Bad Thinking Insults Our Creator Too

In last post I wrote about human artistic endeavors as a reflection of the “Image of God” resident in humankind.  In this post I would like to address another manifestation of the “image of God”, the intellect or reason.  Again, I see this as something that sets humanity apart from the rest of creation.  It is true that there are some animals who demonstrate substantial skills in some kinds of problem solving, but what I am discussing here is something more substantial and moves on to include the abstract as well as the concrete.  What I said about art, that to intentionally do art in a sloppy or poor manner is an insult to the Creator, is also true of the intellectual realm.  The problem is that in both realms there is a tremendous cultural and sub-cultural inclination toward the anti-intellectual. 

In our U.S. culture at large there has been a steady decline in the respect for and commitment to the intellectual that seems to have taken hold in the 1960’s.  I would point to the attack of Spiro Agnew on “effete intellectual snobs” as a focal point when anti-intellectualism took hold and became respectable.  At that time the finest universities in the country were seen as the source for much of the unrest of the counter-culture and the anti-war movement.  Thinking, especially critical thinking, came to be seen  as dangerous and subversive.  Public schools and universities have been pushed in the direction of the practical and concrete and away from theoretical content.  It is what I refer to as a trend to training and away from education.  Today many major universities are little more than sophisticated trade schools.  Granted the trades for which they train people are very complex and difficult but schools for engineers, physicians, or teachers are about training people to do specific jobs.  Very little time is allocated for considering the philosophical underpinnings.  An engineer may learn to build a rocket that can travel into space, but never consider whether he ethically should do what he can do.

Anti-intellectualism also shows itself in our political arena.  There is great appeal in the “common man” candidates.  It is seen as a liability in being too academic or too smart.  How many times have you heard voters say that they want a candidate with whom they can identify?  There have been a number of candidates who I am convinced have intentionally dumbed down the way that they present themselves just to appeal to anti-intellectual voters.  Other candidates don’t have to go to that much trouble.

Learning how to think, substantively, critically, and with a solid background of basic knowledge is what education should be about.  In raising our own children, we need to supplement what they get from schools to make sure that they are adequately prepared intellectually.  In some ways that makes parenting more difficult, because when you teach your child to think they may sometimes come to different conclusions than you have.  It is easier to tell them answers to life’s big questions that to help them to learn to discover them for themselves.  But, you won’t always be there.

So far, I have discussed this issue from the standpoint of all of culture.  Now I would like to get into the issue from the perspective of those who claim to be followers of Jesus.  Several years ago Mark Noll, a historian who is a Christian, wrote a book called the “Scandal of the Evangelical Mind”.  It is an excellent treatment of the dominant anti-intellectualism in “evangelical” Christianity.  Mark takes this way back historically.  My one criticism of the book is that he tends to deal with intellectualism only from the perspective of academia.  This is understandable because he is an academic and that is the world in which he functions.  I don’t believe that you have to be an academic to be intellectual, nor do I think that it is legitimate to expect less intellectually of people who are non-academics.  Incidentally, I did have an opportunity to speak with Mark about his book a few years ago and after telling him how much I appreciated it, raised my one criticism.  He agreed.

Without going into nearly as much substantive history as Mark did.  There was an upsurge in anti-intellectualism among theologically conservative Christians in the early 20^th century in the U.S.  When liberal theology was exerting great influence in major universities and seminaries conservatives bailed out.  They were far too quick to blame the intellectualism for the rejection of core truths.  Instead of taking on the new ideas head on, they quit the debate.  They blamed the process for the bad conclusions.  They abandoned the major institutions like Harvard, Princeton, and Yale and replaced them instead with Bible institutes and Bible colleges where truth was dispensed and questions were discouraged.  In much of “evangelical” Christianity serious scholarship and substantive evaluation of theological issues was discouraged. 

As I said at the outset, I believe that when we consciously and intentionally refuse to use the minds that God gave us, we insult Him.  If we really believe that God is the source of all that is true and good.  Then we need have no fear of digging deep into any of the issues that face us.  When followers of Christ avoid difficult subjects, issues, or fields we abandon them to the other side.  Whether the question is origin of the species, or authorship of the Penteteuch we need to be involved.  And, these questions are important for believers beyond just academia.  A number of years ago,  I was a part of a congregation that was looking for a new pastor.  A sizable portion of the congregation let their opinion be known that they did not want a new pastor who was so far over their heads as the last pastor.  I do not believe that the last pastor was an intellectual giant, but he did challenge people’s minds from time to time.  The leadership gave in to the wishes of that portion of the congregation.  How much better off would that congregation have been and how much better off would we all be, if we would seek out leaders who would challenge our minds and force us to think more? 

Parting thought:  some years ago I had a friend come to me and tell me that they heard someone refer to me as an intellectual.  My immediate response was to take that as a great compliment, as that is something that I aspire to.  But, knowing the congregation that the source was a part of, I had to ask if that comment had been intended as a compliment or a slam.  There is something very wrong when being intellectual is viewed as a negative thing.

Bad Art Insults our Creator

Theology of Art

In considering the idea of a Theology of Art, I believe that we need to begin with the source of artistic impulse and ability.  Since we are calling this a “theology” it doesn’t seem like much of a stretch to look to God as that source.  God or Creator is the ultimate artist.  Consider the universe in which we live.  God could have created a world in monochrome with all straight lines.  Why would we “need” so many different kinds of plants and animals?  And, why so many stars?  God created a universe of beauty and diversity.  And, we are told that when He finished, He saw that it was good.  If He had created a simple world, we obviously would never have known the difference.  But, He would have known and it was important to Him.

Humankind is a part of that creation and we are told in Scripture that God chose to create us in “His Image”.  We are not told exactly what that means.  Rather obviously it does not involve our physical appearance, because God is a spirit without a physical reality to image.  So what then is the “Image of God”?   For purposes of this exploration, I would suggest that one aspect of the image is creativity.  Humankind seems unique in that we have the capacity to act creatively.    I certainly believe that there is more to the image than this but further exploration of that is for another time.  We only have the ability to rather poorly to reflect the Creator in our creative endeavors but we do have some capacity.  That capacity was also likely corrupted by the Fall as were other of our capacities, but I believe that there remains in all of humankind some core of that creative image.

It is my belief that anytime that any human being acts creatively he/she is reflecting the innate image of the Creator.  While human creativity reflects God, it also reflects the imperfections and limitations brought on by sin.  Even the most vile and wicked human, who does not acknowledge the Creator at all, can in spite of themselves reflect God.  The creative activity of a person who is a follower of Christ has the possibility of reflecting, in addition to the general image of God, grace.  The perspective of creative activity in a connected relationship to the Creator represents an additional dimension.

While all humans have to some degree the creative aspects of the image of God within them, like all talents the distribution is not equal.  Some of us have special capacity to be creative far above the norm.  When these people develop and use these talents we call them “artists”.  I love music.  I have always had many friends who are excellent musical artists.  I would love to be able to create and perform music.  But, if I tried, you would not want to hear it.  I simply do not have the talent.  Within the Body, members who are artists should be recognized and encouraged to maximize their abilities.  Their creative work should be appreciated and excellence should always be the goal.  Where there is talent and ability, there is also responsibility.

It is time for a quick side note.  Although I have often heard it referred to as such, I do not believe that artistic ability is a “spiritual gift”.  It does not appear in any of the lists in the New Testament.  I believe instead that it is a talent that can be used in conjunction with “spiritual gifts” like teaching, evangelism, helping, etc.  Interestingly, one of the very first examples in the Bible of the Spirit of God being given to individuals for a specific purpose is the “artists” who were assigned the task of creating objects for the Tabernacle to direct the worship of the people of Israel.

What about a sound perspective on appreciation of art for followers of Jesus?  We should have the capacity to appreciate and learn from all quality art because all of it reflects the image of God in the artist.  Believers who prefer the comfortable and bland to truly creative expressions in their corporate live actually insult the creative God that they claim to worship and serve.  Take the realm of music for example.  Much music that is part of the “worship” in most congregations, regardless of what century it derives from, is predictable and boring.  The industry that is called “CCM” is primarily formula driven, imitation of “secular” pop music.  There is very little room for those true artists who are really creative to break in.  In visual arts, again the gravitation is toward the safe.  Thomas Kincade is tremendously popular and has made millions by mass producing schlock non-art paintings.  At the same time truly creative painters can rarely make a living.  Believers, individually and corporately, should encourage and support talented and creative artists both for the internal benefits to the Body and for the benefit of the world in which we live.  Admittedly, there is a great deal of subjectivity when it comes to judging the quality of art.  What I am suggesting is that we need not be as concerned about what we “like” as we are with the attitude that goes into the process.  When the controlling interest behind a painting, or a piece of music, or a photograph is commercial viability rather than quality,  that is bad art.  And, when those who claim to follow Christ intentionally opt for mass appeal over being a quality reflection of their Creator, they do the Creator a disservice.