How Should We Then Live-Ancient Rome

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