A presentation at the inaugural conference of the Kuyper Center for Christian Studies (Centro de Estudios Cristianos Kuyper) on September 2, 2023, in Buenos Aires by Richard L. Smith PhD

centrokuyper.com

A presentation at the inaugural conference of the Kuyper Center for Christian Studies (Centro de Estudios Cristianos Kuyper) on September 2, 2023, in Buenos Aires by Richard L. Smith PhD

centrokuyper.com

 Psalm 137 provides several insights about the experience of some individuals brought to Babylon in the first deportation (597 BC)—though largely negative in perspective. Key themes are italicized in the following citation from verses 1–6:

By the waters of Babylon, there we sat down and wept, when we remembered Zion. On the willows there we hung up our lyres. For there our captors required of us songs, and our tormentors, mirth, saying, “Sing us one of the songs of Zion!” How shall we sing the Lord’s song in a foreign land? If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget its skill! Let my tongue stick to the roof of my mouth, if I do not remember you, if I do not set Jerusalem above my highest joy!

These exiles enjoyed time for leisure, cultural expression, freedom of assembly, and personal security. In this case, they were likely former temple musicians who were able to bring their instruments. A scholar notes a cruel paradox, however: “Ironically, those who were formerly in political, social, and religious control of Judah, that is, the royal officials and the members of the temple, were now reduced to corvée. In this reversal of power, the once high and mighty were stripped of status and forced to labor for Babylonian economic gain.”

In verse 1, “waters” probably refer to irrigation canals that the exiles dwelled beside in ethnic settlements and were obligated to maintain. Two antagonists are identified in verse 3: “captors” (Babylonians) and “tormentors” (likely other captive ethnicities living nearby). This incident depicted in this psalm presumes a pluralistic setting: proximity to and friction with persons of other cultures, religions, and ethnic identities. Apparently, the Jews were sometimes mocked for their predicament.

In their misery and disorientation, some of the deportees struggled to internalize Jeremiah’s positive perspective of the exile, expressed in his letter to them (29:4–20). They could not imagine serving God apart from the enabling infrastructure of the Israelite state (monarchy, temple, land). Perhaps they did not listen attentively to the Lord or suffered from double-mindedness: “For they have not listened to my words,” declares the Lord, “words that I sent to them again and again by my servants the prophets. And you exiles have not listened either” (Jer 29:19, NIV). Perhaps they idolized the temple and Zion ideology—“the pride of your power, the delight of your eyes, and the yearning of your soul” (Ezek 24:21). Or as one commentator suggests, they did not discern this critical lesson: “Holy sites do not enable Yahweh’s presence among his people, but holy people do (Jer 7:3–11; 26:1–6).”

On the positive side, Psalm 137 presupposes a decision and an essential spiritual priority. Verses 5–6 contain three conditional clauses with the word “if”:

If I forget you, O Jerusalem
If I do not remember you
If I do not set Jerusalem above my highest joy

The explicit options are to forget or remember Jerusalem. Forgetting means a repudiation of the covenant and calling. The implicit option is to embrace Babylon. This indicates religious and cultural assimilation. The verbs “remember” and “set” are linked. The latter term indicates a single-minded preference for Zion. “Remember” presumes a mental and motivational prioritization to distinguish between foreign and Hebrew priorities and to maintain them at all costs, as indicated by the writer’s self-deprecation in verses 5–6.

From a negative perspective, the dejected singers in Psalm 137 provide a discordant path to follow in the midst of cultural disorientation. The musicians were unable to imagine blessing and service apart from their former temple setting and their accustomed lifestyle in Canaan. Their mental state resembles a scene in Book 7 of the Chronicles of Narnia. A group of exceedingly closed-minded dwarfs stubbornly refused to perceive or partake of the blessings set before them. They preferred what they had before, even though that was no longer available to them. They willingly deceived themselves, embracing a false perception of reality. They did not proceed into land of prosperity prepared for them by Aslan.

The musicians in Psalm 137 had unwillingly transitioned from a mono-cultural to a pluralistic setting. They lost social, religious, and economic capital. In a very real sense, they were impoverished and their manner of thinking was adversely impacted. They did not discern how their view of reality or themselves was conditioned by power and its loss. As a result, they did not perceive their opportunity or responsibility. They did not seek the common good for the glory of God, as Jeremiah counseled (29:4–7). They did not declare God’s name as exiles in their pluralistic context.

This kind of thinking and behavior resembles many North American evangelicals. The United States has been associated closely with the Promised Land of ancient Israel. North Americans, it is often thought, comprise a special community akin to the covenanted peoples of the Old and New Testaments. Now that evangelicals have most likely lost the culture war, the ensuing disorientation feels like internal exile. Many, it seems, refuse to embrace the opportunities and responsibilities inherent in the new setting. Inordinate longing for the cultural domination of the past and related forms of thinking, however, is not spiritually healthy, nor intellectually pious.

Clearly, then, the lessons of Jeremiah 29 and Psalm 137 are still relevant. In the midst of exile, we must never forget our worldview priorities. But we must also “seek the peace” of “Babylon” in our day.

This is an edited extract from my, Such a Mind as This: A Biblical-Theological Study of Thinking in the Old Testament (2021).  It is used by permission of Wipf and Stock Publishers, http://www.wipfandstock.com.

First and foremost, we must love God with our minds because we are commanded to do so. Moses told Israel in Deuteronomy 6:4–5: “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.” (The word “heart” is often a stand-in for “mind” or “mindset” in the Old Testament.) And, when Jesus was asked about the greatest commandment, he cited Deuteronomy, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength’” (Mark 12:29–30). Intellectual love for God is at the center of Old and New Testament spirituality.

Mental piety and intellectual acumen are essential aspects of a holistic spirituality. God’s word is the most interesting, incisive, uplifting, and pragmatic information available on planet earth. The Bible is full of intellectuality. For this reason, willful ignorance and anti-intellectualism are not spiritual virtues. Passive consumerism of popular culture is not God-honoring. Intellectual boredom is not healthy or pious. Relegating serious thought to Monday through Friday or for professional purposes only signifies a spiritual malady.

Second, God made humans as thinkers, because he is a thinker. With our minds, we create, make, imagine and build. We need our minds to be his stewards in creation. Since we are created in his image, we must bring our brains to God and enroll in his school. We must learn to love God with our mind, as Moses and Jesus told us. (God does not require us to become rocket scientists or philosophers, but to develop the potential he gave us individually for his glory and the good of others.)

In fact, God created a world for beings that were fit for thinking and learn­ing in all forms. He made them with intellectual curiosity. To carry out our vice-regency, we must apply our cognitive abilities in compliance with the God who made us and the real world we live in. We must learn to honor God with our intellect in motive, method, and content.

Third, we must learn to love God with our minds because the modern world is very complex and confusing. There is much more information today, as well as diverse opinions, propaganda, and ever-present marketing. There is constant interaction of perspectives through globalization. Our world is a battlefield of opposing worldviews.

Probably more than ever, therefore, we need to interact with our cultures with wisdom and understanding. To remain relevant, we need discernment and knowledge. We must become “wise as serpents” (Matt 10:16), especially in missions and for engaging unbelief in all its forms. We should be like the Sons of Issachar, who served God with their intellects, “who had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do” (1 Chron 12:32).

If this reasoning seems compelling to you, check out the resources available or recommended on this site.

Watch these two excerpts from a sermon delivered in Buenos Aires several years ago (with Spanish translation) by Dr. Keith Campbell, Vice-President of Global Scholars and a Founder of the Society of Christian Scholars. Part one concerns the significance of the mind (8:20)  and part two addresses the strategic necessity to reach out to the intelligencia (6:38).

Worldviews are a very complex phenomenon. A worldview is really a web: the convergence of ideas, culture, and history. Our worldview webs are the social and mental matrix in which “we live, and move and have our being,” as Paul says (Acts 17:28).

People are not simply “blank slates” that we write upon with the biblical worldview. They present themselves already locked in a maze of preconceptions and cultural expectations. Those with whom we engage are not simply “empty” or “neutral,” just waiting for us to enlighten them. No. They perceive the world and themselves with sinful biases and idolatries. People are formed by ideas and cultural norms that skew how they view reality, the Bible―and us.

Moreover, worldview formation is difficult to understand because it involves a mix of complex, theological factors. First, there is our post-fall spiritual context: sin complicates everything. Paul mentions in Ephesians 2:1–3 three negative dimensions of human existence: our sinful nature, the world, and the devil.

And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience—among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of  the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.

Together, these produce evil “desires of the body and mind.” Paul says in Galatians 1:4 that we live in “this present evil age.”

Second, there is God’s common grace (Ps 104, Acts 14:17), which often restrains evil for his purposes, and amplifies the beauty and potential of this world, even though it is fallen into sin.

Third, there is the gospel itself, which has the power to transform lives and communities.

But fourth, there is the enigmatic concept of divine providence. Consider Acts 17:26–27.

And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us.

What does verse 26 mean considering the history and cultures of South America, for example, since God “determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God”? Remember that South America was colonized by Catholic empires. Imagine, however, if the continent had been colonized by Protestant nations. Imagine, also, what might have happened if there had been a Protestant Reformation here. Think about the social, political, economic, and intellectual implications that might have occurred.

Sadly, what really did happen is that millions of people in this continent died, through violence and disease, because of the lust for empire and its cousin, colonialism. Lands were acquired. Peoples were dispersed or enslaved for purposes of security, gain or glory. Millions of Africans were brought as slaves to Brazil.

And Christianity? It was often affiliated with the powerful and prosperous, with empire and colonialism, and overlooked the victims: the poor, exploited, enslaved, abused, and condemned.

We could name other enigmas of history and continue speculating. The matrix of evil, common grace, gospel, and divine providence in human history and worldview formation is very complicated.

We need a lot of humility, wisdom, and compassion to discern the intricate worldview web we encounter in cultures through evangelism, church planting, and missions.

Why? Because people are pre-packaged by ideas and cultural norms in complex ways that distort their worldviews before we arrive. We cannot simply overlay the Bible, assuming that people are open or neutral. They are often wounded, confused, indifferent or hostile.

If you wear reading glasses and look at objects far away or, if you wear glasses for driving and look at objects close at hand, they will appear out of focus, distorted. When I wear my reading glasses, people faraway look strange. Why? Because my glasses distort my vision, how I see reality.

If we think of glasses in a metaphorical way, I suggest that everyone wears glasses. Because everyone looks at the world through distorted lenses and fails to see what is really there―or what God sees. They do not perceive reality or see the truth. They do not see creation or the Creator. This is due to sin.

These distortions happen because our epistemological glasses, so to speak, function as sinful biases, worldviews, and idolatries. The Bible says that human beings have a severe vision problem. Sin affects how and what we see or how and what we think, commonly called the noetic effect of sin.  For this reason, we do not want to see clearly (John 3:19–20).

The Bible teaches, therefore, that we need radical surgery to fix our sight and thinking. For those who follow Christ, this is already happening. Slowly, our vision is being restored and one day in eternity we will see everything clearly, including ourselves (1 Cor 13:12). Until that time, God provides corrective lenses, so to speak, to help us see and think more clearly. The scriptures, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, provide the God-sanctioned assumptions by which to view the world and operate in it (Ps 16:11; 119:105).

By way of example, think about how people view the Bible. When you look at the information and the worldview represented there as a follower of Jesus, you already possess corrective lenses. You are inclined to look favorably on the Bible and to value its teaching. You see its beauty. You hear the voice of God in the word. You are learning the truth. You are beginning to perceive reality. You understand the Bible’s relevance for yourself and society.

But imagine how an unbeliever views the Bible. They view the same information, but with their sinful biases, presuppositions, and erroneous worldviews. They cannot see what you see. They do not hear God speaking in the text.

Therefore, when we present the Lord Jesus to unbelievers, we must not forget how sinful bias affects spiritual vision. If we talk about the Bible’s relevancy for society or as a revelation from God for our souls, we must always recognize the influence of sin upon our minds. Or, when we focus on the biblical worldview as a framework for interpreting human experience, we cannot forget the intellectual impact of the fall. Of course, we hope and pray that the Spirit works through the text to open eyes and heal sight.

So, when we read the Bible, we should―also―remove our “glasses.” And, when we share the Bible with non-believers, we should say to them, “Take of your glasses, please.”

Ted is the author of two new books: Oasis of Imagination: Engaging our World through a Better Creativity and Imagination Manifesto: A Call to Plant Oases of Imagination.

This video is an interview about his books and ministry.

Inertia is “a tendency to do nothing or to remain unchanged” or “a lack of activity especially when movement is needed.” Intellectual inertia is mental laziness and anti-intellectualism.

The Bible commands Christians to honor God “with all of our mind” (Mark 12:30). I suggest, however, that a profound inertia hinders many evangelicals from obeying this demand. Mental activity is desperately needed, but many Christians are unable or unwilling to embrace intellectual discipleship or to integrate faith and ideas according to the biblical worldview.

The inevitable result is the status quo, marginalization of the church, aversion to risk and entrepreneurialism, and worst of all, the restriction of evangelical Christianity to private emotionalism and cultural irrelevance. Where I live, the evangelical church has little impact upon the educated or elite, the university community, and the cultural gatekeepers. Many believers have ceded worldview dominion, popular culture, and public policy to secular power brokers.

Sadly, our intellectual sluggishness affects every aspect of Christian life and practice. It is “deliberate ignorance,” according to the theologian, John Frame. Why? Because the hegemony of the secular worldview fosters an anti-intellectual outlook that severely restricts faith and practice to the private, subjective, and behavioral realms. As a result, the biblical worldview is neither intellectually plausible nor existentially credible. And of course, God is not honored with our minds and his glory is not displayed in our ideas and practice. Evangelical Christians are complicit and culpable in this dilemma.

When we retreat from the world of ideas, theoretical analysis or cultural critique, how can we discern, for example, the relationship between faith and philosophy, conflicting truth claims and alternative worldviews, faith and science, political ideology and social advocacy, psychology and counseling, business and economics, education, the arts, and so forth?

In contrast, Frame declares that Christians have a God-given “stewardship of the mind and intellect.” He wrote:

It is remarkable that Christians so readily identify the lordship of Christ in matters of worship, salvation, and ethics, but not in thinking. But . . . God in Scripture over and over demands obedience of his people in matters of wisdom, thinking, knowledge, understanding, and so forth. (“A History of Western Philosophy and Theology,” p. 5)

Perhaps then, we should ask a few honest questions that promote intellectual self-awareness:

Are we personally afflicted with self-imposed intellectual inertia?

Is there inertia that hinders the gospel and limits the evangelical church, particularly in your culture?

What does it mean to “love God with all the mind” in your society, especially among cultural gatekeepers, such as the educated and elite classes?