Schaeffer begins laying the foundation for much of what he has to say in this first chapter of the book/film. He is going to be dealing with the thought life or the presuppositions that we all have, although, for the most part we have caught them like a “child catches the measles.” His claim is that “the inner thought world determines the outward action.
He then applies this reasoning to the decline of ancient Rome. He attributes the fall of Rome not to outward circumstances, but to their inner thought life. Their reference point, that is, their gods were just not sufficient to the task. He says, “A culture or an individual with a weak base can stand only when the pressure on it is not to great.” (Did anyone think of our Lord’s words in Matt 8:24-27?)
In the Institutes Calvin says, “…no man can survey himself without forthwith turning his thoughts towards the God in whom he lives and moves.” Calvin’s claim is that no man can truly know himself apart from a knowledge of God.
The conclusion is that Rome fell because they did not have true self-knowledge. They lacked this knowledge because their gods were really just projections of themselves. Their knowledge was autonomous. They were their own standard.
Christians, however, reference themselves to the infinite, personal, triune God revealed in scripture. Their standard is ‘outside’ them and is the norm of all norms.
It is very easy make comparisons with the situation that Schaeffer describes of ancient Rome and today. Do you think these comparisons are valid? Do we have a ‘crisis of knowledge’ today?
randy
Posted in Schaeffer, epistemology.
By admin
– June 20, 2009
In our progress through Joel Beeke’s Living for God’s Glory we now come to the topic of total depravity, or as some prefer radical depravity, radical corruption, or pervasive evil. To deal with this topic we need a thorough understanding of sin, its nature, and how it has affected us in our relationship to God as well as our ability to comply with His just demands.
The following quotations, taken from What Is Sin by David Powlison give us some starting points for our discussion of sin. I encourage you to read carefully the full article. In just three paragraphs it lays a foundation for our contemplation of the nature and effects of sin.
First, people tend to think of sins in the plural as consciously willed
acts where one was aware of and chose not to do the righteous
alternative.
But sin also includes what we simply are, and the perverse ways we think, want, remember, and react.
Sin – the desires we pursue, the beliefs we hold, the habits we obey as second nature – is intrinsically deceitful.
Sinners think, want, and act sinlike by nature, nurture, and practice.
Have you thought about sin in these ways before? How do these descriptions of sin apply to the regenerate?
randy
Posted in calvinism.
By randy
– November 30, 2008
I came across this post on Justin Taylor’s blog Between Two Worlds. Our discussions, as we began Joel Beeke’s Living for God’s Glory, coupled with Thanksgiving have brought the words ‘Puritans’ and ‘Calvinists’ to your hearing repeatedly. The essay linked in the post helps to give us an even a broader understanding of the nature of the Puritans than Joel Beeke can in the opening chapters of his book. As we move along in the book, however, and see the thought and practice of the Puritans in greater detail we will have a better understanding of the essay. The Puritan practice as described in the essay will be seen to flow from the Puritan and Calvinistic doctrine. This is not ‘deeds, not creeds’ but the biblical order of deeds flowing from and out of our creeds. We saw this pattern echoed when we studied the Heidelberg Catechism. Our deeds or good works, done in thankfulness and described in the Decalogue, were a response to what we had learned of God’s work for us as expressed in the Apostle’s Creed.
As you can see, Between Two Worlds, is listed in my blogroll. When I get in off the road it is one of the first sites I check. The site is never stale and is broad enough in scope that I can almost always find something that relates to what has been brewing in my head while I have been gone. I highly recommend it.
randy
Posted in calvinism, puritans.
By randy
– November 28, 2008
A quote from Michael Horton form his article Sloth
It is not only that we do not think enough; we do not love enough and–more importantly, we do not love the right things. C. S. Lewis writes, “Our Lord finds our desires not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition, when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.” The church, we are told, has to satisfy the needs of the people; it cannot simply ignore the questions that people are asking today. Of course, that’s true. It isn’t enough for the church to simply educate; it must address itself to the whole person in the whole context of that person’s life. We must make the connection between the text of Scripture and the experience of men and women living today. But the problem is the one expressed here by C. S. Lewis. Our felt needs are trivial. It’s not only that they are human-centered, but that the pleasures of such religion fall so far short of the everlasting peace that comes from a sound understanding of The Faith. We’re so wrapped up in tips for living, relationships and success in life we miss the grander scheme of redemption from God’s wrath. We are like children making mud-pies in the slums when we could be enjoying a holiday at the sea
A sound understanding of the faith is what we seek, and Joel Beeke’s Living for God’s Glory will go a long way in helping us gain that understanding. As we attain to that understanding may our class and individual prayer be that in all we do we may live soli Deo Gloria
randy.
Posted in calvinism.
Tagged with calvinism.
By admin
– November 16, 2008
Recent Comments