L’Abri Rochester

  L'Abri 101 The Lordship of Christ over ALL of Life   This Summer we are trying something new! We are beginning our Summer series of lectures with a short five-week course on the essentials of L'Abri teaching, what we sometimes refer to as the 'Five Themes of L'Abri'. Each Friday, Greg Jesson and Jock McGregor will co-teach one of these themes. For those of you who have wondered about what makes L'Abri's teaching distinctive or who want to learn more, this will be a good opportunity. Each lecture is stand alone, but if you can attend all five lectures that make up this short course, that would be best. This week we conclude the course with our fifth theme, which looks at the transforming reality that Christ has come to make ALL things new. Dr. Schaeffer stressed that Christ is not just Lord of our heart or in the Church, but is Lord over all of life.   Greg Jesson's journey from Los Angeles took him to Switzerland, where he studied at L'Abri with Francis Schaeffer, back to LA where he earned a BA at UCLA and an MA at USC under Dallas Willard, and finally to the University of Iowa for a Ph.D. in philosophy. Most recently, he was a professor of philosophy and director of the Center for Ethics and Public Life at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa. Having decided to leave the university, he now spends his time writing, lecturing, restoring an old home, and looking after his dog, Dr. Watson.   Jock McGregor and his wife Alison direct the Rochester L'Abri where they have lived for the past 25 years. They met at Swiss L'Abri and previously worked at English L'Abri for ten years. Jock has a B.Sc. and an M.Div from Regent College in Vancouver. He lectures widely on many topics that bear on the relationship between Christianity and contemporary culture.   \/  \/ Greg Jesson's Syllabus \/   \/   Pondering the Five Themes of L’Abri: #5: The Lordship of Christ Over ALL of Life Dr. Greg Jesson [email protected]   “Christianity is not merely what a man does with his solitude. It is not even what God does with His solitude. It tells of God descending into the course publicity of history and there enacting what can—and must—be talked about.” C.S. Lewis, “The Founding of the Oxford Socratic Club” in God in the Dock, p. 133   We are looking at the nature of the Christian spiritual life. In the context of: Christianity being true That we live in a supernatural universe That we are living in the shadow of the Fall & Christian spirituality is about restoring of our God-created humanity; “Outside of God the biggest thing in the universe is the human soul (mind).”   Or, another way to think about tonight’s theme: “What are the conditions under which human beings flourish?” Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics Think of “The Sermon on the Mount” as addressing the same question: What are the moral conditions under which a person lives the most fulfilling life possible? Living in the availability of God’s Kingdom, what are the conditions and processes under which humans can flourish?   These themes are based on what is actually real (reality) Here is the reality: The infinite personal God eternally exists and is always available to reach out to us The issue of our life before God is if we are actively responding to His plans On/off spirituality can’t be correct because God can’t be part-time Think of the thoroughly non-Christian designation “full-time Christian work”   If Christian belief isn’t applicable to every part of life (emotional, education, career, relationships, politics, etc.) it can’t be true Why? Because that means God and His guidance are restricted to very limited parts of human life Compartmentalization: Occasionally putting on the spiritual hat Sacred/secular distinction Mafia movies, such as The Godfather, killers who cross themselves and attend Mass Obviously can’t be true, Christianity as an activity, usually Sunday mornings, 10-12 Christianity as a hobby Christianity as a philosophy; a purely academic pursuit in academic settings, no commitment whatsoever   The Bible, from beginning to end, presents two Kingdoms or Realms: Kingdom of Man vs. Kingdom of God These Kingdoms war against each other At every moment of life everyone lives in one or other of these two Kingdoms. So, for example, when Jean-Paul Sartre says, “Every existing thing is born without reason, prolongs itself out of weakness, and dies by chance.” Nausea, p. 133, that is affirming a particular set of realities, and therefore, a particular set of possibilities of the human person (dispositional properties)   We forget what it is like to feel spiritually healthy and thriving Jesus came to teach us The Availability of the Kingdom of God (salvation) and The goodness of rightness (sanctification) We live surrounded by false caricatures of what real goodness is, and what real life is   The message of Jesus is so utterly radical, beyond everything that had ever been hoped or dreamed for, that people, even after twenty centuries, have trouble even grasping it what it is all about 14,000 biographies written about Jesus   The full, but simple, message of Jesus is often missed Dallas Willard often said, “Life is about more than having our sins forgiven.”   The picture that we are often given is one of contentless ritual unconcerned about truth as opposed to propositional truth about the love of God that restructures human life on every level   Lordship is not as the oppressive, hope-crushing condemnation by God in every situation like the kingdoms of this world, but it is God’s ever-present offer of reconciliation in each situation of life (Luke 15. 2, “This man accepts sinners and eats with them.”)   The Lordship of Christ brings the authority of God into every corner of human life, not by the soul-crushing ways of the Kingdoms of this world, but with the radical message of God’s grace and truth.   It is an RSVP (the chance of a lifetime) A gracious invitation, not a burden, not the constant threat of condemnation and judgment. Most people think of God as a giant condemnation machine.   What is often missed is that we can’t follow the teachings of Jesus without being transformed by Him   The context is everything: Without the Biblical context: Christianity is true, the supernatural is real, we live in the shadow of the fall, and genuine Biblical spirituality is what it means to be a fulfilled human being   You simply cannot follow what Jesus said, apart from the context of His ever- present availability (Lordship). “The kingdom of God is at hand” Matt. 4.17 “Love your enemies” Matt. 5.43-48, (Hamas leader’s son) “Pray for those who persecute you” Matt. 5. 44 (According to Dallas Willard “Vernon Grounds was unflappable. I’ve never seen anything like it.”) “Pray without ceasing” I Thess. 5.17 Forgive, not “seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.” Matt. 18.21-22 “Be anxious for nothing” Phil. 4.6 “Deny yourself” Luke 9.23 “Be perfect just as your Father in heaven is perfect” Matt. 5.48 “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourself” Phil. 2.3   Doctrine is important, but it alone does not magically save you or transform you What does it mean to believe? Not mere mental assent, not a mental checklist of approved doctrines James 2.19: “the devils believe—and tremble” Their lives are not submitted to the reality of God’s love and it’s availability   How the Qualifications of Discipleship look Impossible Apart from the Lordship of Christ over all Things: Luke 14.25: “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brothers, and sister, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.” Luke 14.27: “And whoever does not bear his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.” Luke 14.33: “So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all he has cannot be my disciple.” John 13. 34-35: “A new commandment I give unto you: As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”   Luke 4. 18-21: Do you hear the Lordship of Christ over All things in these verses?   Finally, what is the result of rejecting the Lordship of Christ over everything; what is the result of ignoring the Kingdom of God as it has been revealed in general and special revelation? This is the cost of non-discipleship This explains so much in the world today   Here is a quotation that I have always found compelling: “Plato and Aristotle have left us awesome portraits of the effect on human character of choices known to be immoral…Such choices are motivated by love of my associates and/or myself, but end up in destruction of all human friendships and in loathing for the self that has so preferred inadequate goods…to practical reasonableness [what is known to be good]. And this self-loathing still does not inspire repentance, because this person has effected a partial but concentrated integration of his character around some set of experiences—say, of domination, or sensual pleasures [and/or indifference].   “It is not too difficult to envisage, then, the constitution by free choices of a character that would be described simply as repudiating all friendship with God…The possibility of having constituted oneself thus, at the time of one’s death, is the possibility of being in the situation which those who offer to transmit the divine self-disclosure to us have called hell. No-one who has thought seriously about ethics, and about his own character, will be inclined to shrug off the possibility that that is the situation he is heading for because he has already, implicitly, chosen it, or might tomorrow do so.” Fundamentals of Ethics by John Finnis, p. 152   Practical Considerations: Before the formation of L’Abri, Francis Schaeffer was deeply despondent over the lack of reality in the Christian community. He constantly pondered the question, “How can we claim that Christianity is true yet there is so little love and compassion in so many Christians?” This question became so compelling to Schaeffer that in 1951 it drove him into a spiritual crisis in which he had to go back and reexamine his reasons for believing Christianity was true. Even after he worked through the good reasons for believing, this question would be the dominant orienting thought of Schaeffer’s life. (I quickly have to add that Schaeffer constantly stressed that this did not mean perfection, but it did require a most definite intention.)   L’Abri was gradually founded as a visible expression of the truth of Biblical Christianity, centered on the Five Themes we have examined in the last few weeks. Here, it makes no sense to claim that one should just “believe” (make merely an affirmative assertion) in the Lordship of Christ, but that it is unnecessary to live by actually following the things that Jesus said and did, i.e. live as if Jesus is Lord.   “Not every one who says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in they name have cast out devils? and in they name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity.” Matt. 7. 21-23   1. One’s general orientation in life determines how we react to the events thrown at us. Life often happens faster than we can carefully prepare for, and our immediate reactions are those things that are closest to our hearts. For most people, their immediate reaction is an expression of their rebellion against God.   Jesus replied “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites [the Pharisees and teachers of the law (vs. 5)]; as it is written: “These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.” Mark 7. 6-7   “Jesus went on: “What comes out of a person is what defiles them. For it is from within, out of a person’s heart, that evil thoughts come—sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance, and folly.” Mark 7. 20-22   This is why Dallas Willard said that “we spend too much time trying and not enough training,” i.e. training to follow Jesus in what he said and what he did.     2. The presence of the Kingdom of God, given through the ministry of Jesus, is available at all times to every person who has accepted God’s offer of salvation.   3. Our pilgrimage in life is to discover that living in the resources of the Kingdom of God is infinitely better than following the self-centered Kingdom of Man.   4. Life affords us daily opportunities to treat every person we meet with Christ-like love and compassion.   “It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare. All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations. It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics. There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations—these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit—immortal horrors or everlasting splendours…Next to the Blessed Sacrament itself, your neighbor is the holiest object presented to your senses.” C.S. Lewis, “The Weight of Glory” in The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses, p. 14-15   5. We are invited to live in the Kingdom of God in all things, from the great and glorious to the small and seemingly insignificant. “Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. So don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.” Matt. 10. 29-31, see also, Luke 16.10   6. Finally, as you live your life, remember the glorious and fathomless context in which each person who has ever walked upon the earth. All of history, all the drama, all the laughter, all the “big” events as well as all the “small” events, all the hopes, all the dreams, all the fears, all the early-morning aspirations, all the late-evening disappointments, all the tears, all the smiles, all the failures, all the successes, every word that was ever spoken—all of it, all of human life without exception: the bottom line of every person’s life is that either it was deliberately lived in the Kingdom of God or it was lived in the Kingdom of Man. The predicable results always followed.   For Further Study: Francis Schaeffer: True Spirituality, The Church Before the Watching World, The Church at the End of the Twentieth Century Edith Schaeffer, L’Abri Dallas Willard: The Divine Conspiracy: Rediscovering Our Hidden Life in God, Renovation of the Heart: Putting on the Character of Christ, The Great Omission: Reclaiming Jesus’ Essential Teachings on Discipleship Mohab Hassan Yousef: Son of Hamas: A Gripping Account of Betrayal, Political Intrigue, and Unthinkable Choices

L'Abri 101: The Humanness of Spirituality   (Lecture Syllabus follows the Blurb.) This Summer we are trying something new! We are beginning our Summer series of lectures with a short five-week course on the essentials of L'Abri teaching, what we sometimes refer to as the 'Five Themes of L'Abri'. Each Friday, Greg Jesson and Jock McGregor will co-teach one of these themes. For those of you who have wondered about what makes L'Abri's teaching distinctive or who want to learn more, this will be a good opportunity. Each lecture is stand alone, but if you can attend all five lectures that make up this short course, that would be best. This week we continue with our fourth theme, which looks at the area of Spirituality - Dr. Schaeffer felt that the traditional Sacred/Secular divide was misguided and that True Spirituality, rooted in the finished work of Christ, should cover all of life - and to be truly Spiritual is to be fully Human.   Greg Jesson's journey from Los Angeles took him to Switzerland, where he studied at L'Abri with Francis Schaeffer, back to LA where he earned a BA at UCLA and an MA at USC under Dallas Willard, and finally to the University of Iowa for a Ph.D. in philosophy. Most recently, he was a professor of philosophy and director of the Center for Ethics and Public Life at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa. Having decided to leave the university, he now spends his time writing, lecturing, restoring an old home, and looking after his dog, Dr. Watson.   Jock McGregor and his wife Alison direct the Rochester L'Abri where they have lived for the past 25 years. They met at Swiss L'Abri and previously worked at English L'Abri for ten years. Jock has a B.Sc. and an M.Div from Regent College in Vancouver. He lectures widely on many topics that bear on the relationship between Christianity and contemporary culture.     \/ \/ Greg's Lecture Handout Below \/ \/   Pondering the Five Themes of L’Abri: #4: The Humanness of Spirituality Dr. Greg Jesson [email protected]   Without revelation from God (general and special) we can’t know what is objectively moral Without revelation from God (general and special) we can’t know what is objectively normal (Here, normal does not mean common; it is closer to the ideal. It’s normative. Normal blood pressure does not mean common blood pressure.)   This is really the question “Is there an objective human nature?”   Humans are in a large part self-determining: this requires that humans are not entirely mechanisms Story of turtle and scorpion at a river   Progression of changing oneself: A Feeling A Thought A Wish A Dream A Hope A Plan A Detailed Course of Action An Act   “In the eighteenth century, the atheism of the philosophes discarded the idea of God, but not so much for the notion that essence precedes existence. To a certain extent, this idea is found everywhere…man has a human nature…each man is a particular example of a universal concept, man. Atheistic existentialism, which I represent, is more coherent. It states that if God does not exist, there is at least one being in whom existence precedes essence, a being who exists before he can be defined by any concept…It means that, first of all, man exists, turns up, appears on the scene, and only afterwards defines himself…Thus, there is no human nature, since there is no God to conceive it…man is nothing else but what he makes of himself. Such is the first principle of existentialism. The existentialist…thinks it very distressing that God does not exist, because all possibility of finding values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with Him…That is the very starting point of existentialism. Indeed, everything is permissible if God does not exist, and as a result man is forlorn, because neither within him nor without does he find anything to cling to.” Existentialism and Human Emotions by Jean-Paul Sartre, pp. 14-15, 22.   Your life as a pilgrimage: “Midway on our life’s journey I found myself in a dark wood.” Dante, Divine Comedy. Homer’s Odyssey, Virgil’s Aeneid, Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress, Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn, Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, Jack Kerouac’s On the Road, etc., etc.   Notice that there are only two options to find the standard of what is normal: 1. Inside oneself—for most nothing is more obvious But, it is obviously wrong. Why do my personal valuations have any authority, or claim of objectivity, besides the fact that my valuations are, by definition, mine? 2. Outside of oneself This just opens one up to all the craziness of the world—we could list the destructive alternatives for hours.   The key to all of life is a rejection of God and God’s ways. What we see in the world today is not only the rejection of God, but the rejection of the image of God. Consequently, people are nothing and have no real value. And then, completely predictably, nothing in life has objective value. Sartre: “Hell is other people.” No Exit   Biblical spirituality can only be considered in the full context of what Christianity actually is: (true, the reality of the supernatural, living in the shadow of the Fall) The Tradition of the “Inner Emptiness” of the Self Colin McGinn, The Character of the Mind: “The idea of a peculiarly mental substance, when you think about it, is extremely weird. It is quite unclear that there is any intelligible conception associated with the words ‘immaterial substance.’ The alleged substance tends to get characterized purely negatively. We are prone to picture it in imagination as an especially ethereal or attenuated kind of matter. Stuff of the rarified sort we imagine the bodies of ghosts to be made of, the kind of stuff a hand could pass without disturbance.” p. 23   Myth has the power to make us say things that probably nobody believes Beware of philosophers bearing stories: instead of “long ago and far away”, “we are prone to believe” Arrogance and ignorance walk hand in hand.   So that when we come to Hume, we have the famous statements: “For my part, when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. I never can catch myself at any time without a perception, and never can observe any thing but the perception.” A Treatise of Human Nature, Selby-Bigge edition, p. 252.   “When I turn my reflection on myself, I never can perceive this self without some one or more perceptions; nor can I ever perceive anything but the perceptions. ’Tis’ the composition [the bundle] of these, therefore, which forms the self.” p. 634.   “Philosophers began to be reconcil’d to the principle, that we have no idea of external [physical] substance, distinct from the ideas of particular qualities. This must pave the way for a like principle with regard to the mind, that we have no notion of it, distinct from the particular perceptions.” p. 635.   In the chapter on Personal Identity of the same book, (Book I of the Treatise) he says:   “The mind is a kind of theatre, where several perceptions successively make their appearance; pass, re-pass, glide away, and mingle in an infinite variety of postures and situations….” p. 253.   G.E. Moore: “Refutation of Idealism”: “The term ‘blue’ is easy enough to distinguish, but the other element which I have called ‘consciousness’—that which sensation of blue has in common with sensation of green—is extremely difficult to fix. That many people fail to distinguish it at all is sufficiently shown by the fact that there are materialists. And, in general, that which makes the sensation of blue a mental fact seems to escape us: it seems, if I may use a metaphor, to be transparent—we look through it and see nothing but the blue.” (p. 20) …the moment we try to fix our attention upon consciousness and to see what, distinctly, it is, it seems to vanish: it seems as if we had before us a mere emptiness.” p. 25.   These statements stand in a long tradition; maybe a mistaken tradition. The self (person, mind, soul) is nothing. What is real are perceptions or mere physical objects.   Colin McGinn: 1. The relation of consciousness to its objects is peculiarly palpable and diaphanous. 2. Therefore, all you come across in introspection are the objects of consciousness, not consciousness itself.   G.E. Moore: 1. Consciousness is “transparent”, a “mere emptiness”   David Hume: 1. It’s impossible to perceive anything except perceptions. 2. Therefore, I never have a perception of myself or the world. But, isn’t this a claim about oneself?   But if that is all you come across, you could never know that you are conscious, or that you are introspecting, and you would not know that consciousness is palpable and diaphanous, and you would not know that it is a pure directedness to things other than itself.   But, if it is a pure directedness, that is precisely a determinate nature and not an inner emptiness at all. If this is so, then apart from general problems about substances and qualities, there does not seem to be any reason why these pure directednesses could not come together to form substances quite as well as the determinate natures that come together to form physical substances do.   Ultimately, everything is weird. That is part of what it means to be ultimate. If you ever get down to what is ultimate about matter you are going to discover that matter is just as weird as anything you can think of.   Non-weird is always against a background of assumed regularities. Why is my dog’s nose always cold?   If you lose the background, which is what happens when you get to what is ultimate then everything is weird.   How could Hume know that he had entered into himself? Like the man who goes outside of his house and looks in the window to see if he is home.   A complete confusion between the Perception of the object and the Object of Perception. Hume turns everything into a perception. But, who is having the perceptions? If nobody, why call them perceptions?   Something profoundly wrong here.   Common experience needs to be weighed against the claim that there is just an inner emptiness. Nothing then over and against that the almost inexhaustible supply of what we experience   The fundamental feature of the mind: Intentionality: ofness or “aboutness” Reveals an unfathomable rich and varied reality “Outside of God the biggest thing in the universe is the human soul (mind).”   If it escapes us, how do we even begin to talk about it?   If we see nothing, how do we know that we are looking through it?     How do you feel? We abbreviate—“fine.” Never could fully express everything you experience through a day in terms of your feelings. Does that sound like an inner emptiness?   Optometrist—we report what we experience, not what is on the wall chart   The idea of an inner emptiness is an absurd contrivance of a view of mind that is based on the mythology of empiricism—the idea that all knowledge must come by means of sense perception (things we see, smell, taste, touch, and hear).   The most important things in life are not given through sense perception (mind, character, God, morality, etc.), but that is just tough for empiricism.   The inner emptiness line cannot account for what we actually know about the flow of reality that makes up our own lives. Empiricism is an utterly bankrupt theory of knowledge.     The Contours of the Soul: Phenomenology: a study of the entire interior life, a study of the structures of experience 1. feelings: bodily, mental, memories, sensations (feelings are loaded with life), emotions 2. acts of thought 3. acts of knowledge 4. acts of will, choices 5. rationality, inference, deriving other beliefs on the basis of what you know, if this is true then that is true 6. attitudes, preferences, orientations (Republicans, Democrats, collectors) 7. habits, dispositions 8. dreams and fantasies 9. character traits, deep-seated purposes, honesty, deceitfulness, malice, bodies of knowledge 10. states of being: being rational, being faithful, being courageous, being moral, being an American, being a skeptic, being an educated person, being Norwegian, being a follower of Jesus, etc. 11. creativity 12. aesthetical judgments 13. moral judgments 14. Comfort level, extrovert, introvert   Connection between the Creation of man, the Incarnation, and Christian spirituality The person of Jesus is the central figure in each of these.   The whole of life is a creative act, and each life is a continual process of creativity beginning to end—with or without the involvement of God.     Practical Implications of the Humanness of Spirituality: As we have stressed in each lecture, the identity of L’Abri is not exhausted merely by a set of ideas—even though those ideas are true. At the heart of Francis Schaeffer’s case for Christianity is the claim that ideas which are not being lived out are not really being believed. What we merely profess and what we actually believe are two different things. Schaeffer stressed the necessity of living consistently with what one claims is true, otherwise we are deceiving ourselves, which is hardly a life of integrity. So, what are some of the practical results of viewing the recovery of our God-given humanity as the essence of genuine spirituality?   1. Genuine spirituality is about more than the forgiveness of sins; it’s about God’s rigorous process of inner transformation as one is being conformed to the character of Jesus Christ. 2. Every person you ever meet has had struggles and disappointments as they have been living in the brokenness of the Fall. 3. In all our associations in life we are given the opportunity to treat each person with “grace and truth” (John 1. 14-17). This is how Jesus lived His life. 4. Life is filled with superb opportunities to minister to others and to learn in discipleship to Christ what true fulfillment, joy, and the meaning of life are. 5. Genuine spirituality is not about fancy rituals or non-propositional, meditative experiences, but follows the teachings of Jesus as he lived in the common everyday world. This Biblical spiritual life is necessarily connected with the creation, incarnation, and God’s revelation in history, which propositionally reveals God’s plan of salvation once humanity has gone off the rails. This is the only way for humanity to have a rational and loving relationship with God. 6. Christianity is a divine invitation to live our lives with God as He progressively transforms our character to be increasingly like that of Jesus. 7. Discover and cultivate the unique God-given contours of your soul in order to bring God’s healing grace and truth to those in your world. As Dallas Willard put it, “What are you planning to do with your life that will bring about results of eternal value?”     For Further Study: Being Human: The Nature of Spiritual Experience by Ranald Macaulay and Jerram Barrs L’Abri, Hidden Art by Edith Schaeffer The New Super Spirituality by Francis Schaeffer “The Emotional Life of Our Lord” by B.B. Warfield in Biblical and Theological Studies Renovation of the Heart: Putting on the Character of Christ by Dallas Willard “The Thought” by Gottlob Frege, start 12 pages in with paragraph that begins with, “A person who is still untouched by philosophy knows first of all things he can see and touch, in short perceive with the senses…” The Recalcitrant Imago Dei: Human Persons and the Failure of Naturalism by J.P. Moreland

(Handout from Greg Jesson follows below)   L'Abri 101: Living in the Shadow of the Fall   This Summer we are trying something new! We are beginning our Summer series of lectures with a short five-week course on the essentials of L'Abri teaching, what we sometimes refer to as the 'Five Themes of L'Abri'. Each Friday, Greg Jesson and Jock McGregor will co-teach one of these themes. For those of you who have wondered about what makes L'Abri's teaching distinctive or who want to learn more, this will be a good opportunity. Each lecture is stand alone, but if you can attend all five lectures that make up this short course, that would be best. This week we continue with our third theme, which looks at the Fall - Dr. Schaeffer felt strongly that we cannot understand the fullness of Salvation unless we understand the full significance of the Fall.   Greg Jesson's journey from Los Angeles took him to Switzerland, where he studied at L'Abri with Francis Schaeffer, back to LA where he earned a BA at UCLA and an MA at USC under Dallas Willard, and finally to the University of Iowa for a Ph.D. in philosophy. Most recently, he was a professor of philosophy and director of the Center for Ethics and Public Life at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa. Having decided to leave the university, he now spends his time writing, lecturing, restoring an old home, and looking after his dog, Dr. Watson.   Jock McGregor and his wife Alison direct the Rochester L'Abri where they have lived for the past 25 years. They met at Swiss L'Abri and previously worked at English L'Abri for ten years. Jock has a B.Sc. and an M.Div from Regent College in Vancouver. He lectures widely on many topics that bear on the relationship between Christianity and contemporary culture. (Handout from Greg Jesson follows)   Pondering the Five Themes of L’Abri: #3: Living in the Shadow of the Fall Dr. Greg Jesson [email protected]   1. Opening comments on L’Abri themes 2. When I began looking at Christianity: First, the person of Jesus, but then general themes: the moral order, the logical order, the soul (personhood), God’s revelation in history, progressive revelation, Old Testament context for the coming of the Messiah, grace, redemption, character transformation, cognitive space, freedom, God’s sovereignty, the Fall, etc.   This is why I’m arguing for Following Clues, Signposts, Hints, and Insights 3. Methodological points: Move from the reality of something to the details of an in-depth analysis of it—not the other way around. Two common mistakes in philosophy and theology: a. the thing to be explained gets reduced into something else: Physical objects get reduced to experiences (Berkeley, Hume, Ayer, Carnap) The self gets reduced to experiences (Hume) Knowledge gets reduced to groundless opinion (countless skeptics) Experiences get reduced to brain states (Dennett, Smart, the Churchlands, etc.) The University of Iowa Philosophy Department: “we are seeking to reduce everything” b. one gets hopelessly lost in the details: (our descriptions of knowledge, God, time, whatever, are never the thing itself) Example: Edmund Husserl 4. The theme of the Fall is really looking at God’s relationship to the world What does the Fall mean? The catastrophic results of human rebellion against God What is the evidence for the Fall? Whatever Became of Sin? By Karl Menninger M.D., “Certain new theologians dispute original sin, which is the only part of Christian theology which can really be proved.” G.K. Chesterton What implications does the Fall have for our lives? It touches every point of our lives   We are each immersed in a vast moral order This is a key element of C.S. Lewis’ case for Christianity   People often begin by getting unnecessarily tangled up in the details while missing the wide, general themes. C.S. Lewis: Why I Am Not an Atheist, From Mere Christianity, pp. 38-39   “My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But, how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet.   Of course, I could have given up my idea of justice by saying that it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But, if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too—for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist—in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless—I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality—namely my idea of justice—was full of sense. Consequently, atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.”   5. Why does God allow the evil and brokenness of our world? The Problem of Evil   Problem of evil: not meant to obliterate the suffering Not is it meant to explain away specific evils, specific sufferings: that would be trivial The world is an unfathomable mixture of good and evil: and We are each a curious amalgam of good and evil. Everyone’s problem: You cannot be a mature human being without facing the issue of evil and suffering   1. If God is all-powerful, then he is able to eliminate all evil. 2. If God is all-good, then he would want to eliminate all evil. Evil exists. Therefore, an all-powerful, all-good God does not exist.   Moral evil vs. Natural evil; Human evil not decreasing with education and technology Never underestimate the potential for evil in each person, nor the potential for good in the human heart   Augustinian accounts of evil (causal explanation) vs. Irenaean theodicies (a rational justification for natural evils). Evil is metaphysically and logically necessary for the achievement of some unique good. An adequate answer must tell us something about God. Why did he allow this? The afflicted man naively seeks an answer, from men, from things, from God, even if he disbelieves in Him, from anything and everything. Why is it necessary precisely that he should have nothing to eat, to be worn out with fatigue and brutal treatment, or about to be executed, or be ill, or be in prison? If one explained to him the causes which have produced his present situation, and this is in any case seldom possible because of the complex interaction of circumstances, it will not seem to him to be an answer. For his question “Why” does not mean “By what cause?” but “For what purpose?” Simone Weil, Waiting for God   Life crushes all the illusions out of us—that is what it was designed to do. Evil a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for recognition of two facts that we continually forget: 1) The folly and futility of the human enterprise in establishing hope in the world (Sin) 2) If there is any hope for humanity, it must come from outside the human sphere (The possibility of Redemption)   Anthony Flew: Parable of the Gardner: “What would have to occur or to have occurred to constitute for you a disproof of the love of, or of the existence of, God?” 1. God would not be acting in love if the world and human life were completely futile and frustrating, in which progress towards the good would be impossible. 2. God would not be acting in love if the illusions of humanity could not be confronted and addressed. 3. God would not be acting in love if people could not see the tragedy of their rebellion. Thus the necessity of natural and moral evils. 4. God would not be acting in love if moral and natural evils, which teach us the tragedy of our ways could be avoided. 5. God would not be acting in love if He instantly changed our evil dispositions, incorrect beliefs, and prejudices to the right and the true. Character is chosen; it is not born, given, or ready-made. 6. God would not be acting in love if He immediately punished everyone for doing wrong. 7. God would not be acting in love if He allowed evil people and structures to become so powerful that they utterly block God’s grace in the world. 8. God would not be acting in love if he did not provide examples of how His love can transform and empower lives, and thus overcome evil. 9. God would not be acting in love if He made us and the world in such a way that change would be impossible, difficult or highly improbable, and available to only a few, such as those with superior intelligence or education, etc. 10. Finally, God would not be acting in love if He did not provide the means by which we could be transformed. This is the meaning of the life and mission of Jesus.   6. Living in the Shadow of the Fall: As stressed in the last two lectures, L’Abri is committed to each of these themes because they are essential elements of the historic Christian faith. Because of this, the members of the L’Abri community are committed to living out these themes in both their individual and corporate lives. Part of the calling of L’Abri is to point the way for others to follow. With respect to the Fall: Understand that every part of creation is flawed, broken, and mangled Recognize that every person is a remarkable mixture of beauty and brokenness (an image bearer of God that has been disfigured by the Fall) Practically this means that every person will often be disappointing to others, and even to oneself. (James 3.2) Everyday we can experience God’s redemptive presence throughout the details of life in a non-utopian way. To live like Christ means intentionally loving others by moving beyond knee-jerk condemnation and criticism. Francis Schaeffer: “If you require perfection or nothing, you will get nothing every time.” The broken nature of the world is not what God desired, so we can oppose evil without opposing God. The objective nature of the Good is always presented against the vivid background of our broken world. Healing, reconciliation, and transformation of character never happen by chance. The Creation and the Fall provide the two reference points to understand every person and each social situation. Permanent transformation (not be confused with perfect transformation) only comes by God’s loving grace. The only way to thoroughly and effectively resist the Fall is by laying down our lives for others by being apprentices of Jesus in all he said and did. Blindly living for one’s self merely perpetuates endless brokenness and evil. For Further Study: Francis Schaeffer: True Spirituality, No Little People Dallas Willard: Renovation of the Heart: Putting on Christ’s Character, The Divine Conspiracy: Rediscovering our Hidden Life in God

(Lecture Syllabus follows the Blurb.)   L'Abri 101: The Reality of the Supernatural   This Summer we are trying something new! We are beginning our Summer series of lectures with a short five-week course on the essentials of L'Abri teaching, what we sometimes refer to as the 'Five Themes of L'Abri'. Each Friday, Greg Jesson and Jock McGregor will co-teach one of these themes. For those of you who have wondered about what makes L'Abri's teaching distinctive or who want to learn more, this will be a good opportunity. Each lecture is stand alone, but if you can attend all five lectures that make up this short course, that would be best. This week we continue with our second theme - what Dr. Schaeffer described as the Reality of the Supernatural.   Greg Jesson's journey from Los Angeles took him to Switzerland, where he studied at L'Abri with Francis Schaeffer, back to LA where he earned a BA at UCLA and an MA at USC under Dallas Willard, and finally to the University of Iowa for a Ph.D. in philosophy. Most recently, he was a professor of philosophy and director of the Center for Ethics and Public Life at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa. Having decided to leave the university, he now spends his time writing, lecturing, restoring an old home, and looking after his dog, Dr. Watson.   Jock McGregor and his wife Alison direct the Rochester L'Abri where they have lived for the past 25 years. They met at Swiss L'Abri and previously worked at English L'Abri for ten years. Jock has a B.Sc. and an M.Div from Regent College in Vancouver. He lectures widely on many topics that bear on the relationship between Christianity and contemporary culture.   Greg Jesson Syllabus as follows: Pondering the Five Themes of L’Abri: #2: The Reality of the Supernatural Dr. Greg Jesson [email protected]   Plan for the Lecture: 1. Opening comments on L’Abri themes 2. Why it’s not a simple matter of evidence. Why? One’s presuppositions and assumptions can greatly determine what one will allow as evidence. At best, evidence without the true framework produces moderate, and often only temporary, curiosity.   This is why I’m suggesting Following Clues, Signposts, Hints, and Insights   This is Lewis’ point in The Screwtape Letters. “There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them. They themselves are equally pleased by both errors and hail a materialist or a magician with the same delight.” The Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis, Preface 3. Carefully define supernatural 4. Evidence for the supernatural is everywhere. It’s right in front of our faces—we just look right past it. Some examples: our experiences and thoughts, our identity through time, knowledge, abstract realities (truth, logic, math, morality), and finally historical miracles 5. Christianity only makes sense in the context of the supernatural. Demythologizing theologians, such as Rudolf Bultmann (1884-1976), rejected the miraculous element (“mythical world picture”) in the scriptures, often arguing that they are incompatible with our current scientific understanding of the world, but traditional Christianity has always maintained that the miraculous is only discernable in the context of the common, everyday view of nature. (e.g. when St. Joseph learned Mary was pregnant). 6. L’Abri deliberately attempts to live daily in the reality of the supernatural: prayer, our expectations, our hopes, and our understanding of everything in the context that we each live our lives in the reality of God, Acts 17.28.   The central point in this lecture: When Ranald Macaulay first heard Francis Schaeffer speak at Cambridge University, (5 June 1958, Wednesday): “The supernatural is right here.” Defining “Supernatural” The natural and supernatural worlds overlap Natural world: physical objects and their properties Supernatural world: minds, experiences, abstract realities (not physical, don’t exist in space) It appears that some parts of reality are objective while other parts appear to be subjective. (Logic, mathematics, and the physical objects that make up the subject matter of the various sciences appear to be objective. To conceive of these realms as being subjective, or in some sense mind-dependent, is just to render these realms utterly unintelligible and absurd. However, mathematical and logical objects cannot just be any kind of objective reality. It would be absurd to conceive of mathematical and logical truths as nothing more than mere marks on a sheet of paper.)   The common, everyday world of our experience, consisting primarily of the physical world in space and time is thoroughly intertwined with the supernatural realities including God and human persons, angelic beings, and abstract objects (math, logic, geometry, and universals—Plato’s forms).   The underlying assumption of the entire secular world: everything is physical Modern connection between empiricism and materialism (naturalism) Empiricism: All knowledge comes from sense experience, things you can see, touch, taste, hear, and smell. This has to be challenged. Only three possibilities: Materialism (Everything is physical)(Weak on the mental) Dualism (both physical and non-physical, mental things exist) (What is the connection between the two realms?) Idealism   (everything is mental)  (weak on the physical)     1926: The Mind and Its Place in the World, by C.D. Broad The Reality of Minds and Knowledge: C.S. Lewis, A Grief Observed: “If Joy ‘is not’, then she never was. I mistook a cloud of atoms for a person. There aren’t, and never were, any people. Death only reveals the vacuity that was always there. What we call the living are simply those who have not yet been unmasked. All equally bankrupt, but some yet not declared.   But this must be nonsense, vacuity revealed to whom? Bankruptcy declared to whom? To other boxes of fireworks or clouds of atoms? I will never believe—more strictly I can’t believe—that one set of physical events could be, or make, a mistake about other sets.” (pp. 25-26)   Lewis’ point: a person can’t be just a series of chemical and electrical events. More to the point: Lewis himself, having knowledge, can’t simply be a series of brain events.   Is the mind identical to (the same thing as) the brain? (mind=brain) Are mental states (pains, perceptions, and thoughts) identical to brain states? (mental states=brain states?) Are there two different things (a mind and a brain) or is there just one thing (mind=brain)?   How Is It Possible to Believe in God? William F. Buckley, Jr.   “I've always liked the exchange featuring the excited young Darwinian at the end of the 19th century. He said grandly to the elderly scholar, “How is it possible to believe in God?” The imperishable answer was, ‘I find it easier to believe in God than to believe that Hamlet was deduced from the molecular structure of a mutton chop’… Granted, that to look up at the stars comes close to compelling disbelief—how can such a chance arrangement be other than an elaboration—near infinite—of natural causes? On the other hand, who is to say that the arrangement of the stars is more easily traceable to nature, than to nature’s molder? What is the greater miracle: the raising of the dead man in Lazarus, or the mere existence of the man who died and of the witnesses who swore to his revival?   The skeptics get away with fixing the odds against the believer, mostly by pointing to phenomena which are only explainable by the belief that there was merely a physical cause for them. But how can mindless forces be the ultimate cause of Hamlet? Or, of St. Matthew's Passion? What is the cause of inspiration?   This I believe: that it is intellectually easier to credit a divine intelligence than to submit dumbly to felicitous congeries about nature...”   Materialism and Empiricism Eliminate the Mind (the self): Here is Hume’s account, which is driven by empiricism. The mind or self gets reduced to experiences. “For my part, when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. I never can catch myself at any time without a perception, and never can observe any thing but the perception.” A Treatise of Human Nature, Selby-Bigge edition, p. 252.   “When I turn my reflection on myself, I never can perceive this self without some one or more perceptions; nor can I ever perceive anything but the perceptions. ’Tis’ the composition [the bundle] of these, therefore, which forms the self.” p. 634.   This is just another way of saying that the mind is identical to the brain (brain=mind) and (mental events = brain events)   But this has to be wrong. Leibnitz’s factory: the brain is a giant factory that we could walk through; we never could see experiences   We could have a complete description of the human body and not know that mental events and minds even existed.   In summary: All mental events are known only by introspection, but no physical objects or events (the objects and events of science) are known by introspection. All mental events are of or about something (i.e. exhibit intentionality), but no physical objects or events (the objects and events of science) are of or about anything. 3. Mental events can be known with certainty (incorrigibility), but physical objects and events cannot be known with certainty. 4. Therefore, mental events are not identical to physical objects or events.   If it appears that there are two things that seem to be completely different the best explanation, given that there is no other direct evidence to the contrary, is that they are different. The burden of proof lies with those that deny that there are two things.   But most people, even Christians, hold onto materialism at all costs. Many Christians are just functional materialists. At another ministry: “As a neuroscientist I think all those things [sense of self, sense of an overriding purpose, our values and ethics, a sense of continuous identity] and more are inextricably linked to the biology of the brain...The thoughts that guide our lives—our purpose, sense of self, values, etc. are also products of organized patterns of activity in the brain.  I don’t see the soul as something separate that lives out there in the ether and has found some way to interact with the brain.  Dualistic thinking is very common and easy to slip into without even being aware of it.” In fact, the author is doing some dualistic thinking of his own.  He says that conscious states “are inextricably linked to the biology of the brain” and are “products of organized patterns of activity in the brain.”  But, if A causes B, than A and B are not identical.  If brain activity causes mental states then brain activity and mental states are not the same thing.  In fact, the author is simply outlining the position of Property Dualism: mental states, as opposed to physical states, are properties that are caused by brain activity.  Many people have tried to avoid this problematic dualistic conclusion, but the only way to do this seems to be either some form of Eliminative Materialism, in which conscious mental states do not exist (a la´ Churchland or Dennett), or the equally improbable view of Panpsychism in which everything is conscious at some level.  These are obviously moves of desperation, but those who hold them understand they are the only consistent way to avoid the bothersome realm of the dualism, which involves the interaction of the non-physical mental with the physical brain. The confusion is further supported by claiming that life after death can be accounted for by means of “some kind of reproduction of that [brain] organization.”  Of course, any reproduction just means that the result is not the original.  You will not live after your death even if a copy of you is produced by God.  That is what reproduction means.  A reproduction is not the original. The author is operating under the confused idea that consciousness requires some kind of physical ground.  But, just by considering the brain alone we would never even know that consciousness exists.  This is an important point worth contemplating.  There is nothing in the mere structure of the brain that would lead us to believe that it is conscious.  Aristotle, who was a pretty accomplished observer, thought that the brain might be for cooling the blood.  Does the author think that God has a brain?  If not, does he believe that God is conscious?  To deny that God is conscious is to leave the confines of Biblical Christianity. Of course—a thousand times over—everyone is correct to claim that brain activity can change the nature of conscious experience, but a causal connection between one thing and another does not show that they are the same thing.  Trying to transform mental realities into physical ones has historically resulted in the mental being eliminated.  The author certainly has explored how changes in the brain affect experience, but that work is incapable of showing that experience itself and the one having the experiences are just products of brain activity. See: John Searle Rediscovery of the Mind, chapter 1, for the same confusion.   Colin McGinn: The Mysterious Flame: Conscious Minds in a Material World, pp. 11-13 “Some people like to harp on the complexity of the brain, as if this gave a clue to its mental productivity. But sheer complexity is irrelevant: merely adding more neurons with more synaptic connections doesn’t explain our problem a bit. The problem is how any collection of cells, no matter how large and intricately related, could generate consciousness…How did evolution convert the water of biological tissue into the wine of consciousness?” According to McGinn we have not the slightest idea, and we will never have the slightest idea, even in 10 billion years if humans live that long.       The Universal Fact of Objective Moral Truths: (The law written in the heart.) This is what the first 5 chapters of Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis are about. Moral truths, like logic, mathematics, and geometry are abstract, therefore, they cannot be physical. (prescriptive vs. descriptive facts)   “Everyone is indignant when he hears the Germans define justice as that which is to the interest of the Third Reich. But it is not always remembered that this indignation is perfectly groundless if we ourselves regard morality as a subjective sentiment to be altered at will. Unless there is some objective standard of good, over-arching Germans, Japanese and ourselves alike whether any of us obey it or not, then of course the Germans are as competent to create their ideology as we are to create ours...Unless the measuring rod is independent of the things measured, we can do no measuring.” C.S. Lewis “The Poison of Subjectivism,” Christian Reflections, p. 73   Miracles, which are interruptions to the natural physical order, are evidence that God is involved in human affairs. This kind of supernatural occurrence must be rare, because it is always against the backdrop of the natural. Jesus’ resurrection was in the highest possible contrast to the universal reign of death in biological life.   Here is the Bottom Line: People often first approach the question of God through the perspective of a thorough-going naturalism with a little Sunday School thrown in: “We just know that everything is physical, but we have a few pesky, recalcitrant conundrums such as consciousness, logic, math, and this irksome guy Jesus that don’t easily fit in. These issues will probably be solved in a few months.” This presupposition will be crucial in next week’s theme: Living in the Shadow of the Fall   The L’Abri Theme of Living in the Reality of the Supernatural Francis and Edith Schaeffer founded L’Abri to demonstrate the possibility of living in the reality of the supernatural; a universe governed by God to bring about His plans; all the good and the bad, “all things work together for good for those who love God” Romans 8.28.   1. Live as if the supernatural is real and that people are not just physical objects that get in my way. 2. Live as if every person is of infinite and wondrously irreducible value. 3. Live as if we can have true-truth about the physical world, the abstract world, and God’s revelation. 4. Live as if the context of life is an objective moral order: a real battle between good and evil. 5. Live as if God is ever-present to redeem our lives and to enable us bring about concrete goods to His glory. 6. Live as if evidence always matters and how we follow it reveals the state of our epistemological humility. 7. Live as if God is never further away than one uttering a simple and sincere prayer in faith. 8. Live as if our lives, and all we do, have eternal significance. 9. Live as if God has given us astonishing co-laborers so we can toil together in His redemptive work. 10. Live as if Jesus showed us how to live an objectively successful life. (“Well done, good and faithful servants.”) 11. Live as if nothing in this world can give so much joy and meaning as living for God who gave His life for us. 12. Live as if we’ve been given the chance of a lifetime.   For Further Study: 1. Dick Keyes: “Five Themes of L’Abri” at L’Abri Ideas Library 2. Benjamin Keyes: “Five Themes at L’Abri Revisited” at L’Abri Ideas Library 3. C.S. Lewis’s Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason by Victor Reppert, 2003 4. The Freedom of the Will by J.R. Lucas, esp. chapter 21, “The Presupposition of Thought” 5. C.S. Lewis: A Life by Alistair McGrath, esp. chapter 10 6. Knowing Christ Today: Why We Can Trust Spiritual Knowledge by Dallas Willard 7. Body & Soul: Human Nature & the Crisis in Ethics by J.P. Moreland and Scott Rae 8. Miracles: A Preliminary Study by C.S. Lewis. For those who want a shorter treatment see Lewis’ God in the Dock, chapter 1 “Miracles”, chapter 9 “The Grand Miracle,” chapter 16 “Religion without Dogma?,” and chapter 4 “Answers to Questions on Christianity”:   Question 6: “Materialists and some astronomers suggest that the solar planetary system and life as we know it was brought about by an accidental stellar collision. What is the Christian view of this theory?”   Lewis: If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present thoughts are mere accidents—the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else’s. But if their thoughts – i.e., of materialism and astronomy – are merely accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all other accidents. It’s like expecting that the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.”

    L'Abri 101: The Christian Faith as Truth We have a short five-week course on the essentials of L'Abri teaching, what we sometimes refer to as the 'Five Themes of L'Abri'. Each Friday, Greg Jesson and Jock McGregor will co-teach one of these themes. For those of  you who have wondered about what makes L'Abri's teaching distinctive or who want to learn more, this will be a good opportunity. Each lecture is stand alone, but if you can listen to all five lectures that make up this  short course, that would be best. This week we start with what Dr. Schaeffer called 'True Truth'. {Text of Greg Jesson's Handout follows} Pondering the Five Themes of L’Abri:   #1:  On Truth & Knowledge Dr. Greg Jesson [email protected] Plan for the Lecture: 1.  Opening comments on L’Abri themes 2.  What is at stake? 3.  Carefully define truth and then knowledge, which requires truth (15 points) 4.  Common Misconceptions concerning truth and knowledge (the following 15 points) 5.  How did truth and knowledge get undermined? 6.  Primary reasons that truth is rejected: naturalism and skepticism  7.  Francis Schaeffer’s pivotal insight concerning apologetics, life at L’Abri, and living in what is true  Truth, Reality, and Knowledge: Following Clues, Signposts, Hints, and Insights  1.  Only certain kinds of things can be true, such as beliefs, thoughts, and indirectly sentences.   (Propositions)  2.  Truth is the correspondence between a belief and reality.  (Correspondence Theory of Truth.)    Schaeffer called this “true-truth” and Dallas Willard called it “real-truth”.   3.  Reality is everything that exists.  Therefore, there are not different realities.  (There are differing  conceptions of  reality, but only one reality.  Reality is objective; it has nothing to do with how you feel  or what you wish.)  4.  Truth requires a truth-bearer (a belief, thought, or sentence) and a truth-maker (reality).  5.  When a thought matches reality, it is true.  6.  When a thought does not match reality, it is false.  7.  Every thought must be true or false.  8.  Because reality is objective, truth is objective.  (Truth has nothing to do with how you feel or what you  wish.)  9.  Therefore, saying that something is “true for me” is literally non-sense.  (Willard’s compass example.) 10.  Saying something “is true for me,” is just a confused way of saying, “I believe it.” 11.  Believing something (even really hard), does not make it true. 12.  Knowledge is more than truth.  13.  Knowledge requires three things:  You must have a belief, the belief must be true, & the belief must be justified.   14.  Justification comes in degrees; therefore, knowledge comes in degrees.  15.  The value of knowledge is that it “gets hold of” reality.  The rest is the adventure of your life! Some Misconceptions and Confusions:  (Examples of misconceptions and confusions are taken from Jamie Smith’s book, Who’s Afraid of Postmodernism)   1.  That nobody knows anything.  Rather, everyone starts by knowing a lot.  (Romans 1: 18 ff.)   2.  If you can’t prove something then you can’t know it.  (Rather, every argument must come to an end.  The          real issue between presuppositionalism and evidentialism is what is required for adequate  justification.)   3.  That we need philosophy in order to know if we know anything.   4.  That knowledge is impersonal, mechanical, and always simple.  (Rather, knowledge is always an achievement of a person wherein the individual grasps the objective on the basis of adequate evidence.    Therefore, knowledge is always a grasping of the objective from a perspective, and perceiving and understanding  the objective within the context of one’s history, education, culture, motives, language,  preconceptions, presuppositions, agendas, values, other knowledge, other beliefs, and physical and mental condition, etc.)   5.  That knowledge is complete or perfect.  (We can have perfect knowledge of very small matters, e.g., a phone  number, but complete knowledge only belongs to God.)   6.  That knowledge does not require humility, patience, and work.  (Rather, what one can see is always dependent on  the condition of that person.  As one famous epistemologist said, “Take heed how you hear” Luke 8.18)   “What I, a sinner saved by grace, need is not so much answers as reformation of my will and heart.” Smith, p.  30  [In  fact, we need all of these things!  Reformation of the will and heart often comes through answers.]   7.  If something is an interpretation, then we can’t know it is true.  This is simply false.  In fact, we test our  interpretations countless of times everyday against reality to see if our interpretations match reality.  “I would agree that the gospel is an interpretation and that we can’t know the gospel is true, if by knowledge  we mean unmediated objectivity or pure access to the ‘way things are.’” P. 44.   8.  If something is true, then everyone could/would know it.   9.  That one’s presuppositions, preconceptions, and beliefs cannot be challenged by the facts. “…I am, in some sense, carrying on the Schaefferian legacy…I want to demonstrate that, perhaps to Schaeffer’s surprise (and chagrin), the claims of postmodernists such as Derrida and Foucault have something in common  with his own account of knowledge and truth (insofar as Schaeffer recognized the role of presuppositions.” p. 27, cf. p. 50    “Unless our apologetic proclamation begins from revelation, we have conceded the game to modernity.” Smith, p. 28    10.  That all knowledge comes from sense experience (empiricism)—things we see, smell, taste, touch, and hear.   After all, this claim itself is not derived from sense experience.    11.  That knowledge requires certainty. Certainty is psychological not epistemic;  it has nothing to do with  knowledge.   12.  Knowledge need not be objective.  Subjective truth and subjective knowledge are incoherent.  Notice how people  who talk of these don’t define them.  Is subjective knowledge different from mere belief?  If so, how?  “However, we need to consider these deep differences in interpretation rather than glibly supposing that the Christian account is objectively true and then castigating the Buddhist account for being merely an  interpretation.  In fact, both are interpretations; neither is objectively true.” P. 50, emphasis in the original.  “Language is a lens through which we see the world, albeit with some distortion, simply because this lens stands between us and the world.  As soon as there is a lens, there is distortion.” p. 36 13.  Claiming objective knowledge necessarily leads to oppression and abuses. “To assert that our interpretation is not an interpretation but objectively true often translates into the worst kinds of imperial and colonial agendas, even within a pluralistic culture.” p. 51 14.  If one has objective knowledge then one has not made an interpretive judgment.  Knowledge is always an interpretation, but it offers itself as the correct (i.e. true) interpretation. “If everything is interpretation, then even the gospel is only an interpretation and not objectively true.” p. 42  15.  If it is logically possible that one is wrong, then one cannot know it.  Rather, simply because it is logically  possible that one is wrong, it does not follow that one is wrong.  The Train Wreck of Truth and Knowledge: 1. Aristotle, Aquinas, and the Biblical writers: Knowledge                                 Blind faith 1. God                                        1. nothing 2. the soul 3. values 4. what other people think, feel, perceive 5. the real world of science 2. Empiricism: Knowledge                                 Blind faith 1. the real world of science             1. God 2. other people                                2. the soul                                                          3. values 3. Relativism: Knowledge                                 Blind faith 1. the “world” as my group sees it       1. God 2. group values                                     2. the soul                                                               3. universal values                                                                   4. the real word of science 4. Subjectivism: Knowledge                                 Blind faith 1. my feelings                            1. God                                                    2. the soul                                                    3. values                                                    4. the real of science                                                                     5. what other people, think,                                                            feel, & perceive                                                                            5. Postmodernism: Secular and Religious Fideism:  The categories of truth, knowledge, justified belief, evidence, and logic simply drop out.  Every set of beliefs is just as “rational” as any other. Knowledge Blind faith All that is available for everyone, Faith systems, Worldviews, Language games, Paradigms, As rational as anything else, Presuppositions, Mere Traditions, etc., etc.                                               There are two basic lines of argument against truth: 1.  The correspondence relation does not look like a physical (causal) relation: The truth bearer (a true belief, thought, or sentence)    -----Corresponds to-----     The truth maker (some fact) “It [naturalism] refutes itself.  Whatever else we may come to believe about the universe, at least we can’t believe in naturalism.  The validity of rational thought, accepted in an utterly non-naturalistic, transcendental (if you will), supernatural sense, is the necessary presupposition of all other theorizing.”   C.S. Lewis, “Religion Without Dogma?” in God in the Dock, p. 107 “Christianity claims to be telling us about another world, about something behind the world we can touch and hear and see.  You may think the claim is false; but if it were true, what it tells us would be bound to be difficult—at least as difficult as modern physics, and for the same reason.” C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, p. 121          2.  Skepticism: Global philosophical skepticism always makes a knowledge claim (“It is impossible to know reality as it is” or “All we can know is our experiences, never reality itself,” etc.), but it requires some knowledge of the world  to establish this conclusion. Descartes:  How do you know that you are not now dreaming? Contemporary philosophy, where it is often claimed that everything is subjective “How do you know that you are not a brain in vat?”  Hilary Putnam, Harvard University  It is almost universally accepted among philosophers today that the only objects which we can be acquainted with are  beliefs or something best described as mental.   According to Keith Lehrer:  “In whatever way a man might attempt to justify his beliefs, whether to himself or to another, he must always appeal to some belief.  There is nothing other than one's belief to which one can appeal in the justification  of belief.  There is no exit from the circle of one’s beliefs.”   Knowledge pp. 187-188 According to Lawrence BonJour: “Now it is a familiar but still forceful idealist objection to the correspondence theory of truth that if the theory were correct we could never know whether any of our beliefs were true, since we have no perspective outside our system of beliefs from which to see that they do or do not correspond.”  “Can Empirical Knowledge Have a Foundation?” in American Philosophical Quarterly, 1978 pp.1-8 According to Michael Williams: “Justification is a matter of accommodating beliefs that are being questioned to a body of accepted beliefs.   Justification always terminates with other beliefs and not with our confronting raw chunks of reality, for that idea is incoherent.”  Groundless Belief p.112 And, according to John Pollock:  “What is it that justifies a belief?  Suppose someone justifiably believes some fact about the world on the basis of some other fact.  Philosophers have often wanted to say that it is the second fact that justifies one’s belief in the first fact . . . But this is misleading.  What is important in deciding whether the person is justified in his belief is not the fact itself but rather the person’s belief that it is a fact.”  Knowledge and Justification p.25 *“Skepticism presupposes an ontology of the mind (a view of the mind) that makes knowledge impossible.”  GJ *“Once one is driven to hold that logic itself is merely subjective the entire enterprise of philosophical inquiry  collapses into incoherence and impossibility.”  GJ G.E. Moore:      A)   1.  The skeptic's principles are correct.           2.  If the skeptic's principle are correct then I cannot know of the existence of this pencil.           3.  Therefore I cannot know of the existence of this pencil.       A)  1.  P           2.  P > not Q           3.  therefore, not Q    ( valid by modus ponens)       B)  1.  I can know that this pencil exists. 2         2.  If the skeptic's principles are correct then I cannot know of the existence of this pencil.           3.  Therefore the skeptic's principles (at least one) must be incorrect.       B)   1.  Q            2.  P > not Q            3.  therefore, not P    (valid by modus tollens) Moore’s point:  Both A and B are logically valid, but we can still ask, “Which do we know better, A1 or B1?   A1 is a long line of questionable philosophical reasoning (such as David Hume’s Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding), whereas B1 is not.  (Compare Hume’s account to Screwtape’s advice to Wormwood in The Screwtape Letters, the first letter),  (See also G.E. Moore: “Refutation of Idealism” and “Proof of an External World”)  What was Francis Schaeffer’s great insight about apologetics? Schaeffer was inspired by Romans 1. 18ff.  People dishonestly suppress truths, which they know to be true (e.g. that people, including oneself, are not merely biological robots, that ethics is nothing but personal preference, that the external world is unjustified opinion, that logic and math are nothing but feelings, etc., etc.).  In many areas of life,  non-believers live as if those beliefs are true but they deny their truth (or that truth even exists).  So, Schaeffer would encourage them to live consistently with their non- Christian views.  What people often surprisingly discovered was that they couldn’t live consistently with their non-Christian worldview.  For many, this was the first moment when they were open to the evidence that  they were wrong.  (See The God Who Is There pp. 126-130) In other words, Schaeffer thought the greatest danger was that the non-believer didn’t take his or her views seriously enough.  If non-Christians really took their beliefs and the logical implications seriously, they couldn’t continue to live in the world, thus they have to cheat by living inconsistently with their beliefs.       Schaeffer’s challenge to Christians: What about us?  Are we intentionally living by taking our Christian beliefs seriously? The founding of L’Abri For Further Study: Dick Keyes: “Five Themes of L’Abri” at https://www.labriideaslibrary.org/IdeasLibraryDatabase/five-themes-of-l'abri Benjamin Keyes: “Five Themes at L’Abri Revisited” at  https://www.labriideaslibrary.org/IdeasLibraryDatabase/five-themes-of-l'abri-revisited Gresham Machen: “Christianity and Culture, delivered at Princeton Seminary 1912” at  https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Christianity-and-Culture-Machen/0f7b3f26fdf92a941d7c11226b0de25ee939fa1c Jim Paul: “True Truth in a Post Truth Culture” at  https://englishlabri.substack.com/p/true-truth-in-a-post-truth-culture-c85 Greg Jesson: “It All Comes down to ‘True-truth’” in He Still Speaks: Francis Schaeffer’s Enduring Relevance, 2021 Greg Jesson: “The Impossibility of Philosophical Skepticism” in Defending Realism: Ontological and Epistemological Essay, 2014

  L'Abri 101: The Christian Faith as Truth We have a short five-week course on the essentials of L'Abri teaching, what we sometimes refer to as the 'Five Themes of L'Abri'. Each Friday, Greg Jesson and Jock McGregor will co-teach one of these themes. For those of  you who have wondered about what makes L'Abri's teaching distinctive or who want to learn more, this will be a good opportunity. Each lecture is stand alone, but if you can listen to all five lectures that make up this  short course, that would be best. This week we start with what Dr. Schaeffer called 'True Truth'. {Text of Greg Jesson's Handout follows} Pondering the Five Themes of L’Abri:   #1:  On Truth & Knowledge Dr. Greg Jesson [email protected] Plan for the Lecture: 1.  Opening comments on L’Abri themes 2.  What is at stake? 3.  Carefully define truth and then knowledge, which requires truth (15 points) 4.  Common Misconceptions concerning truth and knowledge (the following 15 points) 5.  How did truth and knowledge get undermined? 6.  Primary reasons that truth is rejected: naturalism and skepticism  7.  Francis Schaeffer’s pivotal insight concerning apologetics, life at L’Abri, and living in what is true  Truth, Reality, and Knowledge: Following Clues, Signposts, Hints, and Insights  1.  Only certain kinds of things can be true, such as beliefs, thoughts, and indirectly sentences.   (Propositions)  2.  Truth is the correspondence between a belief and reality.  (Correspondence Theory of Truth.)    Schaeffer called this “true-truth” and Dallas Willard called it “real-truth”.   3.  Reality is everything that exists.  Therefore, there are not different realities.  (There are differing  conceptions of  reality, but only one reality.  Reality is objective; it has nothing to do with how you feel  or what you wish.)  4.  Truth requires a truth-bearer (a belief, thought, or sentence) and a truth-maker (reality).  5.  When a thought matches reality, it is true.  6.  When a thought does not match reality, it is false.  7.  Every thought must be true or false.  8.  Because reality is objective, truth is objective.  (Truth has nothing to do with how you feel or what you  wish.)  9.  Therefore, saying that something is “true for me” is literally non-sense.  (Willard’s compass example.) 10.  Saying something “is true for me,” is just a confused way of saying, “I believe it.” 11.  Believing something (even really hard), does not make it true. 12.  Knowledge is more than truth.  13.  Knowledge requires three things:  You must have a belief, the belief must be true, & the belief must be justified.   14.  Justification comes in degrees; therefore, knowledge comes in degrees.  15.  The value of knowledge is that it “gets hold of” reality.  The rest is the adventure of your life! Some Misconceptions and Confusions:  (Examples of misconceptions and confusions are taken from Jamie Smith’s book, Who’s Afraid of Postmodernism)   1.  That nobody knows anything.  Rather, everyone starts by knowing a lot.  (Romans 1: 18 ff.)   2.  If you can’t prove something then you can’t know it.  (Rather, every argument must come to an end.  The          real issue between presuppositionalism and evidentialism is what is required for adequate  justification.)   3.  That we need philosophy in order to know if we know anything.   4.  That knowledge is impersonal, mechanical, and always simple.  (Rather, knowledge is always an achievement of a person wherein the individual grasps the objective on the basis of adequate evidence.    Therefore, knowledge is always a grasping of the objective from a perspective, and perceiving and understanding  the objective within the context of one’s history, education, culture, motives, language,  preconceptions, presuppositions, agendas, values, other knowledge, other beliefs, and physical and mental condition, etc.)   5.  That knowledge is complete or perfect.  (We can have perfect knowledge of very small matters, e.g., a phone  number, but complete knowledge only belongs to God.)   6.  That knowledge does not require humility, patience, and work.  (Rather, what one can see is always dependent on  the condition of that person.  As one famous epistemologist said, “Take heed how you hear” Luke 8.18)   “What I, a sinner saved by grace, need is not so much answers as reformation of my will and heart.” Smith, p.  30  [In  fact, we need all of these things!  Reformation of the will and heart often comes through answers.]   7.  If something is an interpretation, then we can’t know it is true.  This is simply false.  In fact, we test our  interpretations countless of times everyday against reality to see if our interpretations match reality.  “I would agree that the gospel is an interpretation and that we can’t know the gospel is true, if by knowledge  we mean unmediated objectivity or pure access to the ‘way things are.’” P. 44.   8.  If something is true, then everyone could/would know it.   9.  That one’s presuppositions, preconceptions, and beliefs cannot be challenged by the facts. “…I am, in some sense, carrying on the Schaefferian legacy…I want to demonstrate that, perhaps to Schaeffer’s surprise (and chagrin), the claims of postmodernists such as Derrida and Foucault have something in common  with his own account of knowledge and truth (insofar as Schaeffer recognized the role of presuppositions.” p. 27, cf. p. 50    “Unless our apologetic proclamation begins from revelation, we have conceded the game to modernity.” Smith, p. 28    10.  That all knowledge comes from sense experience (empiricism)—things we see, smell, taste, touch, and hear.   After all, this claim itself is not derived from sense experience.    11.  That knowledge requires certainty. Certainty is psychological not epistemic;  it has nothing to do with  knowledge.   12.  Knowledge need not be objective.  Subjective truth and subjective knowledge are incoherent.  Notice how people  who talk of these don’t define them.  Is subjective knowledge different from mere belief?  If so, how?  “However, we need to consider these deep differences in interpretation rather than glibly supposing that the Christian account is objectively true and then castigating the Buddhist account for being merely an  interpretation.  In fact, both are interpretations; neither is objectively true.” P. 50, emphasis in the original.  “Language is a lens through which we see the world, albeit with some distortion, simply because this lens stands between us and the world.  As soon as there is a lens, there is distortion.” p. 36 13.  Claiming objective knowledge necessarily leads to oppression and abuses. “To assert that our interpretation is not an interpretation but objectively true often translates into the worst kinds of imperial and colonial agendas, even within a pluralistic culture.” p. 51 14.  If one has objective knowledge then one has not made an interpretive judgment.  Knowledge is always an interpretation, but it offers itself as the correct (i.e. true) interpretation. “If everything is interpretation, then even the gospel is only an interpretation and not objectively true.” p. 42  15.  If it is logically possible that one is wrong, then one cannot know it.  Rather, simply because it is logically  possible that one is wrong, it does not follow that one is wrong.  The Train Wreck of Truth and Knowledge: 1. Aristotle, Aquinas, and the Biblical writers: Knowledge                                 Blind faith 1. God                                        1. nothing 2. the soul 3. values 4. what other people think, feel, perceive 5. the real world of science 2. Empiricism: Knowledge                                 Blind faith 1. the real world of science             1. God 2. other people                                2. the soul                                                          3. values 3. Relativism: Knowledge                                 Blind faith 1. the “world” as my group sees it       1. God 2. group values                                     2. the soul                                                               3. universal values                                                                   4. the real word of science 4. Subjectivism: Knowledge                                 Blind faith 1. my feelings                            1. God                                                    2. the soul                                                    3. values                                                    4. the real of science                                                                     5. what other people, think,                                                            feel, & perceive                                                                            5. Postmodernism: Secular and Religious Fideism:  The categories of truth, knowledge, justified belief, evidence, and logic simply drop out.  Every set of beliefs is just as “rational” as any other. Knowledge Blind faith All that is available for everyone, Faith systems, Worldviews, Language games, Paradigms, As rational as anything else, Presuppositions, Mere Traditions, etc., etc.                                               There are two basic lines of argument against truth: 1.  The correspondence relation does not look like a physical (causal) relation: The truth bearer (a true belief, thought, or sentence)    -----Corresponds to-----     The truth maker (some fact) “It [naturalism] refutes itself.  Whatever else we may come to believe about the universe, at least we can’t believe in naturalism.  The validity of rational thought, accepted in an utterly non-naturalistic, transcendental (if you will), supernatural sense, is the necessary presupposition of all other theorizing.”   C.S. Lewis, “Religion Without Dogma?” in God in the Dock, p. 107 “Christianity claims to be telling us about another world, about something behind the world we can touch and hear and see.  You may think the claim is false; but if it were true, what it tells us would be bound to be difficult—at least as difficult as modern physics, and for the same reason.” C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, p. 121          2.  Skepticism: Global philosophical skepticism always makes a knowledge claim (“It is impossible to know reality as it is” or “All we can know is our experiences, never reality itself,” etc.), but it requires some knowledge of the world  to establish this conclusion. Descartes:  How do you know that you are not now dreaming? Contemporary philosophy, where it is often claimed that everything is subjective “How do you know that you are not a brain in vat?”  Hilary Putnam, Harvard University  It is almost universally accepted among philosophers today that the only objects which we can be acquainted with are  beliefs or something best described as mental.   According to Keith Lehrer:  “In whatever way a man might attempt to justify his beliefs, whether to himself or to another, he must always appeal to some belief.  There is nothing other than one's belief to which one can appeal in the justification  of belief.  There is no exit from the circle of one’s beliefs.”   Knowledge pp. 187-188 According to Lawrence BonJour: “Now it is a familiar but still forceful idealist objection to the correspondence theory of truth that if the theory were correct we could never know whether any of our beliefs were true, since we have no perspective outside our system of beliefs from which to see that they do or do not correspond.”  “Can Empirical Knowledge Have a Foundation?” in American Philosophical Quarterly, 1978 pp.1-8 According to Michael Williams: “Justification is a matter of accommodating beliefs that are being questioned to a body of accepted beliefs.   Justification always terminates with other beliefs and not with our confronting raw chunks of reality, for that idea is incoherent.”  Groundless Belief p.112 And, according to John Pollock:  “What is it that justifies a belief?  Suppose someone justifiably believes some fact about the world on the basis of some other fact.  Philosophers have often wanted to say that it is the second fact that justifies one’s belief in the first fact . . . But this is misleading.  What is important in deciding whether the person is justified in his belief is not the fact itself but rather the person’s belief that it is a fact.”  Knowledge and Justification p.25 *“Skepticism presupposes an ontology of the mind (a view of the mind) that makes knowledge impossible.”  GJ *“Once one is driven to hold that logic itself is merely subjective the entire enterprise of philosophical inquiry  collapses into incoherence and impossibility.”  GJ G.E. Moore:      A)   1.  The skeptic's principles are correct.           2.  If the skeptic's principle are correct then I cannot know of the existence of this pencil.           3.  Therefore I cannot know of the existence of this pencil.       A)  1.  P           2.  P > not Q           3.  therefore, not Q    ( valid by modus ponens)       B)  1.  I can know that this pencil exists. 2         2.  If the skeptic's principles are correct then I cannot know of the existence of this pencil.           3.  Therefore the skeptic's principles (at least one) must be incorrect.       B)   1.  Q            2.  P > not Q            3.  therefore, not P    (valid by modus tollens) Moore’s point:  Both A and B are logically valid, but we can still ask, “Which do we know better, A1 or B1?   A1 is a long line of questionable philosophical reasoning (such as David Hume’s Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding), whereas B1 is not.  (Compare Hume’s account to Screwtape’s advice to Wormwood in The Screwtape Letters, the first letter),  (See also G.E. Moore: “Refutation of Idealism” and “Proof of an External World”)  What was Francis Schaeffer’s great insight about apologetics? Schaeffer was inspired by Romans 1. 18ff.  People dishonestly suppress truths, which they know to be true (e.g. that people, including oneself, are not merely biological robots, that ethics is nothing but personal preference, that the external world is unjustified opinion, that logic and math are nothing but feelings, etc., etc.).  In many areas of life,  non-believers live as if those beliefs are true but they deny their truth (or that truth even exists).  So, Schaeffer would encourage them to live consistently with their non- Christian views.  What people often surprisingly discovered was that they couldn’t live consistently with their non-Christian worldview.  For many, this was the first moment when they were open to the evidence that  they were wrong.  (See The God Who Is There pp. 126-130) In other words, Schaeffer thought the greatest danger was that the non-believer didn’t take his or her views seriously enough.  If non-Christians really took their beliefs and the logical implications seriously, they couldn’t continue to live in the world, thus they have to cheat by living inconsistently with their beliefs.       Schaeffer’s challenge to Christians: What about us?  Are we intentionally living by taking our Christian beliefs seriously? The founding of L’Abri For Further Study: Dick Keyes: “Five Themes of L’Abri” at https://www.labriideaslibrary.org/IdeasLibraryDatabase/five-themes-of-l'abri Benjamin Keyes: “Five Themes at L’Abri Revisited” at  https://www.labriideaslibrary.org/IdeasLibraryDatabase/five-themes-of-l'abri-revisited Gresham Machen: “Christianity and Culture, delivered at Princeton Seminary 1912” at  https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Christianity-and-Culture-Machen/0f7b3f26fdf92a941d7c11226b0de25ee939fa1c Jim Paul: “True Truth in a Post Truth Culture” at  https://englishlabri.substack.com/p/true-truth-in-a-post-truth-culture-c85 Greg Jesson: “It All Comes down to ‘True-truth’” in He Still Speaks: Francis Schaeffer’s Enduring Relevance, 2021 Greg Jesson: “The Impossibility of Philosophical Skepticism” in Defending Realism: Ontological and Epistemological Essay, 2014

7641-ScienceAndBiblicalAuthority-HansMadueme from the 2017 Rochester L'Abri Conference - The Power of God to Transform Lives Science and Biblical Authority Assessments and reaction to "The fact is science has been instrumental in shaping the development of Christian doctrine" Also included: An insight as to why we have denominations {I found the mentioned books in Google play, but not free, "Editor"} Andrew D. White A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, Vol. I A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, Vol. II John William Draper History of the conflict Between Religion and Science (Bio from our 2026 conference) Dr. Hans Madueme is professor of theological studies at Covenant College on Lookout Mountain, Georgia. Hans was born in Sweden and grew up in Nigeria and Austria. He originally trained as a medical doctor and completed his residency in internal medicine at the Mayo Clinic before shifting his focus to theology. He received his Master of Divinity and then completed his Ph.D. in theological studies from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. His recent books are Defending Sin: A Response to the Challenges of Evolution and the Natural Sciences (Baker Academic, 2024) and Does Science Make God Irrelevant? (Crossway, 2025).

7640 Christianity in the Public Square by Greg Grooms 2017 Rochester L'Abri Conference - The Power of God to Transform Lives Greg Grooms discusses 5 "gameplans", or sub-worldviews, for how Christians interact with the non-Christian world. (Salt and Light)

  The Transformative Power of Art: Music - Margie Haack  - With Denis Haack, and featuring Karen Choi Interview and Music. Lecture from 2017 L'ABRI Rochester Conference - The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures https://www.rochesterlabriconferences.org Ransom Fellowship's Karen Choi Blog post https://ransomfellowship.org/article/karen-choi-paper-birch-2012/ Karen Choi Website https://karenchoimusic.com

Transformation of the City: Lessons from Utrecht. - Wim Rietkerk - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures The lecture is From the 2017 Rochester L'Abri Conference; the speaker is from Dutch L'Abri In 1971, Wim and Greta helped found the Dutch L’Abri. Since then they have led the work in Holland.

Cultural Transformation: A Proposed Model - Bob Osburn - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures   A Senior Fellow with Wilberforce International Institute, which he founded in 2009, Bob Osburn trains international students as redemptive change agents and writes and teaches about international development, comparative worldviews, corruption, education policy, and wealth creation. For seven years he taught courses on religion and educational policy and religion and international development at the University of Minnesota, and currently teaches courses with The New International University and Wilberforce International Institute. He has a PhD in comparative and international development education from the University of Minnesota, a ThM from Dallas Seminary, and a BA from the University of Michigan. He is the author of Taming the Beast: Can We Bridle the Culture of Corruption? (2016) and, most recently, Developing Redemptive Change Agents: Discipleship That Helps Nations Flourish Rather Than Flounder (2021). Bob and Susan have been married for 49 years, are the parents of four sons, and grandparents to 13.

This lecture explains why corruption is so rampant in the international aid sector, tracing much of the problem to faulty diagnoses and remedies rooted in naturalistic and postmodern worldviews. Dr. Bob Osburn, who has worked in international student and academic campus ministry for 40 years and has authored Taming the Beast: Can We Bridle the Culture of Corruption?, recommends a rejection of Christian sentimentalism and a simultaneous fulsome embrace of the Christian worldview in order to bridle corruption in the international aid sector while also enhancing international development outcomes centered on human flourishing.

This talk considers the involvement of medical professionals in intentionally lethal acts in several historical and contemporary contexts (beyond abortion or medical experimentation under National Socialism). Contexts include medicalized capital punishment (from 18th C. France to 21st C. Florida); assisted suicide and euthanasia (from Hippocratic proscription to contemporary prescriptions); transplantation (forced organ harvesting in totalitarian China / the intersection of euthanasia and transplantation among European liberal democracies), as well as, oddly and astonishingly, medical lethality as a backstop solution for failed housing policy in Canada! In economic terms, a 'perverse' incentive accomplishes the opposite of the stated intent. But, a morally or spiritually perverse incentive may also fulfill intent. When medical(ized) lethality is normalized, 'the trouble with normal is it always gets worse' (B. Cockburn) - including for the coherence of medicine per se.   Kirk C Allison, PhD, MS directed the Program in Human Rights and Health at the U of M School of Public Health from 2007-2016 and taught in the Health Humanities Program of the College of Saint Scholastica from 2017-2025. (Previously he served as Chair of the American Public Health Association's Ethics Special Primary Interest Group and testified on forced organ harvesting in China before a U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee).

Throughout its history, Evangelicalism has neglected to consider the spiritual lives of people with profound intellectual disabilities and how their experiences might contribute to a fuller understanding of what it means to follow Jesus. Both the historic and modern constructions of evangelical discipleship have led to particular ministry strategies and practices that rarely consider the presence of people with profound intellectual disabilities. A broader theology of discipleship that includes the spiritual lives of people with profound intellectual disabilities can only be achieved through embracing a renewed emphasis on a theology of the cross, and the conviction that we are held in the trustful love of God that seals our eternal purpose in the divine kingdom. Dr. Phil Letizia is a theologian and pastor who holds a Ph.D. in Theology and Disability from the University of Aberdeen. After 20 years of pastoring and church planting, Phil has joined Anselm House's Center for Faith & Learning as the inaugural Director of the Healthcare Initiative. The initiative aims to provide intellectual and relational support to the significant number of healthcare students, faculty, and providers at the University of Minnesota, in the Twin Cities, and at Mayo Clinic in Rochester. Phil also serves as the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Disability and Religion. Last fall, his book Held in the Love of God: Discipleship and Disability was published by Baylor University Press.

Postmodernism's Failure to Assuage Your Fears - Greg Jesson - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures   Greg Jesson’s long journey from Los Angeles to Iowa took him to Switzerland, where he studied at L’Abri with Francis Schaeffer, to UCLA where he finished his undergraduate degree in philosophy, to USC where he completed an MA in philosophy under Dallas Willard, and finally to the University of Iowa where he received a Ph.D. in philosophy focusing on philosophy of mind, metaphysics, epistemology, phenomenology, and philosophy of religion. He has published books and articles on the nature of thought and knowledge, consciousness, philosophy of mathematics, Francis Schaeffer, the portrayal of ultimate issues in modern film, defending Christianity in the marketplace, and the philosophical and religious thought of Dallas Willard. Over the years he has taught at eight colleges and a seminary, and has lectured widely in America and Europe. Most recently, he was a professor of philosophy and director of the Center for Ethics and Public Life at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa. Having decided to leave the university, he now spends his time writing, lecturing, restoring an old home, and looking after his dog, Dr. Watson.

You Say You Want a Reformation: Cultural Engagement or Cultural Resistance? Evaluating the Benedict Option - Mike Sugimoto - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures    Mike Sugimoto is Professor of Asian Studies at Pepperdine University with a focus on cinema, sociology and philosophy.

The Transformative Power of Art: Story in Film - Denis Haack - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Culture   Denis and Margie Haack co-directed Ransom Fellowship from 1983-2020. They continue a ministry of conversation and listening, as well as writing, no longer in print (Critique & Letters from the House Between), but on their website (https://www.critique-letters.com/). They are enjoying being grandparents while Margie collects eggs laid by her four hens, Pecorino, Brie, Fontina, and Velveeta. They live in Savage, MN and are members of Church of the Cross (Hopkins, MN).

Abraham Kuyper A Model for Transformation - Wim Rietkerk - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures   Wim Rietkerk was educated at Leydon University in Philosophy of Religion and graduated in Theology at Kampen. He has worked as a pastor for many years along with leading L’Abri Fellowship in Holland. He is the author of several books including co-authoring What in the World is Real: Challenging the Superficial in Today’s World.

Can the Bible Reform the 21st Century West - Vishal Mangalwadi - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures   Vishal Mangalwadi is an Indian philosopher and social reformer who has written several popular books on the Bible’s seismic influence. Vishal has lectured in over 40 countries, published seventeen books (including The Book That Made Your World), and contributed to many more.

Developing a Reformed Theology of Culture - Doug Groothuis - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures   Dr. Groothuis holds a Ph.D. in Philosophy (University of Oregon, 1993) and in the fall of 2024, he will become Distinguished University Research Professor of Apologetics and Christian Worldview at Cornerstone University. He is the author of twenty books, beginning with the best-selling Unmasking the New Age (InterVarsity Press, 1986) and including the popular and voluminous textbook, Christian Apologetics, 2nd ed. (IVP Academic, 2022), as well as a memoir, Walking Through Twilight: A Wife’s Illness—a Philosopher’s Lament (InterVarsity Press, 2017), an introduction to philosophy, Philosophy in Seven Sentences (InterVarsity, 2016), and a book on the controversial topic of Critical Race Theory, Fire in the Streets (Salem Books, 2022). He co-authored the introductory textbook on apologetics, The Knowledge of God in the World and in the Word (Zondervan-Academic, 2022) with Andrew Shepardson.

Sin Shamanism Suspicion and The State: Why Corruption Pervades & Devastates Societies Around the World - Bob Osburn - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures   A Senior Fellow with Wilberforce International Institute, which he founded in 2009, Robert Osburn trains international students as redemptive change agents and writes and teaches about international development, comparative worldviews, corruption, education policy, and wealth creation. For seven years he taught courses on religion and educational policy and religion and international development at the University of Minnesota, and currently teaches courses with The New International University and Wilberforce International Institute. He has a PhD in comparative and international development education from the University of Minnesota, a ThM from Dallas Seminary, and a BA from the University of Michigan. He is the author of Taming the Beast: Can We Bridle the Culture of Corruption? (2016) and, most recently, Developing Redemptive Change Agents: Discipleship That Helps Nations Flourish Rather Than Flounder (2021). Bob and Susan have been married for 49 years, are the parents of four sons, and grandparents to 13.

Whenever we read the Gospels, we visualize what we're reading. In essence, it's like we're directing a little film that plays in our minds. As a way to explore that important interpretative dynamic, Jesus films can provide an external reference point for us. In this talk Dr. John Anthony Dunne will help us think about our internal, private films in relation to the external, public ones that have been a major part of film history since the inception of filmmaking at the end of the 19th century. In doing so, he introduces us to his forthcoming book, co-authored with his colleague Dr. Jeannine K. Brown, which is entitled, The Greatest Story Ever Retold: Envisioning Jesus Narratives from Gospels to Film (Baker), focusing especially on The Chosen—the hit, multi-season streaming show about Jesus and the disciples. John Anthony Dunne (PhD, University of St Andrews) is associate professor of New Testament at Bethel Seminary in St Paul, MN, the editor and co-host of 'The Two Cities' podcast, and the author of the forthcoming book, The Mountains Shall Drip Sweet Wine: A Biblical Theology of Alcohol (Zondervan).

America is a deeply divided nation, politically and culturally. With each month that goes by, our public rhetoric seems to grow more angry, our tolerance less and our ability to live with each other more and more uncertain. Increasingly we see our politicized Culture Wars inside the Church as well as outside. Can Christians engage as citizens in the debates and controversies that roil our society without compromise, but also without being sucked into the anger and hatred? In this lecture we’ll be trying to step back from arguing about what our positions should be on every issue and grapple with the question of how we as Christians should engage with political, social and cultural questions and with people who disagree with us about them - both inside and outside the Church. Click for Slides Ian Barrs was born and raised in the South of England, growing up close to the English branch of L'Abri. He studied History at the University of Wales Lampeter, where he gained a BA in History and a Graduate Certificate in Medieval Studies. Following an ancient tradition, he met his future spouse at L’Abri, which eventually led to him moving to her hometown in Iowa. For the last 19 years, Ian and Buffy have lived in SW Iowa, and now have 3 children from ages 17 to 8. Ian is interested in just about everything, but especially History, Politics, culture and cultural differences, subcultures and discussing and debating those and more! He became a US citizen as fast as legally possible, voted in his first primary weeks after becoming a citizen and at various times has been involved in local and state politics in different ways. In 2015 he ran for the Republican nomination for State Representative, and in 2017 he was involved in trying to start a new political party (...it didn’t work). From 2017 to 2021 he was a regular weekly co-host for the “Politics” segment of FaithWorks Live, a live talk show on Des Moines Christian radio. He serves as an Elder at GracePoint EFCA Church in Atlantic, Iowa.

Discover how the human brain reveals meaning, justifies meaning, and constructs meaning and discuss practical implications for the Christian life. Andrea Leep Hunderfund, MD, MHPE, is associate professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota where she practices clinical neurophysiology, teaches neuroscience to medical and physical therapy students, and serves as chair of patient and staff experience for her clinical department.

This presentation will be a bit autobiographical, explaining how persistent curiosity led to permitting a rural composting facility, then to a teaching job and other academic pursuits. Then we will delve into the fascinating world of soil biology (where I am still a student). We will consider soil as the “Foundation of Creation,” and the blessing of farmers and of American agriculture, both small-scale and industrial. After almost four decades as a civil engineer working in large and small private sector consulting firms, permitting and designing landfills and water resource projects, and assisting with environmental responses to freight train derailments, Beth Keister stepped back from the professional engineering world to “complete her liberal arts education” and take on a role as an adjunct professor at Bethel University in St. Paul, MN, teaching an entry-level environmental science course and getting to know the next generation.

Professor Taliaferro will defend the reality of the soul and consciousness. Questions to be addressed: What is the soul? What is the soul or mind-body relationship? Some Christians in the early church (Tertullian) and today (Peter van Inwagen) are materialists in their view of human and nonhuman animals. What are the merits of Christian materialism? This talk and discussion will bring you up to date in the current debate between Christian philosophers about the soul. Charles Taliaferro Ph.D. MA (Brown) MTS (Harvard) MA (URI) BA (Goddard) Professor Emeritus of Philosophy and Emeritus Overby Distinguished Professor, St. Olaf College, has taught at Notre Dame and U. Mass Boston. He is the author or co-author or editor of 40 books (3 are audio books, available on Amazon). For a profile, see: https://wp.stolaf.edu/philosophy/charles-taliaferro-profile/

Many in Rochester know someone in the medical profession; perhaps a doctor, a nurse, a physical therapist. However, what most do not experience is the frontline work of the intensive care unit or the emergency department. These are the spaces where life and death meet; where patients and family members are faced with choices and endings that are deeply painful and often sudden and stressful. Amanda Daxon worked as a pediatric ICU nurse for seven years before transitioning into another career. During that time, she walked with families and children through their darkest moments. She will share her own personal story while also highlighting the stressors that healthcare workers face. She will also share insights into suffering and redemption and will remember the children who shaped her. Originally from Oklahoma, Amanda Daxon graduated valedictorian from Oklahoma Baptist University and subsequently worked for several years as a pediatric ICU nurse before realizing that her true passion was historical study. She graduated in 2011 from The Catholic University of America with a Master of Arts in Medieval History. She subsequently worked as the Program Coordinator for the Byzantine Studies Department at Dumbarton Oaks, a Harvard University research institute located in Washington, D.C. In addition, she volunteered at the Folger Shakespeare Library, performing bibliographical analysis on 16th-18th century Flemish imprints before relocating to Germany for three years, where her husband was stationed with the US Army. There, she honed the art of having children and finding obscure medieval structures to explore. She has resided in Rochester for eight years with her husband, Ben, and three children, Macallan, Gwyneth, and Sullivan. She currently teaches literature and rhetoric at Schaeffer Academy.

How Should Christians Be Tolerant - Dick Keyes - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures

Spiritual Transformation Through Five Doctrines of the Reformation - Doug Groothuis - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures

The Unexpected Reformation - Larry Snyder - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures

The Reformed Roots of Modern Science - Greg Grooms - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures  

Ideas affect our lives in both positive and negative ways. Some of the greatest problems in our lives have their origins in confused thinking. Such thinking makes serious thought about the ultimate issues of life close to impossible. We will look at several confusions that deeply harm people and leave them with without hope. This lecture does not presuppose any previous academic preparation. It is meant to be accessible, practical, and engaging. As always, there will be a significant time for discussion, delicious home-baked snacks, and good company.   Greg Jesson’s long journey from Los Angeles to Iowa took him to Switzerland, where he studied at L’Abri with Francis Schaeffer, to UCLA where he finished his undergraduate degree in philosophy, to USC where he completed an MA in philosophy under Dallas Willard, and finally to the University of Iowa where he received a Ph.D. in philosophy focusing on philosophy of mind, metaphysics, epistemology, phenomenology, and philosophy of religion. He has published books and articles on the nature of thought and knowledge, consciousness, philosophy of mathematics, Francis Schaeffer, the portrayal of ultimate issues in modern film, defending Christianity in the marketplace, and the philosophical and religious thought of Dallas Willard. Over the years he has taught at eight colleges and a seminary, and has lectured widely in America and Europe. Most recently, he was a professor of philosophy and director of the Center for Ethics and Public Life at Luther College in Decorah, Iowa. Having decided to leave the university, he now spends his time writing, lecturing, restoring an old home, and looking after his dog, Dr. Watson.

Mark Chavalas wrestles with a particular issue in the dialogue between God and Abram in Genesis 15, namely the identification of the ‘smoking oven and flaming torch’ of v. 17. Before the advent of the decipherment of cuneiform languages in the mid-nineteenth century the interpretation of the passage was rather straightforward; the oven and the torch represented God, who somehow passed through the halves of the animals in this admittedly strange ritual (which appears to have similarities to an event described in Jeremiah 34:18-19). It so happens that the interaction of Mesopotamian studies with the biblical text has much to offer to help us understand this very difficult and obscure part of Scripture. From a survey of Ancient Near Eastern treaties, the passage appears to be a land grant covenant (among other things). However, the ritual is not nearly as clear; the censer (ie firepot) and torch were used in a myriad of Mesopotamian purification rituals and usually represented two relatively minor Mesopotamian deities, which appears on the surface to be troubling to the believer. Mark will attempt to reinterpret this passage in light of this new information.   Mark W. Chavalas is Professor Emeritus from the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, where he taught for over thirty years. He has written or edited a number of books, including Mesopotamia and the Bible, and the IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. He also has a podcast: Buried Bible Podcast, up and running since February of this year. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61572416891118# He and his wife Kimberlee have six children and four grandchildren.

"We want to be the church for people who don’t like church.” This is just one way I have heard it said lately. In the same way people still want romantic or sexual relationships, but don’t want to have anything to do with marriage… perhaps similar to the way a person decides that ‘The me that I am does not belong in this female body, but belongs in a male body’… and certainly in keeping with our newest generation’s newest definitions of 'family' as ‘emphatically not my family of origin but my people,’ it seems that being a part of a church today that is in any sense associated with traditional concepts of “church” is not only undesirable, but culturally immoral! Let’s talk about our disenchantment with “church” and explore a path to restoration for the Bride of Christ.   Click for Slides   Brian Swedburg is currently enjoying family and grandkids as much as possible, while teaching music at a classical Christian academy. His undergraduate degree is in music education and his masters is in exegetical theology. So, you won't be surprised that he has spent the last 30 years pastoring, church-planting, discipling, leading worship, and teaching music in various capacities. Brian and his wife Julie first came to the Rochester L'Abri in 2016, and have returned as often as possible. He is running in preparation for a 50 k this summer, reading all that he can, and growing up by the grace of Christ with his church, family, and friends.

Updates from the Universe: From Challenges to the Big Bang Model to Extra-terrestrial Life and More - AJ Poelarends - Friday Night Lecture - 6th June   In the past few months, several extraordinary claims have been made about discoveries that could turn our understanding of our universe on its head. From signs that the acceleration of the universe is possibly slowing down (challenging the standard Big Bang model), to claims of large quantities of biosignature chemicals (only known to be made by life on Earth) on an exoplanet approximately 100 light-years away. What are the implications of these claims and what do they teach us about the current state of science? And, perhaps more importantly, what do these claims mean for our understanding of reality and how Christian theology helps us to make sense of it all? Arend J. Poelarends is the director of the Center for Faith and Learning at Anselm House, a Christian study center serving the University of Minnesota (Twin Cities). He received a Ph.D. in Astrophysics from Utrecht University in the Netherlands and an MDiv from Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis (MO). Prior to moving to Minnesota, he taught Physics and Astronomy for 11 years at Wheaton College (IL). For more than two decades he has helped Christians and non-Christians think deeply about questions at the intersection of Science and the Christian faith.

Can I Be Spiritual Without Being Religious? - Dick Keyes - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures   Dick Keyes is the director-emeritus of L’Abri Fellowship in Southborough, Massachusetts, where he has been working with his wife and family since 1979. They now continue to be engaged in the work but on more of a part-time basis. He holds a B.A. in History from Harvard University, and an M. Div. from Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. He has worked for L’Abri Fellowship in Switzerland and in England, where he served also as a pastor in the International Presbyterian Church in London. He has been an adjunct professor at Gordon Conwell Seminary and Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. He is the author of Beyond Identity, True Heroism, Chameleon Christianity and Seeing Through Cynicism, as well as chapters in several anthologies such as No God But God, ed. Os Guinness and Finding God at Harvard, ed. Kelly Monroe, and The New Dictionary of Christian Apologetics.

From Canon to Wikipedia and Back Again - Clarke Scheibe - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures   Clarke Scheibe is the director of L'Abri Fellowship in Victoria, B.C. His wife Julia and he have been a part of L'Abri in Canada for 15 years and they are grateful to have two young children. He received a BLA from the University of Mississippi and a MDiv from Regent College in Vancouver.

Can We Keep it? - Marvin Padgett - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures Marvin Padgett is a book business professional who has served as the Editorial Director for Crossway Books in Wheaton, Illinois. He previously managed the bookstore at L'Abri in Huémoz, Switzerland in 1982. He has also served as a board member of Covenant College (1995-03), Good News Publishers (1988-98), and Great Commission Publications.

In the Beginning Was the Word: The Influence of the Reformation on Art and Music - John Hodges - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures   John Hodges has worked for over 15 years as an orchestral conductor and taught arts and cultural apologetics for over 10 years at Crichton College. He founded and directs the Center for Western Studies, a tutorial program that teaches college-aged students a Christian worldview and the history of Western ideas. Hodges lectures on music, aesthetics, and education, and lives in Memphis with his wife Day.

Salt and Light and the Transformation of Society - Dick Keyes - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures Dick Keyes is the director-emeritus of L’Abri Fellowship in Southborough, Massachusetts, where he has been working with his wife and family since 1979. They now continue to be engaged in the work but on more of a part-time basis. He holds a B.A. in History from Harvard University, and an M. Div. from Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. He has worked for L’Abri Fellowship in Switzerland and in England, where he served also as a pastor in the International Presbyterian Church in London. He has been an adjunct professor at Gordon Conwell Seminary and Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. He is the author of Beyond Identity, True Heroism, Chameleon Christianity and Seeing Through Cynicism, as well as chapters in several anthologies such as No God But God, ed. Os Guinness and Finding God at Harvard, ed. Kelly Monroe, and The New Dictionary of Christian Apologetics.

Europe: God's Experiment - Wim Rietkerk - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures Wim Rietkerk was educated at Leydon University in Philosophy of Religion and graduated in Theology at Kampen. He has worked as a pastor for many years along with leading L’Abri Fellowship in Holland. He is the author of several books including co-authoring What in the World is Real: Challenging the Superficial in Today’s World.

The Book That Made Your World - Vishal Mangalwadi - 2017 Conference Highlights: The Power of God's Word to Transform Cultures    Vishal Mangalwadi is an Indian philosopher and social reformer who has written several popular books on the Bible’s seismic influence. Vishal has lectured in over 40 countries, published seventeen books (including The Book That Made Your World), and contributed to many more.

Tolkien's Elves - The Ideal of Every Artist and Sub-Creator - Jerram Barrs - 2018 Conference Highlights: For Glory and for Beauty - Creativity and the Christian   Jerram Barrs retired in 2022 after 34 years of service to the Seminary. A student of the late Francis A. Schaeffer, Jerram joined the Covenant faculty in 1989 after 18 years with L’Abri Fellowship in England, where he also served as a pastor in the International Presbyterian Church he helped plant there. Jerram is a graduate of Covenant and while a student at the Seminary he and his wife, Vicki, were involved in the planting of Grace and Peace Fellowship, a Reformed Presbyterian (now PCA) church in St. Louis city. His publications include Being Human, Shepherds and Sheep, Who Are the Peacemakers?, The Great Rescue, The Heart of Evangelism, Through His Eyes, Learning Evangelism from Jesus, The Heart of Prayer, Echoes of Eden, Delighting in the Law of the Lord, as well as the video series Building Up Bridges, Breaking Down Walls. He is at present working on a sermon commentary on the Book of Revelation, tentatively entitled Jesus, Lord of History: The Message of Revelation. He is also working on books on The Heart of a Pastor, The Heart of Worship, C. S. Lewis: God’s Hand in His History, and Mythmaking and the Gospel in J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings.

The Intriguing Friendship Between Francis Schaeffer and Hans Rookmaaker - Edith Reitsema - 2018 Conference Highlights: For Glory and for Beauty - Creativity and the Christian   Edith Reitsema worked at English L’Abri from 2002 to 2020, holds a B.A. in Music, and an Honours Degree in Modern English Literature from Potchefstroom University in South Africa; an M.A. in Theology from Covenant Seminary; and a graduate degree in Philosophy from the Free University in the Netherlands. She was one of the translators of The Complete Works of Hans Rookmaaker. Edith lectures on a variety of topics that deal with the relationship between Christianity, contemporary culture and the arts.

A Walk Through Aaron Copland's What to Listen for in Music - John Hodges - 2018 Conference Highlights: For Glory and for Beauty - Creativity and the Christian John Hodges has worked for over 15 years as an orchestral conductor and taught arts and cultural apologetics for over 10 years at Crichton College. He founded and directs the Center for Western Studies, a tutorial program that teaches college-aged students a Christian worldview and the history of Western ideas.  Hodges lectures on music, aesthetics, and education, and lives in Memphis with his wife Day.

Cultivating Beauty - Alison McGregor - 2018 Conference Highlights: For Glory and for Beauty - Creativity and the Christian Alison Mcgregor, who is Australian, worked in computing for 3M Australia before joining her husband Jock in the ministry of L’Abri. They worked at English L'Abri for 10 years and have led the Rochester L'Abri for 20 years. She enjoys still life painting and foraging for mushrooms.

Finding a Voice Through the Arts - Ann Riggot - 2018 Conference Highlights: For Glory and for Beauty - Creativity and the Christian   Ann Riggot is primarily a figurative artist using oils in a more traditional realist style, Ann has explored several other styles and subjects including reflective objects, ocean waves and birds.  Her favorite subject matter, however, are children exploring and interacting with their everyday world.   Ann has exhibited throughout SE Minnesota and the Twin Cities, and has won many awards for her work, including Best of Show, People’s Choice Awards and a merit award in international juried competition.  

Shakespeare and the Christian Walk - Keith Jones - 2018 Conference Highlights: For Glory and for Beauty - Creativity and the Christian Dr. Keith Jones received his B.A. in English from Covenant College and his M.A. in English Literature and Ph.D. in Renaissance English Literature from Saint Louis University. He served as a Visiting Assistant Professor in the English Department of Wheaton College for five years and has been a valued part of the Department of English and Literature at University of Northwestern since 2004. The Joneses have adopted three children from Vietnam. The experiences surrounding their adoptions continue to teach the family about trusting in God. Adopting children from Vietnam has also expanded Keith’s love of Vietnamese culture, literature, and cuisine.

Beauty out of Ashes: Blues and Spirituals for Troubled Times - Bill Edgar - 2018 Conference Highlights: For Glory and for Beauty - Creativity and the Christian   William 'Bill' Edgar (BA, Harvard University, MDiv, Westminster Theological Seminary, DTh, Université de Genève) is proffesor of Apologetics at Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia. He directs the gospel-jazz band Renewal, which features the legendary singer Ruth Naomi Floyd. He is also currently professeur associé at the Faculté Jean Calvin, Aix-en-Provence (France). He has published more than 20 books and numerous articles in French and in English. His most recent book is A Supreme Love: The Music of Jazz and the Gospel (IVP Academic, 2022). He and his wife, Barbara, have two children and three grandchildren.

The Exploration of Good and Evil in C.S. Lewis's Science Fiction Trilogy - Jerram Barrs - 2018 Conference Highlights: For Glory and for Beauty - Creativity and the Christian   Jerram Barrs retired in 2022 after 34 years of service to the Seminary. A student of the late Francis A. Schaeffer, Jerram joined the Covenant faculty in 1989 after 18 years with L’Abri Fellowship in England, where he also served as a pastor in the International Presbyterian Church he helped plant there. Jerram is a graduate of Covenant and while a student at the Seminary he and his wife, Vicki, were involved in the planting of Grace and Peace Fellowship, a Reformed Presbyterian (now PCA) church in St. Louis city. His publications include Being Human, Shepherds and Sheep, Who Are the Peacemakers?, The Great Rescue, The Heart of Evangelism, Through His Eyes, Learning Evangelism from Jesus, The Heart of Prayer, Echoes of Eden, Delighting in the Law of the Lord, as well as the video series Building Up Bridges, Breaking Down Walls. He is at present working on a sermon commentary on the Book of Revelation, tentatively entitled Jesus, Lord of History: The Message of Revelation. He is also working on books on The Heart of a Pastor, The Heart of Worship, C. S. Lewis: God’s Hand in His History, and Mythmaking and the Gospel in J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings.