I hesitated to make this an official SDP post, but I have a new post up over at my personal blog on the contrast between the city and the country, based on a recent vacation I took.

Take it for what it’s worth.

I first purchased Francis Schaeffer’s The God Who Is There when I was in a freshman in college.   I had taken an Honors philosophy of the mind course and I was very interested in the Christian response to the philosophers and ideas I had been presented with.  At the time, Schaeffer was the only person I knew who was engaging ancient and modern philosophy from a Christian perspective (obviously, now I realize there are many, many other gifted men who came before and after him).  I started to read the book and got about 100 pages in before losing interest.  This happened 2 or 3 more times, before I put the book back on the shelf, for another day.

Well, that day came a few months ago.  I promised myself I would start and finish The God Who Is There, no matter how long it took.  And I am glad I did.

In my mind, there are two parts of the book.  In the first part, Schaeffer deals with the history of philosophy from Kierkeggaard down to the existentialists like Camus and Sartre (although Camus didn’t consider himself an existentialist).  He introduces us to the concept of the “line of despair”, which is basically the dividing line between those who embraced the idea of antithesis, and those who rejected it.  Our age is “under” the line, while the age before Kierkeggaard, Hegel, etc. was “above” the line, since people generally believed in antithesis and absolute truth (even if they did so for romantic reasons).  Schaeffer then explains how philosophy is manifested in art, music, literature, and theology.  It’s almost like a trickle-down effect: the philosophers lead the way, and their ideas affect these other areas over the course of time.  When you see an art exhibit or listen to modern music, you are hearing an artistic manifestation of what is going on philosophically at the time.

I wouldn’t describe this section as academic but it is at times a little technical for someone without experience with philosophy.  But Schaeffer is an excellent communicator and for the most part he makes these complex ideas very simple, pointing out where these ideas conflict with historic Christianity and also giving a human element to those who believe in them.

The “second half” of the book focuses more on application: the Christian’s response to the philosophical milieu of the modern culture.  Here, Schaeffer is masterful.  He doesn’t present answers to common questions the unbeliever might ask, but lays out more of a mindset that we need to adopt when evangelizing.  I could sum his approach up as this: we are all, believers and unbelievers, God’s children, created in His image.  We should therefore approach the evangelistic task not mechanically, as if relaying some secret formula will cause the unbeliever’s eyes to be open, but in love.  Love is the overarching theme of the “second half”: love for the unbeliever as one created in the image of God, and love for each other, because as Jesus said, they will know we are His disciples when we love one another.

The other, more intellectual points Schaeffer makes regard approach.  Again, instead of a formula, there is a broad principle to be followed:

Every man, therefore, irrespective of his system, is caught.  As he tries intellectually to extend his position in a logical way and then live within it, he is caught by the two things which, as it were, slap him across the face.  Without indicating that his psychology or philosophy is correct, Carl Gustav Jung has correctly observed that two things cut across every man’s will – the external world with it’s structure, and those things which well up from inside himself.  Non-Christian presuppositions simply do not fit into what God has made, including what man is.  This being so, every man is in a place of tension.  Man cannot make his own universe and then live in it.

We find the “point of tension”, that area in a man’s thinking where his ideas and life don’t match up, and we show the inconsistency in his worldview.

I would heartily recommend this book.  In my opinion, any thinking Christian, serious about engaging modern man where he is philosophically, should read this book.  Though it was written over 40 years ago, the ideas and approach are as relevant as ever.

Great article over at ardentcries.com about Calvin’s idea of the “sensus divinitatis”.  He says:

Men of sound judgment will always be sure that a sense of divinity which can never be effaced is engraved upon men’s minds.

I have been spending a ton of time lately thinking about the contours of spiritual reformation in the 21st century.  Let me suggest that there are four main areas of human life in which the church in every age (family by family, and also as a communal whole) is called to work out reformation.

(1) Contemplation: This is the sphere of human thinking, of homo sapiens. As individuals, as households, and as a whole church, we need to be engaged in deep reflection/meditation on our scriptures, on our theological and ecclesiastical traditions, and on contemporary theological and ideological trajectories, as well as on the works of our God in nature and history.

(2) Consecration: This is the sphere of human worshipping, of homo adorans. As individuals and households daily, and as a whole church weekly, we need to be engaged in worship that is both vibrant and “formed” (liturgical).

(3) Cultivation: This is the sphere of human building, of homo faber. As individuals, as households, and as a whole church, we need in everyday life to fully embody and enact the gospel (the metanarrative of redemptive history). The rule (kingdom) of God takes shape in every sphere of human living; it is always worked out, manifested, instantiated. This involves both constructive elements (culture building, dominion taking) and defensive elements (vigilance against defilements).

(4) Confrontation: This is the sphere of engagement with the “world” (human life in rebellion against God). Here our work is both missional and militant; it involves robust interaction with ideas and cultures, both for purpose of bringing others into the sphere of God’s kingdom (here we must learn how to communicate the gospel in an idiom accessible to the unbeliever), and for the purpose of throwing down high places of evil and deception.

I must admit that The God Who Is There by Francis Schaeffer is a surprising book.  It’s not I was unaware of Schaeffer’s reputation as a great apologist (a description he would be uncomfortable with; he thought of himself as an evangelist first), it’s just that the first half of the book does not prepare you for what’s to come in the second half.  I plan on writing a review of the book in the next week that will elaborate on this idea, but until then, I wanted to cite this paragraph where Schaeffer introduces a phrase that will stick with me for the rest of my life: the “final apologetic”.

The world has a right to look upon us and make a judgment.  We are told by Jesus that as we love one another the world will judge, not only whether we are his disciples, but whether the Father sent the Son.  The final apologetic, along with the rational, logical presentation, is what the world sees in the individual Christian and in our corporate relationships together.  The command that we should love one another surely means something much richer than merely organizational relationship.  Not that we should minimize proper organizational relationship. But one may look at those bound together in an organized group called a church and see nothing of a substantial healing of the division between people in the present life.

It is all too easy to read a passage like this and think of how it applies to that favorite of Reformed straw-men: the one who reads theology all day, can quote Scripture at length, and can wax poetic on the finer points of systematic theology, yet shows little of the fruits of the Spirit, especially love.  But don’t do that.  Instead take a look at yourself.  Have you become so wrapped up in the academic side of learning and defending the faith that you have neglected Christ’s command that we love one another?

I believe Schaeffer is spot on here: the most powerful testimony we can have to a watching world is that we love one another, and put on display in our own lives and relationships the outworking of the healing that Christ made possible in our relationship with the Father.

One thing is immediately obvious. In the mind of our Lord, the kingdom of God and the announcement of that kingdom are not mere information. This is no infomercial: “We interrupt the normal broadcasting of your life to announce that the kingdom of God has come near. Thank you. We now resume our normal broadcasting.” That is not what is going on. This is an announcement of divine activity, of kingdom-building activity that embraces the whole of creation within its scope (think back to the prophecies of the Old Testament); and in the face of this announcement, no passive neutrality is possible. Jesus says, “Turn and believe, for God is acting! God is building a kingdom. In fact, he has already acted and the kingdom is here. So you must act. You must turn and believe.” Passive neutrality is impossible in response to this message.

Think with me further about how Jesus’ summons flows out of his announcement of the kingdom. The kingdom of God is divine activity. It is God’s active response of saving grace toward those who have rejected his rule (think back to Genesis 3:15). It is the aggressive outworking of his great master plan to restore his creation – to restore individual lives, families, communities, even structures of civilization. It is the active outworking of his purpose to overturn the curse and ruin brought upon humankind by Adam’s rebellion. This is a message saturated with astonishing grace. And to ignore this message – to have no response, or an apathetic response – is active rebellion against the purpose and working of the King. If you and I don’t turn and believe this good news, we are simply at war with God. Jesus in these glad tidings issues a clarion summons, and he will not be ignored. What does he mean by the word “repent”? He means that we are to turn.

Ben Miller – The Kingdom Has Drawn Near: Studies in the Gospel Jesus Preached

All this and much more lies back of Jesus’ proclamation as we return finally to Mark 1 and listen again to him say, “The time has been fulfilled.” He is saying quite simply that the decisive threshold of fulfillment of everything spoken by the law and the prophets has already been crossed. That is the force of the verb he uses here. The sense is not, “The time is about to be fulfilled.” It is not even, “The time is presently being fulfilled.” It is rather, “The time has been fulfilled.”

The decisive threshold of the fulfillment of all the Old Covenant promises has already been crossed. It is now already God’s appointed time to visit mankind, to set up a kingdom of righteousness and peace that will never end and indeed will fill the earth, replacing universal cursing with universal blessing. It is now already God’s appointed time to enthrone the anointed son of David, who is both the Son of God and the Son of Man as the law and the prophets told us, who is Jesus himself, the God-Man. It is now already God’s appointed time to restore human dominion over the earth and human communion with God. It is already here, that is what Jesus is saying. We must try to imagine how this would have thrilled the heart of a Jew who really knew the Old Covenant Scriptures – if he or she could even have taken it all in!

Then there is this curious language, “The kingdom of God has come near.” This is probably a better rendering than “is at hand,” because “is at hand” could still leave a sense that the thing is about to happen, about to arrive. No, the kingdom of God has drawn near; the verb Jesus chooses means that the thing of which he speaks is already definitively here. The preceding phrase established this: the time has been fulfilled; and in that fulfillment the kingdom of God has come near. But this is still an interesting verb to choose, “has come near,” because it leaves open the possibility that the kingdom of God may have come near in less-than-full form. Let me try to explain.

To come near is not necessarily, as of yet, to fill and dominate the scene. A thing may already have come near without yet having taken the whole of the stage. The possibility is left open in the word Jesus chooses that the kingdom, though definitively present, may not be manifested in its fullness all at once. And this is fairly obvious, when you think about it: clearly not every enemy of the God-Man, the Son of David, is already visibly under his feet when Jesus makes this announcement. As of the moment Jesus speaks, the kingdom has already come near, but it is not yet in its full expression as it will be in time to come.

Ben Miller – The Kingdom Has Drawn Near: Studies in the Gospel Jesus Preached

In the diner, for perhaps the millionth time, Phil Connors (Bill Murray) in the movie Groundhog Day says, “Well maybe the real God uses tricks, or maybe he’s not omnipotent, he’s just been around so long he knows everything.” This assertion leads to an intriguing question. Are God’s thoughts not our thoughts only because God knows more than us? Imagine a simple blade of grass. We can know certain things about that blade of grass; God knows everything about that blade of grass. But does that sum up the difference between God’s thought and ours?

Let us consider the human activity of learning. Man learns. Man is a learner. Man habitually relies on what he knows while working to know more. For man, it is impossible to learn apart from thinking, considering, reflecting, concentrating, evaluating, comparing, categorizing, qualifying, analogizing, and summarizing. Man’s activity as learner is unique to man. Man can learn because man is made in God’s image, but man is limited by learning because man is not God. God cannot learn; He is unchangeable, eternal, infinite, and omniscient. God knows all and always has known all. From all and to all eternity God has known everything about everything, and he never had to learn any of it. This is incomprehensible to man. God’s thought is qualitatively and quantitatively different from man’s thought because God never learned a thing and yet he knows it all!