Intellectual Asleep-ism / Pride

[B. W.]

There are several new waves of teaching within the body of Christ that are subverting sound Christian Doctrine and replacing Christian Theology with peculiar modes of thinking. I will address a few of these in the Theology Thread here on this Forum for discussion and comment. Next is something I call Intellectual Asleep-ism.

Intellectual Asleep-ism as easy I can put it is what puts you to sleep. Have you ever heard a minister preach like a college professor to a bunch of students who have no idea what he is saying? That is a good illustration of Intellectual Asleep-ism. Such is all heady knowledge without any life to it. It fills our seminaries and teaches how to teach with such grand high style that the plain folk cannot understand. Intellectual Asleep-ism, often looks down the nose at such common folk too. I should call it - Intellectual Pride - too as that captures what I am trying to say in a nutshell.

I heard one of these chaps about 8 weeks ago - teach on some topical subject in the bible on - enduring with faith - and guess what, it was all head knowledge and no life. I was falling asleep and so were several others. Then, just like the professor pleasing servant in a college class, someone mentioned after the message how wonderful the message was. The minister way too easily flattered and yupped it all up. Too bad they could not see the eyes roll from the rest of us.

Any of you ever encounter such like this or Christian Intellectual Pride?

If you haven't, then, strike up a conversation between a Hyper Calvinist and an Free wheeling Ariminian...


-
-
-

[RickD]

This reminds me of a church I used to attend about 10 or 11 years ago. Until this day, I believe the pastor of that church had the "gift of healing". I was struggling with insomnia, and this man's sermons "miraculously" cured my insomnia. 10 minutes into his sermons, and I was out like a light!

[B. W.]

This reminds me of a church I used to attend about 10 or 11 years ago. Until this day, I believe the pastor of that church had the "gift of healing". I was struggling with insomnia, and this man's sermons "miraculously" cured my insomnia. 10 minutes into his sermons, and I was out like a light!

Yes that is true Rick but it goes much deeper than that!

A form of rationalism has come in vogue in many quarters of the modern Christian Church based upon Practical Syllogism of Aristotelian thought concerning how to know if one is saved or not.

Aristotelian Practical Syllogism is not a bad form of logic, nor is it wrong. Practical Syllogism sets up a simple form of reason, in a threefold way, such as:

1-Vitamin C is healthy
2-Oranges contains vitamin C,
3-Eating Oranges will maintain health

When used in such manner, nothing much wrong with this form of logic, that is, unless one is allegoric to oranges.

Basically a form of Practical Syllogism crept into the Church regarding salvation and the witness of the Holy Spirit. It came about through the Puritan tradition which basically uses a form of positive confession to assure oneself that they are saved by reflecting on ones conscience by use of reason alone and not by a direct and immediate witness of the Holy Spirit. It came about as a reaction to the abuses of the day toward the bible and experience promoted at the time by the old ways of Roman Catholicism abuse of power well documented in its own history, and strange doctrines infecting the church from aberrant sects during the Puritan era.

Basically this form of reason the Puritans used went like this:

1-All who believe in Jesus Christ are saved
2-I believe in Christ Jesus
3-Therefore I am saved

One could convince his or her self that they were saved and part of the elect if they by use of this form of reason as a reflective confession. This also led to a works based salvation system whereas one proves they are saved by self works that prove one is sanctified and leads to the Hyper Holiness syndrome. It also has led to the modern form of evangelistic techniques that rely on a form of easy believism too. Both leave out the immediate and direct witness of the Holy Spirit and exchange it for cold hard reflective reason based upon adherence to confession within the mind. I know this is controversial but I must ask - where is the influence Holy Spirit in the modern Church? Did he disappear after the last Apostle died and left us as orphans since there is no direct witness of Him anymore?

It appears that this mindset has infected the church and borders on positive confession techniques based on human reason, leaving out the Holy Spirit’s witness. It has led to the rise in what I call Intellectual Asleepism / Intellectual Pride, where human reason alone is the means to derive what the bible teaches, says, and justifies what one does or not do. The Witness of the Holy Spirit upon a person that ensures one is saved is substituted for a salvific form of reason that goes like this:

1-Believe in Jesus Christ, you are saved
2-I believe in Jesus Christ
3-Therefore I am saved

There is nothing wrong with this as the logic is correct but without the influence of the Holy Spirit witnessing with that inward conviction - something is not there. One is relying upon human logic and reason alone to assure they are saved and the means to get others saved. Without the Holy Spirit witness, this correct form of logic, well, is hollow and eventually will put one asleep. I am afraid that so many are asleep behind the pulpits and in the pews that something needs to be said to restore the living reality of the Holy Spirit witness that seals ones salvation secure in the heart and mind of Christian that transforms one's life to actually experience a living personal relationship with the Lord in a life altering way.

Like the Puritans of old not really knowing they were actually saved, modern forms of evangelism leaves many coming to Christ without assurance they are saved unless they reflect and ponder and agree with this syllogism despite what they are going through in life. Many such folks appear to jump ship and reject Christ becoming atheist or joining another religion due to this. Like the boring sermons, and cold hard logic, and exalting human reason in many churches, people simply fall asleep and by the wayside.

To those that do fall by the wayside, what are they told, and thus the tellers assure themselves all is well by …

1-You believed in Jesus Christ and are saved
2-Once you believed in Christ Jesus
3-You are saved

Say this three times fast and reflect upon it an don't worry about it, Yawn... ...Your life falling apart - sorry so sad too bad, bye... just rejoice you are saved - say three times fast...

To make this matter a bit clearer, the article I referenced, by M. J. Sawyer, goes into more details on this and makes the case that John Calvin, John Wesley, and Jonathan Edwards did not hold to the Puritan position of relying on this Practical Salvific Syllogism form a reason as the sole means to determine if one is saved or not. Please read the whole article. In his conclusion, Mr. Sawyer writes:

Conclusion

…As we turn our attention to the doctrine of the witness of the Spirit in salvation we are again faced with a curious situation. One debate that has continued for years within the Evangelical Theological Society is that of Lordship Salvation. Those associated with the free grace position consistently deny that the witness of the Spirit is an experience in the heart of the believer.74 However, many of those who assert the Lordship position also deny in a very practical sense the vitality of the Spirit’s immediate witness and deny that certainty of salvation is possible in this life. Instead they propose a contemporary version of the practical syllogism as the only means of knowledge that one is in fact saved.75

These incidents are, I believe, illustrative of the rationalism that has infected our circle of evangelicalism. We have seen abuses of the subjective and experiential. These abuses have elicited a reaction, not just against the abuses themselves but also against the foundations out of which the abuses arose. This reaction has had the effect of squeezing the Holy Spirit out of his rightful place in the life of believer and in the Church.

The Witness of the Spirit in the Protestant Tradition
https://bible.org/seriespage/witness-sp ... -tradition
M. J. Sawyer, Ph.D. Professor A.W. Tozer Seminary

Do you agree or disagree with Mr. Sawyer's premise?
-
-
-

[RickD]

Bryan,

There's a lot to take in on your post. I'd like you to clarify this if you would:

B. W. wrote:
Like the Puritans of old not really knowing they were actually saved, modern forms of evangelism leaves many coming to Christ without assurance they are saved unless they reflect and ponder and agree with this syllogism despite what they are going through in life. Many such folks appear to jump ship and reject Christ becoming atheist or joining another religion due to this. Like the boring sermons, and cold hard logic, and exalting human reason in many churches, people simply fall asleep and by the wayside.

It seems like you are saying that one must have some kind of feeling of assurance, in order to know one has God's assurance(promise) of salvation.

I'm not sure I'm following you. As one who believes in assurance of salvation, I believe all who are saved, have assurance of salvation, whether or not we actually feel that assurance. For example, if one is saved and continues to trust Christ as a believer, and grows as a believer by sanctification of the HS, there's a good chance that one will feel God's assurance. Otoh, if one is saved, and goes through some trials as a believer, one might not actually feel assured of salvation at that particular time of trials. I contend that both people are equally assured of salvation. Feeling assured, has no bearing on assurance(God's promise) of salvation.

Otherwise, I'm really not sure where you going with this.

As far as this:

…As we turn our attention to the doctrine of the witness of the Spirit in salvation we are again faced with a curious situation. One debate that has continued for years within the Evangelical Theological Society is that of Lordship Salvation. Those associated with the free grace position consistently deny that the witness of the Spirit is an experience in the heart of the believer.74 However, many of those who assert the Lordship position also deny in a very practical sense the vitality of the Spirit’s immediate witness and deny that certainty of salvation is possible in this life. Instead they propose a contemporary version of the practical syllogism as the only means of knowledge that one is in fact saved.75

I can't agree nor disagree. I just don't know if LS adherents and FG adherents actually believe what he says they believe. Logically, the HS in a believer speaks to the believer's spirit, and confirms that scripture is true. So, I'd contend that the HS would show that the syllogism, which is biblical, is true.

1 John 5:13
These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.

I believe in Christ, so I have eternal life.
Since I believe in Christ, I have the indwelling HS.
The indwelling HS tells my spirit that 1 john 5:13 is true.

[Jac3510]

I won't speak to Sawyer's understanding of the LS position, Rick, but his presentation of the FG view of the inner witness of the HS is a straw man at best. It is true that many, if not most, of us deny that Rom. 8:16 says that the HS speaks to our spirit and assures us of our salvation. A much better rendering (grammatically and contextually) is "the Spirit bears witness along with our spirits . . ." In other words, our spirits testify to our salvation, and the Holy Spirit comes along beside us and makes the same testimony. In both cases, the audience of the testimony is God, not us. For us, assurance is of the essence of faith: since I have believed, then by that same faith I also know that I am saved. The syllogism is simply

Everyone who believes in Jesus has eternal life
I have believed in Jesus
Therefore I have eternal life

The first premise is taken on faith. The second premise is the expression of faith. The fact that I can come to the conclusion is not a deviation or addition to faith, then. It is simply the expression of that faith. And it is just here that I have such a huge problem with all versions of LS, because ALL versions of LS deny assurance at the level of faith. As is always the case in matters of projection, they accuse us of their own insecurities. Because their version of assurance comes out of a subjective formula and not out of the objectivity of faith--that is, because they add something to faith to gain assurance--they insist that we are adding something to faith to gain assurance (in this case, "cold logic," as if being reasonable were somehow a bad thing).

So to that extent, and that extent only, Sawyer's point is fine. But he goes too far in blatantly denying the witness of the Spirit at all. That same verse says that we are led by the Spirit. If that isn't an inner witness, I don't know what is. And every FG advocate I know insists that the HS uses Scripture to lead and guide us. Thus, you are exactly right in your own syllogism.

I have to say that I'm not in the least surprised at Sawyer's misrepresentation. It's extremely common. People who insist on denying and distorting the gospel have always made it a habit of building straw men. In fact, I take it that is one of the ways I know that I am on the right road! If they did it to Paul, I shouldn't be surprised when they do it to us (cf. Rom. 6:1). What breaks my heart is that these people project on us so many of their insecurities. They accuse us of cold logic, when, in fact, it is they who are being cold in their "logic." They simply refuse to believe what God has said--Jesus must be a liar on this point--and so they find every argument from reason they can think of to avoid doing the one thing He asked for: faith.

It is FG advocates who have come to realize and embody the notion of child like, saving faith. It is the theologians and pharisees of the world who insist on corrupting what Jesus said, and that's why they cannot and will never have the simple assurance of faith.

[B. W.]

I thought Sawyers article opens a good premise on the role of the Holy Spirit and how that role appeared to be replaced by the logical Puritan mind of the 1600's into a formal syllogism. I understand also that this was used to help people grow in his or her faith. So there is nothing wrong with the logic other than human beings messing it up.

Sawyer, interjects a new line of thought and seems to be saying that folks now have faith alone in - Believe’n - without an object to one’s - believe’n – Jesus Christ as necessarily necessary. One intellectually assures themselves that they believe and goes no further than that. That in a nutshell is what I think Sawyer’s premise is and its spread to the Church world.

This leads to the role of the Holy Spirit. we, (Rick, Jac, myself) may know and are assured by the Holy Spirit many diverse ways but what of others? I began salvation as do others by being awoken to my fallen state and in need of a savior – Jesus Christ. I was saved sitting in a bean bag chair, July 1980 Tucson AZ, all alone, just released from the medical hospital for treatment of Cholera. Looking up, said to the Lord these words, “Dear Jesus I never want to go back to that awful place, I am a mess, save me…”

Something happened then that I cannot explain – it was like a wind entered me and I wept. That presence of the Holy Spirit never has left me. I call that the inward witness of the Holy Spirit. The formal syllogism mentioned earlier came later and it never convinced me as I was already convinced I was saved. I was determined that I needed His help to change the course of my life and he has not let me down. There is the proof. As the apostle Paul mentioned, 'bought at a price and I am not my own' is fitting.

I found out later, there is more to the Holy Spirit than the first impartation / indwelling. There is a need to be equipped and empowered to task God assigns. RA Torrey, D. Moody, and a host of others mention this as well to. So it appears to me that Mr Sawyer is alluding to this as well and that cold formal intellectualism stifles the work of the Holy Spirit, leaving many folks lukewarm, indifferent to the call and effect of God upon a person. I know that Rick and Jac both notice how the modern church is falling prey to a sort of stupor. That is obvious, we can and do see this in many areas. We have mentioned it is this forum too.

Cold intellectualism leads to this stupor, leads to formalism, legalism, hyper holiness, hyper grace, tickling ear pastors, and a host of other things like division, strife, and inflated egos. That is a great danger of this kind of intellectualism as it leaves out the work of the Holy Spirit or at least lessens His influence to a great degree. So in the words of Billy Graham, Dr Charles Stanley, and a host of others – any reader reading this I ask – do you have that personal deep relationship with Jesus Christ?

The old puritan salvific syllogism maybe fine for awhile to get a person started on such a relationship. There is more, much more to the Lord and his deepness…after you get going...

Part of this forum is for that purpose.

Be blessed all by The Lord and his fullness!
-
-
-