyterian Community Church of the Rockies are aware of these problems.   So, you may ask, why would they invite the error laden Jesus Project to present the faith sapping results of their poor scholarship to the body of Christ in Estes Park?   The only explanation possible is that they too share the same anti-Christ agenda of the Westar Institute.   That brings me to the first of their mistakes: Agenda Drive Scholarship.   As I pointed out in my first post, the founder of the Jesus Seminar started out with an explicit agenda to undermine orthodox Christianity.   In fact, in 1998 Funk explained his vision for the future of the faith in a paper entitled The Coming Radical Reformation .   Here is one of his assertions: “The resurrection of Jesus did not involve the r

A Nation with No Land? Give Me a Break!

The relationship between God, Israel, and the land has been a topic of theological and geo-political significance since the establishment of the Abrahamic Covenant in approximately 1900 B.C.   With the birth of the modern state of Israel on 14 May 1948 questions about God, Israel, and the land have taken on new urgency for both politics, academia, and the popular press. Politically, Israel’s right to occupy their biblical homeland is under diplomatic and military assault.  In the academy, recent studies deny that God has made an eternal promise to provide and preserve a homeland for Israel.  In addition, books aimed at a popular audience, blogs, and ministry leaders are also denying that God has committed Himself to the preservation of a land for Israel. Politics, academics, and culture converge every two years at the Christ at the Checkpoint Conference .   Munther Isaac is the driving force behind this conference.  Here is how he describes it: "In this conference we c