Tuesday, July 01, 2008

The dangers of sentimental theology II

Campo Del Moro, Spain (photo from trekearth.com)

This is my first attempt at writing an article earlier than the posted date. This is supposed to post July 1 at 00: 00: 01. This is a revised version of a previous article I wrote on this blog. I view this article as one of my more important ones and have thought that it needs more feedback. I have therefore reposted it with some changes in the hope that with my slightly increased readership more persons will find the article valuable and worth pondering on. The previous article was 'The danger of sentimental theology' and this is 'The dangers of sentimental theology'.

The last few years I have thought more about death than previously. I am not obsessed with the subject, but part of my focus with the Christian faith, and Christian theology, within the problem of evil and theodicy, is attempting to understand in some ways, what exists beyond death. In the last few years a few people that I have known have died, where as in previous times the only deceased persons I had known were my grandparents. I had lost pets to death, which is difficult, but it is not the same as losing a person to death for which one has had personal conversations on more than one occasion.

Scientifically and empirically (by use of the senses) it appears that human beings die and all that is left are physical remains. Some religions and religious persons believe in an existence of the human spirit that exists after death. In the media, and at funerals it is said sometimes that the person that has passed away has gone to a better place. This is speculative, assumed and hoped for, since the departed was usually and seemingly a good person, humanly speaking. This appears to be sentimental theology, and by that I mean theology that is primarily driven by feelings, that is speculative and lacks a significant use of reason that can be supported by historically based religious revelation. Please note, I am not stating that all theological speculation is lacking the significant use of reason. The naturalist can dismiss this sentimental theology on empirical grounds. Simon Blackburn defines naturalism as generally a view that nothing resists explanation from methods of natural sciences. A naturalist will therefore be opposed to the concept of mind-body since it allows for the possible explanation of human mental capacity outside of science. Blackburn (1996: 255). Henry Clarence Thiessen explains that naturalists reject the idea of God and view nature as self-sufficient and self-explanatory. Thiessen (1956: 32).

A Christian theist such as myself can reason that the person that has died was morally imperfect as we all are, was part of, and affected by, the problem of evil, did not receive direct communication from God normally, and likely not at any point, prior to death. From this there is not an obvious reason to realistically, and reasonably assume that a person that has passed away goes to a better place within a speculative theistic model which lacks historically based religious revelation. Within a speculative theistic model, I would reason that if a person lives an earthly temporal life apart from direct communication with God, then it is reasonable to assume that if God does grant everlasting life, it will not be some type of heaven in God’s presence, and therefore not necessarily a better place.

Biblical Christianity is not dependent on sentimental theology. Millard Erickson writes that natural theology deduces that God can be understood objectively through nature, history, and human personality. Erickson (1994: 156). But, it should be stated that although natural theology can perhaps bring a person to a limited knowledge of God, it does not provide revealed information concerning salvation or everlasting life for human beings.

Erickson explains that Biblical revelation views God as taking the initiative to make himself known to followers. Erickson (1994: 198). This would be a more effective way than natural revelation as God reveals personal things about himself through his prophets, apostles, scribes, and of course Jesus Christ, who is both God and man. It can be reasoned that this revelation is documented in the Bible with persons that are historical and not mythological. Thiessen writes that God revealed himself in the history of ancient Israel. Thiessen (1956: 33). God is presented as personally appearing to chosen persons in the Hebrew Bible through dreams, visions and directly. Thiessen (1956: 34). Thiessen explains that miracles were also noted to occur within the Hebrew Bible, miracles being unusual events that were not a product of natural laws. Thiessen (1956: 35). The Hebrew Bible and New Testament present historical persons that experienced the supernatural God and supernatural occurrences. Some will accept the historicity of these persons, but deny the supernatural aspects of the Bible, but according to the New American Standard Bible presented by Charles Caldwell Ryrie and the Lockman Foundation, approximately 40 authors wrote the Biblical texts over a period of approximately 1600 years. Ryrie (1984: xv). Not all these persons knew each other and yet spoke of the same God that revealed himself progressively over time. The atoning work and resurrection of Christ was documented and discussed by several historical authors within the New Testament and through this work everlasting life is provided to followers of Christ. The book of Revelation describes the culminated Kingdom of God in Chapters 21-22.

The New Testament provides information about the historical Jesus Christ and his followers in historical setting and this gives much more credibility for theology concerning the concept of life after death in the presence of God, than does sentimental theology which denies or twists the concepts of Scripture in order to fit some type of speculative theistic hope for everlasting life which is devoid of the significant use of reason and revelation. This is a dangerous way to approach God and life, as there is not convincing evidence for believing that God will provide a departed person with meaningful everlasting life, outside of revelation from God explaining by what means he would bring a person that has passed away into his presence forever, and/or place them in a better place.

There are many spiritual dangers associated with sentimental theology which include false hopes, and false theology. The ultimate danger is being wrong about God, and not receiving his everlasting grace and mercy.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

RYRIE, CHARLES, CALDWELL (1984) The New American Standard Version Bible, Iowa Falls, Iowa, World Bible Publishers.

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

21 comments:

  1. Hello Russ,
    Thank you for visiting my blog and saying something so nice.
    This article is very nice. I agree that we have no hope for "a better place" without knowing the Christ here and now, even though it must be limited.
    Blessings to you. Even more important than the correct words is the correct relationship with the One who loves us the most.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks, Vicki.

    I am sold, let us link.:)

    Please say hi to Jim.

    ReplyDelete
  3. O.K. Russ,
    You are linked. Thank you for the privilege.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes, double linked, and please readers check out Vicki's blog which deals with theology and philosophy.

    Thanks.:)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi Russ.
    Good one. Probably said it before but when studying theology I was told by one lecturer to keep my opinions to myself. Yes the dangers of sentimental theology is a trap for us all.
    I like what Blaise Pascal said: "All of our reasoning ends in surrender to feeling." So stick to the facts Russ and you will continue to excel in your field.
    Russell.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks as always, mate.

    It has been a busy 24 hours of blogging, too busy. I really appreciate your support. I agree that I need to stick with the facts and also stick to my no blog troll policy as can be seen on the other blog's most recent comments.

    I live and learn, Russell.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  7. No, Biblical Christianity is not dependent on sentimental theology.
    This is the both the beauty and tragety of God's plan.
    It is beautiful because as I grow each day, I come to a place further and further away from doubt. As I experience more of God, I have to confess, it would take more faith to not be a believer than to believe.
    The tragic asspect of Biblical Christianity is that the person who gets saved at the altar is often disillusioned with his experience. This person has listened to so many flower filled sermons and has had his mind filled with thoughts of prosperity and not long after his confession at the altar, there is silence.
    I have met many people who have walked down the isle to search for "life abundantly". However, their focus was not with the optimism of Jesus Christ. There hope was in a get fixed quick scheme that others pretended to testify to.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I have met many people who have walked down the isle to search for "life abundantly". However, their focus was not with the optimism of Jesus Christ. There hope was in a get fixed quick scheme that others pretended to testify to.

    Misunderstandings concerning the problem of evil, and God's plans within that problem are not often reasonably understood by believers.

    Thanks, Jim.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I appreciate your article, Russ, since I have often been bothered at funerals, or after someone dies, when people automatically say, "They're in a better place now." Many times I have heard this said, when the deceased was not even a Christian.

    I even saw on the News, where the mother of a deceased murderer/rapist was interviewed, and she exclaimed, "He was a good person!"

    Of course, I suppose the alternative would be quite offensive to most people: "Well, they're in Hell now, where they will suffer horrible torment for all eternity."

    I suppose even Atheists will say something like, "Well, they're better off now." I doubt that any Atheist would say at a friend's or relative's funeral, "Well, the worms are eating him now!" That would surely be a repulsive thing to say, even for non-believers.

    In fact, I understand that at the funeral of my cousin's teenage son, a couple of young people loudly and rudely interrupted the memorial service by yelling, "He is burning in Hell now!" The preacher asked them to be quiet, but they kept yelling the same thing over and over, so finally, they were thrown out. This was devastating to the family, on top of the deep sorrow that they already had.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Excellent Jeff, thanks.

    Dr. Earl Radmacher, one of my theology professors, provided this suggestion for discussing the death of a loved one with family and friends. I think these were his exact words, if not, they are close.

    The Lord is a righteous and just judge.

    I would use this when in doubt.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hey Jeff,
    Why do I not see this philosophical humor in your post?
    I may have come in when you were out on a dry spell. However, you seem to have something different to offer as of late.
    Jim

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thanks, Jim.

    Jeff can be very funny, and I have learned and have been refreshed concerning science and evolution through Jeff. We do not always agree, but that is the same with any two thinking persons.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hey Jeff,
    Why do I not see this philosophical humor in your post?
    I may have come in when you were out on a dry spell. However, you seem to have something different to offer as of late.
    Jim


    Jim,

    I started a separate blog that is only for humor, but so far I have only made 3 posts on it. You can see it here: Puppet Head
    My main focus is on evangelism and apologetics, so that is why I am so serious on my 'Thoughts and Theology' blog site.
    I also made a weak attempt a while back at writing a humorous article on my home page, which is here: Blackbirds of Miami
    I find it hard to mix humor with evangelism or apologetics, without diluting the message, or without making the message seem wishy-washy. Maybe I should try to find a way to do that.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Jeff can be very funny, and I have learned and have been refreshed concerning science and evolution through Jeff. We do not always agree, but that is the same with any two thinking persons.

    Thanks, Russ!

    Sometimes, in writing, because of the lack of tonal inflections, facial expressions, body language, etc., my attempts at humor has been taken seriously in the past, and some have been offended. Even using netiquette smiley faces [i.e., :) or ;)] or acronymns (LOL, FOFLOL, etc.), people have still misunderstood on occassion, and thought I was being serious. Because of this misunderstanding at times, I sometimes hesitate to go too crazy with humor.

    There is a local newspaper humor writer named Dave Barry. I would love to be able to write like him.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Jeff, as with satire and theology, sometimes it happens that funny sites turn some people off. My basic message on thekingpin68 and satire and theology is the same. The same 'objectionable' things stated on satire and theology may be stated here. But, if I was to delete my satire site, probably half of my readers would be disappointed because they prefer it over this blog. Some persons like satire with theology and some like a more serious approach, and some like both.

    I ask my critics to respectfully challenge me, and I do sometimes admit mistakes, and I can learn. Also, the critic may have to change his or her mind as well when I can demonstrate that this should occur.

    Jeff, persons such as you and other links risk controversy, but I support you folks as brothers and sisters in Christ and so let us agree on essentials and disagree agreeably on other issues. If we do not and we insist on blogging with only those a lot like us, we risk having small blogs, or writing on-line journal articles as I suggested to one link.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thank you for writing about sentimental theology and comparing it to biblical theology. We all need to be reminded about our many assumptions and feelings and how they compare to the truth and reality of Scripture.
    -Bible Student for Life-

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yes, assumptions can lead one to error. I pray for objectivity in all matters.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Wow, this is really well written - it may take me a few goes though to fully digest what you're saying!

    Interesting blog, and I thought the cartoon illustration you included was a good thought-provoker. Thanks for sharing your writing talents and ideas.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thanks for the comments on my blog. I work hard to write interesting material.

    I am always looking for readers, comments and blogs to reciprocally link and network with.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  20. Good evening, Russ,
    I read this post against sentmental theology and was surprised to see that I had responded to it back in July when you first posted it.
    Let's be logical:
    Let's say I don't believe in heaven nor hell. A. I'm right and I die completely with my body. B. I'm wrong and I go to hell.
    Let's say I do beleive in heaven and hell. A. I'm wrong and I die with my body. B. I'm right and I go to be with the Lord when this life is over.
    We are now practicing with only partial vision for our eternal destiny. Let us practice submission to the Saviour, with praise and gratitude. Then when we praise Him in glory, we will with true gratitude and joy lay our crowns before Him.

    ReplyDelete