Stephen W. Hiemstra's Blog, page 258

Benner Cares Spiritually Through Dialogue—Part 2

David G. Benner. 1998.  Care of Souls: Revisioning Christian Nurture and Counsel. Grand Rapids: Baker Books. (Goto part 1)

Review by Stephen W. Hiemstra

An important motive for writing my book, A Christian Guide to Spirituality, was the observation that the current fascination with spirituality has neglected the traditional teaching of the church. The Apostle’s Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, and the Ten Commandments outline the details of Christian spirituality, but the deeper insights in them have been lost. The idea, for example, that idolatry (forbidden in the Ten Commandments) involves setting anything other than God as the first priority in one’s life and is potentially life threatening seems lost on most Christians. The traditional teaching of the church defines Christian spirituality.

David Benner takes a similar approach. In his book, Care of Souls, he devotes essentially the first half of his book—Part 1: Understanding Soul Care—to defining the boundaries of soul care—what it is and what it is not.

For example, Benner’s definition of Christian spirituality has 9 points.  Christian spirituality:

“Begins with a response of the call of Spirit to spirit
Is rooted in a commitment to Jesus and a transformational approach to life
Is nurtured by the means of grace
Involves a deep knowing of Jesus and, through him, the Father and the Spirit
Requires a deep knowing of oneself
Leads to the realization of the unique self whom God ordained we should be
Is uniquely developed within the context of suffering
Is manifest by a sharing of the goodness of God’s love with others and in care for his creation
Expresses that goodness in celebration in Christian community” (95).

Instead of leaning on church teaching in his definition as I had, Benner prefers to capture the essence of Christian spirituality in his own words.

Capturing the essence of Christian spirituality is surprisingly hard work.  For example, In my own walk point 5 was the most surprising. If we are indeed the temple of God’s Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:19-20), then it should be obvious. But I did not understand the importance of self-care in caring for others until I was well into seminary.  The lesson here is that we must each struggle to define and refine our understanding of God and ourselves.

Part of the reason spiritual development is hard work is that our whole person—conscious and unconscious—is involved. Benner sees our conscious self as the self of “thought, volition, and behavior” (159)—a kind of aspirational self. The unconscious self is basically everything else—stuff not chosen (or not admitted) but nevertheless part of us.  In this sense, Benner writes: “Religion is the achievement of the consciousness; spirituality is the gift of the unconscious.” (160) Working on the unconscious (or shadow) side of our personality according frees us and leaves us better integrated persons, but it also means that we must probe deeply into aspects of our history and life that we have worked hard to suppress from others, but successfully suppressed mostly from ourselves.

The bondage that we experience from our history primarily inhabits our unconscious.

I remember clearly an incident one morning the hospital emergency department in 2012. I met with a young woman who had recently lost a pregnancy in a spontaneous abortion. During the first 20 minutes of our conversation, we connected and the visit went well. Pretty soon, however, we began experiencing a role reversal. I was no longer ministering to her; she was ministering to me. Visiting with her reminded me of a pregnancy that my wife, Maryam, and I had lost about 20 years prior that I had not properly grieved. Emotions welled up in me that I was entirely unaware of. I had to break off my visit with young woman and I ended up in the chapel in tears for a good long spell. My unresolved pain in losing a child prevented me from ministering properly to the woman in the emergency department.

Uncovering repressed grief is not easy.  In talking about such spiritual work, Benner writes:

“To be useful for psychospiritual growth, journal writing needs to focus on inner life, that is, on such things as feelings, fantasies, reactions, intuitions, vagrant thoughts, troubling attitudes or behaviors, and puzzling experiences.” (163)

Benner is particularly interested in dreams which have the potential to connect us with our unconscious selves.  He compares an unexamined dream to an unopened letter (173).

A lot more could be said about this book.

David Benner’s Care of Souls is an interesting and transformative text. I highly recommend this book to pastors, other Christian care givers, and Christians who want to be spiritually sensitive in their ministry and open to their own spiritual development.

Questions: Have you ever been hijacked by an unconscious emotion?  How did you respond? Do you feel that it constrained your conscious choices?

A friend of mine is fond of saying:  wherever you go, you show up!

Benner Cares Spiritually Through Dialogue—Part 1

David G. Benner. 1998.  Care of Souls: Revisioning Christian Nurture and Counsel. Grand Rapids: Baker Books. (Goto part 2)

Review by Stephen W. Hiemstra

One distinctive of biblical faith is that each human being is created in the image of God (Gen 1:27). One practical implication of this image doctrine is that when you speak with someone, it is like speaking to God himself.  In fact, many times God speaks to us through the people around us. A second practical implication is that each and every human has intrinsic value in the eyes of God.  Between the hint of the divine and this intrinsic value, everyone has an interesting story to tell—if one takes the time to listen.

In his book, Care of Souls, David Benner implicitly understands and accepts the doctrine of the image.  He writes:

“Care refers to actions that are designed to support the well-being of something or someone. Cure refers to actions that are designed to restore well-being that has been lost.” (21)

One only cares for something of value.  In this case, we are talking about souls which he defines as:

“soul as referring to the whole person, including the body, but with particular focus on the inner world of thinking, feeling, and willing.” (22)

This is the Hebrew understanding of soul (nefesh or נַפְשִׁ֖י) which is quite distinct from the Greek understanding from Plato which divided a person into body and soul, which were truly divided (11).

This body and soul unity is important in Benner’s thinking especially when he delves into the distinction between the conscious and non-conscious parts of our inner life.  He writes:

“Caring for souls is caring for people in ways that not only acknowledge them as persons but also engage and address them in the deepest and most profoundly human aspects of their lives.  This is the reason for the priority of the spiritual and psychological aspects of the person’s inner world in soul care.” (23)

While the cure of souls focuses on remedy for sin; care of souls focuses on the need for spiritual growth (28).

Benner sees 4 elements in care of souls:

Healing—“helping others overcome some impairment and move towards wholeness”,
Sustaining—“acts of caring designed to help a hurting person endure and transcend” a challenging situation,
Reconciling—“efforts to reestablish broken relationships”, and
Guiding—“helping people make wise choices and thereby grow in spiritual maturity” (31-32)

I used to use the analogy of two soccer players working with each other to succeed in their game play and taking care of each other.

Benner offers 6 helpful principles (he calls them conclusions) defining soul care. “Christian soul care”…

“is something that we do for each other, not to ourselves.”
“operates within a moral context.”
“is concerned about community not just individuals.”
“is normally provided through the medium of dialogue within the context of a relationship.”
“does not focus on some narrow spiritual aspect of personality but addresses the whole person.”
“is much too important to be restricted to the clergy or any other single group of people.”

 This last point is important—the idea of Christian friends is fundamental in Christian discipling. In fact, the first book by Benner that I read and reviewed was focused on this point.

Another key point is that the focus in care of souls is on dialogue between equals before God.  Benner distinguishes 4 types of interpersonal discourse:

Debate—“a civilized form of combat…has a focus and implicit rules that encourage participants to stick to the understood topic”. (134)
Discussion—“involves the advocacy of ideas and positions with resulting winners and losers” .(134)
Conversation—“involve the exchange not just of facts and arguments but also of feelings, values, and construals” but not to the extent and with the mutual trust required for a dialogue. (135)
Dialogue—“shared inquiry that is designed to increase awareness, understanding, and insight” among mutually trusting individuals. (131)

This focus on dialogue distinguishes soul care from psychiatric care where true dialogue is not possible, in part, because the talking is more of doctor-patient conversation between two parties that are inherently not equal. Dialogue is the preferred discourse in soul care because healing, sustaining, reconciling, and guiding are able to take place only when trust is present.

Dr. David Benner works and lives in Canada.  He describes himself as: “an internationally known depth psychologist, wisdom teacher, transformational coach, and author whose life’s work has been directed toward helping people walk the human path in a deeply spiritual way and the spiritual path in a deeply human way.”  He has held numerous faculty positions and written about 30 books [4].

Benner writes in 11 chapters divided into 2 parts.  These chapters are:

Part 1:  Understanding Soul Care

What is Soul Care?
The Rise of Therapeutic Soul Care
The Boundaries of the Soul
Psychology and Spirituality
Christian Spirituality

Part 2:  Giving and Receiving Soul Care

The Psychospiritual Focus and Soul Care
Dialogue in Soul Care
Dreams, the Unconscious, and the Language of the Soul
Forms of Christian Soul Care
Challenges of Christian Soul Care
Receiving Soul Care

These chapters are preceded by acknowledgments and an introduction.  They are followed by notes and a topical index.

David Benner’s Care of Souls is a transformative text.  Although some of these ideas here appear elsewhere, many of the discussions are uniquely Benner. For example, Benner goes a lot further than many authors in offering a theological underpinning to soul care, integrates the therapeutic ideas better than other authors into his care, and spends more time in explaining the usefulness and uniqueness of dialogue.  I highly recommend this book to pastors, other Christian care givers, and Christians who want to be spiritually sensitive in their ministry.

In part 1 of this review, I have given an overview of Benner’s book.  In part 2, I will dig deeper into some of his more interesting ideas.

Question: Do you think that soul care is possible outside of a therapeutic relationship?  Why or why not?

 

This intrinsic value provides the philosophical foundation for human rights. In the absence of this theological doctrine, the secular interest in human rights is a philosophical orphan easily forgotten.

Or body, mind, and soul.

 See (Benner 2003) Also see review:  Benner Points to God (http://wp.me/p3Xeut-u3)

[4] www.DrDavidGBenner.ca

REFERENCES

Benner, David G. 2003.  Sacred Companions: The Gift of Spiritual Friendship & Direction.  Downers Grove:  IVP Books.

 

 

 

Prayer Day 40: A Christian Guide to Spirituality by Stephen W. Hiemstra

Espera verano 2015

Loving Father. You clothe the birds that neither spin or reap (Matt 6:26). You send the rain and the sunshine on the just and the unjust without discrimination (Matt 5:45). You make the day and the night to bless us with activities and with sleep (Gen 1:5). We cast our obsessions and addictions at your feet. In the power of your Holy Spirit, heal our relationships and soften our hearts that we might grow more like you with each passing day. In Jesus’ name, Amen.

Padre Amoroso, vistes las aves que ni siegan ni recogen (Mt. 6:25-26). Envías el sol y la lluvia sobre justos e injustos sin discriminación (Mt. 5:5). Haces el día y la noche para bendecirnos con actividades y sueños (Gén. 1:5). Lanzamos nuestras obsesiones y adicciones a Tus pies. En el poder del Espíritu Santo, sana nuestras relaciones y suaviza nuestros corazones para que podamos crecer más como Tú cada día. En el nombre de Jesús oramos. Amén.

Living Out Our Faith

“The earth is the LORD’s and the fullness thereof, the world and those who dwell therein,

for he has founded it upon the seas and established it upon the rivers.

Who shall ascend the hill of the LORD? And who shall stand in his holy place?

He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul

to what is false and does not swear deceitfully.” (Psalm 24:1-4 ESV)

By Stephen W. Hiemstra

Reducing tension with a holy God sometimes increases our tension with an unholy world.

In his book, UnChristian, Davide Kinnaman (2007, 29-30) cites 6 themes in non-Christian skepticism about Christians:

1. Hypocritical. We say one thing and do another.

2. Christians are: “too focused on getting converts.”

3. Homophobic. “Christians are bigoted and show distain for gays and lesbians.”

4. Sheltered. Christians are: ”old-fashioned, boring, and out of touch with reality”.

5. Too political. Christians: “promote and represent politically conservative interests and issues.”

6. Judgmental. People doubt that “we really love people as we say we do.”

Thinly veiled behind each of these criticisms is a concern about Christian holiness. For example, if we are say that we are Christian and act like everyone else, especially when it comes to matters of sexuality, we are seen to be hypocritical, not holy. Or, if we live out our faith, then our live style is taken as judgment on those that do not. People know who we are.

When one discusses holiness issues within the church, one is frequently jabbed with the question—where is the grace in your worldview? In view here is the passage from the Gospel of John:

“For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.” (John 1:16-17 ESV)

Here grace and law are seen as opposing each other. Two points can be made about this passage.

Grace is a divine attribute and often used as a synonym most of the time for divine forgiveness, as in the forgiveness conferred on us by God through Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.  In its concreteness, the law aids in holiness being helpful in educating in righteousness, in law enforcement, and in outlining holiness in daily living, according to John Calvin (Haas 2006, 100).
Grace and truth (law is a kind of prescriptive truth) go together. Almost no one in this context brings up the second part—truth. The idea of objective truth—God’s truth—is not a popular idea these days, but it is a precondition for any kind of serious scientific inquiry [1].

The Apostle Paul also provides interesting comments on this question. He writes:

“What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means![2] How can we who died to sin still live in it?” (Romans 6:1-2 ESV)

Grace is not an excuse for a libertine lifestyle. We are accountable for our actions and non-actions [3].  Law helps maintain our accountability.

The Law of Moses is often divided into two parts: the holiness code and ceremonial law. Because the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans in AD 70, the ceremonial law could no longer be fulfilled. Consequently, when Jesus said:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.” (Matt 5:17 ESV)

Jesus’ fulfillment is, in part, a replacement of the ceremonial law that could no longer to fulfilled in the absence of the temple. But the holiness code itself—especially the prohibitions against sexual immorality—was never abolished or abrogated.  For example, the Council of Jerusalem in AD 50 removed the requirement that a person become a Jew before becoming a Christian, but reaffirmed the prohibition of sexual immorality for gentile Christians, the primary complaint today against the holiness code (Acts 15:19-20).

If you think that the holiness code is obsolete, consider the clean up in New York City that occurred in the 1980s. Two criminologists, James O. Wilson and George Kelling, started the clean up with what they called the “broken windows” theory. They argued:

“Crime is inevitable result of disorder. If a window is broken and left unrepaired, people walking by will conclude that no one cares and no one is in charge. Soon, more windows will be broken, and a sense of anarchy will spread from the building to the street if faces, sending the signal that anything goes. The idea is that crime is contagious.”

So New York City waged a war on broken windows and graffiti in the neighborhoods and subway. Minor infractions of law were not tolerated. And crime throughout the city began to fall precipitously to everyone’s surprise (White, 2004, 158).

The broken windows theory is to cities what the holiness code is to individuals.  King Solomon famously wrote of the “little” sins:  “Catch the foxes for us, the little foxes that spoil the vineyards, for our vineyards are in blossom.” (Song 2:15 ESV)  Make your bed; brush your teeth; sweat the details. Little things matter—they form and reflect your attitude.

What we do and how we conduct ourselves matters. As Christians, we need to be a good example to our families and those around us—especially when it hurts. Who is going to honor God and our marriages if we do not?

We need to live into the faith that we have in Christ.

[1] The existence of one set of physical laws in the universe offers interesting insight into the question of God’s existence.

[2] Wallace (1969, 482) writes: ”Obviously Paul’s usage of μὴ γένοιτο [by no means] is not the same as Luke’s. Here it indicates, as it usually does, his repulsion at the thought that someone might infer an erroneous conclusion from the previous argument.” Greek instructors love this phrase (μὴ γένοιτο) because it is an example of the rare optative mood not readily found in English.

[3] The “we” here makes an important point. Christians are to pursue holiness; holiness is not a requirement that we impose on others. Requiring others to pursue holiness leaves us open to the charge of being judgmental cited earlier.

REFERENCES

Haas, Guenther H. 2004. “Calvin’s Ethics.” In The Cambridge Companion to John Calvin, 93–105. Edited by Donald K. McKim. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kinnaman, David with Gabe Lyons. 2007. UnChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks About Christianity…and Why It Matters. Grand Rapids: BakerBooks.

Wallace, Daniel B. 1996. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

White, James Emery. 2004. Serious Times: Making Your Life Matter in an Urgent Day. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press.

Elliott: God’s Emotions Inform Our Emotions, Part 2

Matthew A. Elliott. 2006. Faithful Feelings: Rethinking Emotion in the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic and Professional. (Goto Part 1)

Review by Stephen W. Hiemstra

In the 1960s when I grew up, boys were expected to fight their own battles.

Back then I almost always won playground fist fights. It was not because I was particular big or strong; it was not because I had not learned karate; it was not because I looked for fights. The chief reason that I won was because I kept my eyes open and thought about what I was doing. Most bullies that picked a fight with me closed their eyes and swung as hard as they could. Their emotions were in full control and they lost. I won, in part, because my fighting strategy engaged my emotions and thinking more equally.

Differences in attitudes about the role of the head and the heart existed also in the ancient world. In his book, Faithful Feelings, Matthew Elliott divides his comments among Greek philosophy, the Old Testament, and the New Testament (NT).  In each of these contexts, remember the distinction between the cognitive theory of emotion (we get emotional about the things that we believe strongly) and the non-cognitive theory of emotion (random, unexplained, or physiological reactive emotions).

Greek Philosophy. The Greek philosophers held a range of views about emotions.

For example, Plato’s division of the body, mind, and soul allowed later Stoics to divide the emotions from thinking—“passions were produced in the irrational part of the tripartite soul” (59-60). Things like magic arise as ways to manipulate these impersonal and irrational forces (61) and fear of emotional and irrational Gods was thought to account for unexplained suffering the world (62).

In contrast to Plato’s tripartite division, Aristotle divided the person into just body and soul and believed that even the appetites of the body were subject to reason (hunger’s object is food) and intelligent behavior was open to reasoning and persuasion (66).

Old Testament. Perhaps because the Hebrew mindset promoted unity of heart and mind, the Jewish attitude about emotions differed fundamentally from Greek thought.

Elliott (82) writes: “The righteous base their emotions on the knowledge of God.”  For example, the Hebrew word verb for to know (יָדַע) includes a much greater range of meanings than in English—“Emotional ties, empathy, intimacy, sexual experience, mutuality, and responsibility are all encompassed with the usage of this word” (82). Elliott observes that: “Prayer in the Psalms is not a ritual to conjure up emotion but, rather, a heartfelt cry based on beliefs about God and the world.” (83)  In other words, in Hebrew thought we see an integration of “knowledge and emotion…[which] includes knowledge that is heartfelt and emotional” (83). For example, Elliott (85) observes that biblical love is always a command—an odd idea if you believe love is just a warm and fuzzy emotion— and it is a manifestation of obedience to God which the most basic daily prayer in Judaism, the Shema, makes clear:

“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.” (Deut. 6:4-5 ESV)

Here love is commanded and we find unity not only between the body and soul, but unity of God himself. Elliott (123) writes that:  “Israel’s God was emotionally stable.”  Heart and soul are words which simply emphasize different aspects of the unified person.

King Solomon (123) summarizes God’s emotional stability best when he writes:

“For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven:

a time to be born, and a time to die;

a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted;

a time to kill, and a time to heal;

a time to break down, and a time to build up;

a time to weep, and a time to laugh;

a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

a time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together;

a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;

a time to seek, and a time to lose;

a time to keep, and a time to cast away;

a time to tear, and a time to sew;

a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;

a time to love, and a time to hate;

a time for war, and a time for peace.” (Eccl. 3:1-8 ESV)

Elliott (115) concludes that “In Judaism emotion was a good thing…”

New Testament.  Elliott begins his analysis on emotion in the NT by noting a great deal of confusion and, as a result, errors in the literature about the nature of emotion.  He cites 4 errors:

Mistakes in interpreting vocabulary or emotion words;
Mistakes made in exegesis due to misinterpretation of emotion;
A general neglect of emotion in NT studies; and
A pervasive non-cognitive understanding of the emotions (125).

One mistake that he highlights is the use of the Greek word for heart, kardia (καρδία).  Much like the Hebrew word for heart (לִבּ), kardia has a wider range of meaning that in the English where the focus is narrowly on emotions.  Kardia “connotes the integration of mind, will, and emotions” (130).  Likewise, references to the mind (νοῦς) have a wider range of meaning in Paul’s work than the narrowly focused Greek mentality would suggest (132).  For Paul, heart and mind were words used for emphasis in a unified (holistic) person, not to suggest Platonic or Aristotelian division of the person.

This holistic view of the person leads to new insights into the meaning implied by the words of emotion.  For example, Elliott writes:

“What is love? I agree with Aquinas, Arnold, and other leading theorists that love is most general an attraction towards an object.  This attraction is the result of seeing a quality in an object that is good, valuable, or desirable. This definition is the only definition which will allow love to function as the root of all other emotions…” (135).

Notice how knowledge of a person is tied in with love of that person.  I may love someone who is hideously ugly because I understand that they had a horrible accident or because they are extremely kind or because they are a close friend or relative.

Thus, when Jesus commands us to love—“You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Mark 12:31 ESV)—he is using an emotion word, love, but he is not focused on commanding an emotional state (141).  Elliott writes:

“Emotions tell us the truth about what we believe and what we value. When the NT commands emotion it is exhorting the believer to have the values and beliefs out of which godly emotions flow.” (143).

The idea here is that in loving a person we are to treat them as worthy of love and as members of the family of faith.  This is not a warm and fuzzy kind of emotional state.

Clearly, there are a lot of details to go over in Elliott’s exhaustive inventory of emotions in the NT.  Elliott summarizes writing:  “Emotions are a faithful reflection of what we believe and value.” (264).

Matthew Elliott’s Faithful Feelings is a book that I have referred to this book frequently in my writing and speaking since I read it first in 2012. This book is of obvious interest to pastors, lay leaders, and seminarians interested in current controversies. Elliott makes an important contribution to the discussion of how to understand emotions in the Bible and to develop a better balance between head and heart in our faith.

Question:  How do you feel about this cognitive theory of emotion? Do you think that emotions and intellect really inform each other? How does this inform your attitude about theology?

Elliott: God’s Emotions Inform Our Emotions, Part 1

Matthew A. Elliott. 2006.  Faithful Feelings: Rethinking Emotion in the New Testament.  Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic and Professional.(Goto Part 2)

Review by Stephen W. Hiemstra

Do you think that Jesus practiced emotional intelligence?

In emotional intelligence training we learn that complete communication has 2 parts:  the information being communicated and the feeling attached to it. Excluding one part or the other leads to confusion and misinterpretation . Information communicated in concrete examples is easier to remember than abstract examples. Short stores communicate ideas and emotions better than long explanations. Body language often reveals our true feelings, even when we are not entirely truthful with ourselves.

In his book, Faithful Feelings, Matthew Elliot examines scripture’s descriptions of God’s use of emotions with special emphasis on the New Testament (NT).  He writes:

“This book attempts to apply modern studies dealing with emotion to the NT. But it is not primarily about the vocabulary of emotion: anger, love, joy, hope, jealousy, fear, and sorrow. Instead, it is about emotion itself, how it was perceived by the writers of the NT, and what role they thought it should play in the life of the believer” (14-15).

While this subject is very timely, it is not new. Theologian Jonathan Edwards (2009, 13), writing in 1746 about the effects of the Great Awakening, noted that both head and heart were necessarily involved in effective discipling. Thus, he coined the phrase “holy affections” to distinguish the marks of the work of the Spirit from other works and associated these holy affections directly with scripture.

Elliott distinguishes 2 theories of emotions:  the cognitive theory and the non-cognitive theory. The cognitive theory of emotions argues that “reason and emotion are interdependent” (47) while the non-cognitive theories promote the separation of reason and emotion (46). In other words, the cognitive theory states that we get emotional about the things that we believe strongly. Our emotions are neither random nor unexplained—they are not mere physiology. Elliott writes: “if the cognitive theory is correct, emotions become an integral part of our reason and our ethics” (53-54) informing and reinforcing moral behavior.

The implications of this discussion are far reaching for the church. If my emotions reinforce and inform my thinking, then work on either side can help me understand my own priorities.  Reflection on my emotions can then help me organize my thoughts which may otherwise be inconsistent for lack of priority.  Likewise, theological reflection aids my emotions in being more consistent, more “even tempered”. Fellowship and Bible study in the church can, of course, aid in this process because healthy thinking and healthy emotions go hand in hand. The balance of heart and mind is therefore an obvious goal to reach Edward’s ideal of holy affections.  The bodily resurrection of Christ reminds us that we are both body and spirit—a denial of the Platonic duality of body and soul—which is another allusion to the unity of heart and mind.

Matthew Elliott received his doctorate in NT studies from the University of Aberdeen and is currently the president of Oasis International in Chicago, Illinois which makes Bibles available to the poor in English speaking parts of the world . Faithful Feelings is written in 6 chapters:

What is Emotion?
Emotions in the Greco-Roman World.
Emotions in Jewish Culture and Writings.
Emotion in the NT: General Analysis, Love, Joy, and Hope.
Emotion in the NT: Jealousy, Fear, Sorrow, and Anger. and
Emotions in the NT: A Summary Statement.

These chapters are preceded by acknowledgments, abbreviations, a list of books of the Bible, and an introduction and are followed by a bibliography, an index of names, and index of biblical references.

Elliot (90, 238) observes that emotions must have an object and that our evaluation of the morality of a particular emotion depends on its object. For example, Elliott (214) reports that the only passage in the NT where Jesus gets angry occurs in the story of the healing of the man with the withered hand:

“Again he entered the synagogue, and a man was there with a withered hand. And they watched Jesus, to see whether he would heal him on the Sabbath, so that they might accuse him. And he said to the man with the withered hand, Come here. And he said to them, Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do harm, to save life or to kill? But they were silent. And he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, and said to the man, Stretch out your hand. He stretched it out, and his hand was restored. The Pharisees went out and immediately held counsel with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him.” (Mark 3:1-6 ESV)

In the story, Jesus asks the Pharisees if it is right to do good on the Sabbath?  In other words, is Sabbath observance more important than caring for one another?  Their unwillingness to answer incensed Jesus and he gets angry because of the “their hardness of heart”. In his anger he heals the man.  The object of Jesus’ anger is accordingly a hardened heart—in other words, a righteous object of anger.

Matthew Elliott’s Faithful Feelings is a book that I have referred to this book frequently in my writing and speaking since I read it in 2012. This book is of obvious interest to pastors, lay leaders, and seminarians interested in current controversies. Elliott makes an important contribution to the discussion of how to understand emotions in the Bible and to develop a better balance between head and heart in our faith.

In part 1 of this review, I have provided an overview of Elliott’s work.  In part 2, I will dig more deeply into his analysis.

Did Jesus practice emotional intelligence? Jesus’ extensive use of parables and object lessons, like the washing of feet, in his teaching suggests that Jesus was an expert at communication and fully understood the role of emotional intelligence in effective communication.

Question:  Do you suppose that the observation that post-moderns often hold inconsistent views is more a consequence of choice (decision by emotional response) or simply the result of insufficient time for reflection?  What do you think?

 

This is often the source of problems interpersonal communication via electronic media—even the most carefully crafted email can be misunderstood.

http://oasisint.net/about/boardstaff.

{ God likewise gets angry over sin:  “The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the LORD regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart.” (Gen 6:5-6 ESV)

REFERENCES

Edwards, Jonathan. 2009. The Religious Affections (orig pub 1746). Vancouver:  Eremitical Press.

 

Prayer Day 39: A Christian Guide to Spirituality by Stephen W. Hiemstra

Espera verano 2015

Almighty God, gracious savior, spirit of truth. We praise you for being the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6). Grant us a discerning spirit to know the truth and a gracious spirit for sharing it. To you and you alone be the glory. In Jesus’ name, Amen.

Padre Todopoderoso, Salvador Misericordioso, Espíritu de Verdad, te alabamos por ser el camino, la verdad, y la vida (Jn. 14:6). Concédenos un espíritu de discernimiento para conocer la verdad y un espíritu misericordioso para compartirla. A ti y sólo ti sea la gloria. En el nombre de Jesús oramos. Amén.

Prune, Intensify, and Apply

“You have heard that it was said, You shall not commit adultery. But I say to you that

everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that

you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell.” (Matt 5:27-29 ESV)

By Stephen W. Hiemstra

When Jesus says “Blessed are the pure in heart”, three actions come into view: to prune, to intensify, and to apply.

Prune. Jesus says later in the sermon on the mount: “If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away.” (Matt 5:29) In case you are hard of hearing, he repeats the idea again in the next verse: “And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away.” (Matt. 5:30 ESV). Pruning consists of removing the sin from your life.

Jesus is serious about pursuing holiness and he assumes that it is hard work. Think about the analogies that he employs—tear out your eye, cut off your hand. These are not easy actions to take. Eyes and hands are part of the body—parts of us. Still, when our lives are threatened, amputation is a acceptable option. If sin were no big deal, the analogy might have been to trim your nails or cut your hair.

Intensify. Jesus does not water down the requirements of the Mosaic law, he intensifies it. In his comments about adultery, he discounts the actual commission of the the act and focuses on the corruption of the heart. The sin begins, not with the act, but with a lustful look or intent. Billy Graham reminds us:

“What does this word adultery mean? It is derived from the same Latin root from which we get our word adulterate which means’corrupt; to make impure or to weaken.” (Graham 1955, 78).

If sin begins in the heart, then purity of heart is an absolute necessity in pursuing holiness, but more is required. We must not only avoid sin, we must focus our desires on Christ. The Apostle Paul writes:

“But that is not the way you learned Christ!–assuming that you have heard about him and were taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus, to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.” (Eph 4:20-24 ESV)

We must actually practice godliness [1]. Paul admonishes Timothy to “train yourself for godliness” (1 Tim. 4:7 ESV) and so must we.

Apply. If the heart and mind both make us a unified person, then all of us is affected when we pursue holiness and practice godliness. In the Hebrew mindset it makes no sense to talk about faith being separated from action. When James, the brother of Jesus, writes:

“But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror. For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like. But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.” (James 1:22-25 ESV)

James would almost certainly share Jesus’ assumption that unity of person implies unity of faith and action. In fact, one meaure of sin in this context would precisely be the amount of sunshine between what we say and what we do. After all, Jesus was the first one to use the word, hypocrite, to mean two-faced—saying one thing and doing another [2]. Prior to Jesus, an hypocrite was an actor on the Greek stage.

This unity of faith and action reflects the unity of our Triune God whose love is simply a reflection of his person [3].

So we must prune, intensify, and apply if we are to be pure in heart and see God.

 

[1] Bridges (1996a, 7) writes: “The Pursuit of Holiness [also a book title] dealt largely with putting off the old self—dealing with sin in our lives. The Practice of Godliness [also another title] focuses on putting on the new self—growing in Christian character.

[2] “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence.” (Matt. 23:25 ESV)

[3] “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.” (Deut. 6:4-5 ESV)

REFERENCES

Bridges, Jerry. 1996a. The Practice of Godliness. Colorado Springs: NavPress.

Bridges, Jerry. 1996b. The Pursuit of Holiness. Colorado Springs: NavPress.

Graham, Billy. 1955. The Secret of Happiness. Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, Inc.

Kinnaman: An Unfiltered View of the Church, Part 2

David Kinnaman with Gabe Lyons.  2007. UnChristian:  What a New Generation Really Thinks About Christianity…and Why It Matters.  Grand Rapids: BakerBooks. (Goto Part 1)

By Stephen W. Hiemstra

For most of my life, certainly before I entered seminary, I was very self-conscious about sharing my faith even in church. Part of the issue was that I did not feel good enough to be a Christian and that my trials and tribulations somehow disqualified me from being one of those “more perfect” Christians. I felt “judged” as a Christian but what I did not realize is that I was projecting my own insecurities on other people. And my doubts were—by no means—original. It was not until I was encouraged to teach Sunday school that I started to realize how unoriginal my doubts and insecurities really were.

A very helpful tool that David Kinnamen uses in UnChristian is to set his 6 unflattering perceptions of Christians in opposition to aspirational perceptions that would be more helpful.  Below is the list.

 

“Perception: Christians say one thing but live something entirely different.

New perception: Christians are transparent about their flaws and act first, talk second” (41).

 

“Perception:  Christians are insincere and concerned only with converting others.

New perception:  Christians cultivate relationships and environments where others can be deeply transformed by God” (67).

 

“Perception: Christians show contempt for gays and lesbians.

New perception: Christians show compassion and love to all people, regardless of their lifestyles” (91).

 

“Perception: Christians are boring, unintelligent, old-fashioned, and out of touch with reality.

New perception: Christians are engaged, informed, and offer sophisticated responses to the issues people face” (121).

 

“Perception: Christians are primarily motivated by a political agenda and promote right-wing politics.

New Perception: Christians are characterized by respecting people, thinking biblically, and finding solutions to complex issues” (153)

 

“Perception: Christians are prideful and quick to find faults in others.

New Perception: Christians show grace by finding the good in others and seeing their potential to be Christ followers” (181).

 

While it is hard to argue with these suggestions, such ideas are often quickly transformed into a new job description for pastors who are, in effect, competing with the best that Hollywood and Madison Avenue have to offer in crafting sophisticated brands, complete with state-of-the-art music and videos. Think of the insecurities that might arise in comparing oneself, not with the guy in the next pew as I did, but with the talents of a television evangelist or musician.

Let me look a minute at Kinnaman’s big 3 complaints—Christians are homophobic, judgmental, and hypocritical.

Homophobic. Kinnaman agrees that Christians have not practiced what they preach when it comes to homosexuality. They have not hated the sin and loved the sinner.  The perception outside the church is that God hates homosexuals (110).

Kinnaman makes a very interesting observation. In the second and third centuries, Christianity made great inroads in the Roman empire because during the outbreak of epidemics, they stayed to care for the sick at the risk of their own lives. Early in the AIDS epidemic (1970-80s), the majority of Christians refused to be involved and, in fact, proclaimed God’s judgment on homosexuals. This is not a trivial image problem—people still remember (110).  Its like Christians have discarded their cross [2].

In this context, Kinnaman’s new perception—“Christians show compassion and love to all people, regardless of their lifestyles” (91)—was a fairly radical assertion in 2007 when this book was published and still remains controversial among many Christian groups. He was not, however, excusing homosexuality; he was only advocating that it be treated on par with other hard sins, like alcoholism, drug addiction, sexual addition, divorce, abortion, and so on.

Judgmental.  Kinnaman asks: “Are we perceived to be a loving group of people?” Here we see strong diversity of opinion which seems to be scaled by the intensity of involvement in the life of the church. The percentage of those believing that the church is a loving community are:  pastor (76 percent), born-again Christians (47 percent), churchgoers (41 percent), and outsiders (20 percent) (185). Ouch!

Kinnaman’s discussion of judgment errors is insightful.  He cites 4 errors in judgment:

Coming to the wrong conclusion. For example, judging people by their outward appearance.
Having the right judgment but at the wrong time.
Having the wrong motivation—we should be motivated by love.
Expressing favoritism (187-189).

Kinnaman offers these suggestions:

Listen more, talk less.
Do not label people.
Don’t pretend to know all the answers.
Walk in the other person’s shoes.
Be genuine.
Offer friendship without an agenda (194-195).

A lot more could be said here.

Hypocritical. It is indeed ironic that Christians should be considered hypocritical because Jesus was the first one to use the word, hypocrite, to mean two-faced [3].  A hypocrite in the Greek was an actor. Kinnaman makes the point that young people are cynical in general and expect us to be hypocritical just like everyone else.  The problem arise is that Christians are perceived to be self-righteous about their hypocrisy (49).  Consequently, Kinnaman’s advice to be transparent about your flaws and “act first, talk second” takes the edge off of this criticism (41).

David Kinnaman’s UnChristian is an insightful and interesting read.  Pastors, lay leaders, and seminarians will find his research helpful. On a more cautionary note, I hope that the results do not encourage Christians to despair of engaging people for fear of offense.  A common concern among pastors, for example, is that they live in a glass house and never have any down time.

Insecurities are still a challenge for me.  Even thought I am a pastor and talk about my faith all the time, my insecurities still show up when I am tired or when I need to share my faith in Spanish.  My tendency to over-prepare for talks is, in part, because of these insecurities.

Question: Are you shy about sharing your faith?  Are there particular situations that are more difficult? What would help you get over your reluctance to share?

 

This is reality that is hard to avoid. For about 10 years, my mother-in-law, who spoke only Parsi, lived with us. She was an angel and I miss her greatly—she taught me most of the Parsi that I know.  What was her favorite show on Sunday morning?  Joel Osteen (www.JoelOsteen.com). She loved the music.

[2] “Jesus told his disciples, If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” (Matt  16:24 ESV)

[3] The need to practice holiness stands behind this criticism.  The famous words of Jesus are taken from the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew’s Gospel: “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, Let me take the speck out of your eye, when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.” (Matt 7:1-5 ESV)

Book Giveaway on Amazon.com: A Christian Guide to Spirituality (Ends August 12, 2015)

Available on Amazon.com

During the next week, I am giving away 10 copies of A Christian Guide to Spirituality  through random selection.

Thank you for following T2Pneuma.net!

To participate in the giveaway, click here.

 

Edición Hispana espera en agosto 2015.