The Sons of Issachar: Knowing What Israel Should Do Part 14

Last week we saw that, due to General Revelation and especially Scripture’s Revelation, a Christian’s works of art can be used of the Holy Spirit to reveal both to nonbelievers and believers aspects of the insights concerning Truth that come with the Christian artist’s corrected perspective as he submits his vision of reality to the Word by the Spirit.  The insights imbedded in these works of art can thus be used to confirm and strengthen the faith of Christians, and to be conduits of Grace to non-Christians, drawing them toward belief.

In the post prior to last week, we discussed how it was that contexts helped the understanding of works of art to their audiences.  General Revelation forms a backdrop against which all men can grasp some spiritual understanding of an art-work.  Christians, who by definition have experienced Spiritual Rebirth (John 3:3-8) and should be submitting their beliefs and views to the inerrant Word of God (2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:21; etc.), have a range of knowledge and experience that far surpasses—in terms of Truth and breadth of spiritual insight—that of infidels.  Because of this, a Christian’s spiritual understanding of a work of art (or anything else, for that matter) should vastly surpass that of a non-believer; a Christian has a much deeper and broader spiritual context for understanding art.

Another factor is the amount of influence Christianity has had in forming the cultural backdrop against which a work of art is to be viewed.  For instance, in India, the culture that has formed (e.g., the views of man and the world, of society and relationships, of forms and content of art, whether architecture, dance, music, poetry, drama, prose, fashion, etc., of what is good and desirable in these areas and what is not desirable) has been shaped primarily by Hindu thought, which reaches generally very different conclusions about all of the cultural categories (conclusions that, from a Biblical perspective, are generally quite destructive spiritually).

This is true of any pagan culture, such as Japan (formed by Shinto and Buddhist thought), American Indian culture (formed by Animist thought), or any culture not primarily formed and cleansed by Christian influence (this is even true of Islamic cultures, though these cultures are at least somewhat closer to a Christian perspective, since Islam is a Christian heresy).

A work of art by a Christian, viewed by an infidel culture, will necessarily be subject to a more limited understanding spiritually, since the spiritual context is limited more or less to General Revelation (which is true) plus their pagan religion’s conclusions about reality (which are false).  So, although a work of art from a Christian perspective would easily reinforce the knowledge inherent in General Revelation (which every person knows deep down [Rom 1:18-19ff]), it would also fly in the face of the pagan conclusions of that culture, producing a tension that would either result in a change in the pagan perspective toward a Christian one (what Christians pray will happen by the Spirit’s Power) or a rejection of at least that aspect of the Christian’s work of art by the pagan.

The tension produced by the clash of Christian perspectives and pagan ones is inevitable in a fallen world, and the history of the expansion of God’s Kingdom (Mark 4:31-32; Isa 9:7) is a study in the Godly exploitation of this tension, as Christians seek to order their communications (artistic or otherwise) according to the patterns of the Word and the leading of the Holy Spirit, trusting that the Spirit will draw men to Christ through the obedient actions of the Christian.

This, of course, is a very important study for the Christian artist (in a way, this whole series, even this column, is due to the need for Christian artists to understand this discipline).  Scripture and Tradition are replete with examples of how a Christian can more effectively communicate with pagans, artistically or otherwise.  (I would suggest, for beginners, a careful study of St. Paul’s interaction with the Greek intellectuals on the Areopagus in Acts 17:16-34, which was looked at in some detail earlier in my posts.)

Our own culture, and Western culture in general, has largely been shaped by Christian thought in past, although this is changing, as resurgent forms of pagan thought (rationalism, reductionism, materialism, New Age religion, etc.) continue to undermine the basis of our civilization.  Though this means that, on many fronts, the Christian artist is faced with the same tensions that confront him in pagan cultures (there are growing numbers of non-Christians in our midst), he is still able to rely to a greater extent on what the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer called “Reformation memory,” the lingering influence of Christian belief in our culture.  Even most nonbelievers (though they may not admit, or even realize it) have been influenced to some extent by Christian beliefs.  For instance, they may value the relief of poverty and suffering; have vague ideas about God as Trinity; Christ as being God in the flesh, and Savior; belief in Heaven and Hell; etc.) though their ideas on these issues may depart radically in some respects from their full Truth in Scripture.  Nonetheless, they will probably have some idea, some context, for the concepts expressed in a Christian’s work of art, and what they mean.  This is, in some ways, a tremendous advantage for the artist, since the ultimate goal for the Christian artist is to communicate, through their God-given artistic vision, experience and knowledge of the truth of God in as complete a fashion as possible.  The greater the shared context of a culture with Christian belief, the easier it is to communicate Christian Truth artistically or otherwise.  This is one of the reasons why the Great Commission (Matt 28:18-20) is so important: Christians must work to bring individuals, families, peoples, and culture under the sway of the Gospel, so that Christ may be known to all.

These are, of course, very general observations of a very complex subject, since it is also true that our own culture, for all its Christian heritage, has, in some areas, never been fully Christianized (for instance, we still hold some reductionist ideas).  It is also true that pagan cultures have much less trouble believing and embracing the supernatural and mysterious elements of the Faith than our own rationalistic and reductionistic culture.  Nonetheless, these general observations are, in my estimation, generally true.

This discussion of a larger context leads us to consideration of two smaller contexts—the Church’s and the individual Christian artist’s lives and actions.  With these issues, we will, Lord willing, contend next week.

For additional teaching on Worship and the Arts visit www.patreon.com/kempercrabb

The Sons of Issachar: Knowing What Israel Should Do Part 13

Last week, we saw that it is not necessary to always be explicit concerning our faith (e.g., presenting the plan of salvation or having “Christian” or “Jesus” written in giant letters across our art) in order for our creations to serve God and His gospel.  This is because, as we saw, God has inescapably revealed some knowledge of Himself to every man through His Creation (Rom 1:18-20; Ps 19; Gen 1; etc.).  Romans, chapter 1, teaches that all men know deep within themselves five things: 1) God exists; 2) He made everything; 3) He is holy; 4) we are not holy; 5) He holds us accountable.  The kicker is that unregenerate man attempts to “suppress the truth in unrighteousness” (Rom 1:18), fighting both consciously and unconsciously to twist the nature of Reality in his mind so that he can try to convince himself that he is free from responsibility to God.  According to Romans, chapter 1, though (and the rest of Scripture, as well), he will fail to completely suppress these Truths on some level of his being.

It is in light of this General Revelation, then, that art that presents Reality as it truly is (that is, Reality as it is presented in the Bible), will reinforce Creation’s witness to God and war with unregenerate mankind’s attempt to deny the Truths that God has inescapably written on our very beings.  This is why art that is not what many Christians would normally think of as explicitly Christian (e.g., a love song, or a dance about Spring, or a painting of a landscape, etc.) are still vehicles for a witness to Christ the Lord, provided they do nothing to contradict the true picture of God’s Reality as revealed in Scripture.  All Truth is God’s Truth, and points to Him.

This is why an artist can still be a Christian artist even if his art is not always explicit about his faith, just as a Christian can be a mechanic without chiseling “Jesus Saves” on the metal of every engine he works on, or a baker without decorating every cake he bakes with Scriptures instead of “Happy Birthday.”  What the artist (or the mechanic or the baker) must not do is promote sinful actions or attitudes.

General Revelation forms the basic context for all meaning and art, and it is against that backdrop that art is made.  There is, however, a more explicit context involved in the making of art.  That more explicit context is the context of our individual lives.  We can appreciate aspects of the art of infidels (wherever those aspects square with revealed Reality) despite the unbelief of the unregenerate artist, because of General Revelation.  On the whole, though, infidel art will necessarily depart from Reality because of unbelieving man’s drive to suppress revealed Truth (this doesn’t mean that an unbelieving artist won’t have parts of the body of his work, say a song or painting, that conforms to the basic tenets of generally revealed Truth; it simply means that in many or most places it will depart from that Truth). 

There is (or should be, at any rate) a difference for Christian artists, because Christians live in the light of Special Revelation, the Word of God which reveals the coming of Christ as the Maker and Redeemer who has come to reconcile man to God, and everything men need to know and do to live in the fullness of the Revelation of Christ (2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:19-20).  Because of this, we are to strive to conform every aspect of our lives and being (including our practice of Art) to the scope of Scripture, even down to every last thought we have (2 Cor 10:4-5).

The expanded revelation given in the Bible informs believers to an exceedingly wider degree about the meaning of created things, the legitimate ways to think about and make use of things, and even the short- and long-term end of things (including man and his constructs).  The depth and breadth of Scripture’s revelation should inform everything we do, including our artistic expressions.  Special Revelation, which is so much more detailed and comprehensive than General Revelation, should allow artists to address any area they work in with much greater authority, confidence, and insight, resulting in art that reflects God’s Reality to a must greater degree than that of men limited to General Revelation alone.  This is why it is so important that Christian artists should work to shape their art to the warp and woof of the Word of God.

This is actually the basis of how Christian Art should work.  The Christian artist, having been enlightened and reborn by the Holy Spirit (John 1 and 3), submits his life, thoughts, and vision to the Spirit-energized cleansing of the Word, and brings his renewed vision to the artistic task, infusing it with the insight born from above.  This should result in a clarity and purity of artistry that testifies in ways both obvious and mysteriously subtle of the Truth of the Biblical vision.  (Of course, this presupposes the consistent submission of the artist’s practice to the Word and Spirit and of a certain amount of maturity in that same practice.  Even in a beginning practice of this, though, there should be an interior witness to the numinous quality of the art, simply because of its orientation.)

The resultant works of art can hopefully be used of the Holy Spirit to reveal to nonbelievers and believers the aspects of the insights that come with Special Revelation, and thus to confirm and strengthen the faith of Christians, and to be conduit of Grace to infidels, drawing them toward belief.

This is especially true if works of art are seen against the backdrop of a faithful Christian’s life, and we will, God willing, begin to examine that next week.

For additional teaching visit www.patreon.com/kempercrabb

The Sons of Issachar: Knowing What Israel Should Do Part 12

Over the last few weeks, we have seen that the attitude that rejects the senses, the body, and the physical world and related human experiences such as sensuality, sexuality, and violence as they are presented in the Bible (e.g., Prov 5:18-19; Ezek 23:19-21; Judg 3:21-22; 1 Sam 15:32-33; etc.) arises from a pagan thought system called Platonism, and not from Scripture’s teaching.  We saw that every area of life that is not sinful is good, and that there is thus no neutral zone: a thing is either a sin or it is good (and, if it is good, it is a vehicle for righteousness).

This means that an artist is free to address any theme or area of life as a Christian, provided he does not promote sin.  Indeed, the purpose of doing any vocation, artistic or not, is ultimately to promote righteousness and help inhibit sin, but this is possible even by simply representing life as it is, provided that it is truly represented as it actually is.

For instance, a novel or song that represents life as actively having no spiritual dimension, or promotes the idea that there is no ultimate punishment for wickedness, or that evil is not actually existent, would not be representing life as it actually is, since the infallible and inerrant Scriptures (2 Tim 3:16-18; 2 Peter 1:20-21) teach us that all the aforementioned aspects of life are in effect and do exist.  Thus, to create a work of art that denied these things would be to create a lie about life that fosters sinful beliefs about reality.  We must not, as Christians, do this.

This is not to say, however, that what we create must always make a scriptural connection, or have “Christian” or “Jesus” written in giant letters across it.  Remember that God has created everything that is as “very good” (Gen 1:31; 1 Tim 4:4; etc.), and, so long as those created things and categories are not perverted into sin; by God’s own assessment as Creator, they are intrinsically good in themselves, and need no justification.

The reason that we do not always need to explicitly connect created things and categories to Christ Jesus is because He has already done so, having created everything that is, individually and in concert, to reveal Himself by a mysterious means so that, deep down, everyone knows that created things all point to God.  (Romans 1:18-20; Psalm 19; Genesis 1; etc.—There’s more to be said on this point in the next post, God willing.)  This innate knowledge that all men have about God’s Revelation in the creation (Rom 1:18-20) forms the basic context for meaning and art.  Thus, we do not always need to be explicit in our art, provided we promote no sinful actions or attitudes.

A couple of illustrations from the Bible may be instructive here.  The Song of Solomon is a love-poem written by Solomon the king to his love, the Shulamite.  It is one of the most beautiful and sensual poems ever written, a celebration of courtship, love, marriage, and sex.  It was written to be read (and/or sung) in the ancient Near Eastern society of Israel.

Though the Song is part of our Bibles, it originally was a book of poetry that was presented as a separate art-piece (even though it was inspired).  The interesting thing about this is that though there are allusions to the poem in Biblical places and people in the rest of Scripture, there is no direct mention of God!  Yet this book is justly recognized by both Israel of old and the Church as being inspired Scripture.  It is recognized by Christians as being, on a secondary level, a picture of Christ and the Church, and a manual of principles to govern courtship and the marital sex life.  How can this be, since the poem does not explicitly mention God?

The answer is context.  The Israelite society of Solomon’s time recognized that this poem was set in actual historical circumstance in their culture, a culture which was self-consciously to be ruled over by God’s Covenant Law.  They recognized that it was their Scripture-infused and informed society which gave rise to the backdrop of the love-poem of Solomon, even though it was not explicitly spelled out that this was a “Christian” poem.  The ancient Israelites assumed, because of Scripture, that even things like love and sex and courtship were saturated with spiritual meaning (as indeed they are).  Because of this, Christians, who are the New Israel, share these assumptions, plus realizing that St. Paul in the New Testament explicitly teaches that the marriage relationship is one of the most profound presentations of the relationship between Christ and the Church that exists (Eph 5:22-23), and that, thus, on one level, the Song of Solomon does speak of Christ.

Yet the Song itself, in both its poetic beauty and its exemplified principles of love, is revered as art by huge numbers of people who don’t care a fig for Christ, and either don’t know about or reject the Biblical context for its imagery.  Solomon wrote this poem as a love-poem (despite his being informed by Scriptural contexts), and as a poem alone, it is superlative art.  He didn’t feel the need in this case to be explicit about his whole catalogue of beliefs, because the context of his life and society gave it deeper meaning.  Still, it works on its own, as a prototype of beautiful love poetry.  This is not wrong, or evil.

The same principle rules another part of sacred Scripture, the Book of Esther, a riveting historical account of Queen Esther’s effort to save the Jews from the machinations of the evil Haman.  The book reads like a short story, but, once again, it does not so much as mention the Lord.  Again, it is the context of knowledge about Israel and her history with God that informs its meaning to the Church.  Yet, even someone who knew nothing of Scripture, God, or the Jews could read this tale and be enthralled.  It works, both as a story and as an artful retelling of history.

We see, then, that being explicit concerning our Faith is not always necessary.  To write a song or novel about love, relationships, or history on the terms of the song or novel itself is not only not evil, but may, in many situations, gain credibility for a larger Biblical context by demonstrating the depth and universality of created human experience.  It is alright to simply be human, provided we eschew, and do not promote, sin.  As to the context issue, and questions of General Revelation, we will, God willing, take those up anew in the next post.

For additional teaching visit patreon.com/kempercrabb

The Sons of Issachar: Knowing What Israel Should Do Part 11

Last week, we continued to see that the attitude that rejects the senses and the body (and God’s Creation) as evil, and thus rejects the way that related human experiences such as sensuality, sexuality, and violence are presented in the Bible (Prov 5:18-19; Ezek 23: 19-21; Judg 3:21-22; 1 Sam 15:32-33; etc.) is due to a pagan system of thought known as Platonism, and not to anything in Scripture itself.

Platonism teaches that only non-physical things (like the human spirit) are good, and that all physical things (the human body, the physical world) are evil and to be despised. The system became influential (and continues to be so) in some areas of Christian thought because of a confusion about what the biblical terms “the world” and “the flesh” mean, a confusion that seemed to support Platonic conclusions. As we saw last week, a close look at the biblical use of the term “the flesh” not only did not support, but actually contradicted Platonic thought. Let us see if the same is true for Scripture’s use of “the world.” 1 John 2:15-17 saith: “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world—the lust of the flesh—is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world is passing away, and the lust of it; but he who does the will of God abides forever.” Does this mean the Platonists are right? Is the world itself of physical matter—intrinsically evil? No. This passage specifically tells us “all this is in the world, e.g., “the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life” (1 John 2:16).

The Apostle John (who wrote this epistle as well as the Gospel that bears his name) uses the word “world” to denote the system of pride and rebellion that wishes to replace the rule of the Holy Triune God, not to denote the created order. The “world-system” (rather than Creation) is “not of the Father” (1 John 2:16), and is already experiencing the judgement which leads it inexorably to final destruction (John 12:31; 1 John 2:17; etc.).

Satan is called “the ruler of this world” in John 12:31, (as he is in John 14:30, 16:11; 2 Cor 4:4; Eph 2:2) because he tempted our parents, Adam and Eve, into committing the same sin of which he was guilty: wanting to be God himself (Isa 14:12-15). This lust resulted in both humanity’s bondage to sin and death (Rom 5:12-19) and in the three conditions that describe and define the world-system in 1 John 2:16—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life.

Jesus has formally displaced Satan’s and sin’s rule over the world-system by His Redemption and the spread of His Kingdom, which is gradually displacing Satan’s rule in the lives and institutions of men (John 12:31; Rev 1:5; Matt 13:31-33, 16:18; Eph 1:20-23; Phil 2:9-11; 1 Peter 3:22; etc.). Doesn’t this still beg the question of the innate evil of the physical world? Nay.

St. Paul teaches us in 1 Timothy 4:4 that “Everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving.” In the earlier verses of this chapter, Paul even teaches that the belief that the material world is not to be enjoyed is a doctrine of demons. Remember that Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:20-21), wrote these words long after the Fall of Man in Adam (Gen 3), a re-affirmation of God’s having confirmed His Creation as “good” in its beginning (Gen 1). “The earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof,” as Psalm 24:1 says.

In the sense in which St. John uses the term “world” in the New Testament (and elsewhere by the other writers of Scripture), “world” means the sphere of life in which God’s Lordship is rejected, and where the things of this life become ends in themselves and/or are worshipped. Any created thing, brothers and sisters, can become an idol. This is the world-system.

It is not, however, the created order that we normally refer to as the world. The world, as opposed to the world-system, is good and is God’s. This includes every area of life that is not sin. Grasp this concept, y’all: If something is not sinful, it is good. There is no neutral zone—a thing is either sin or it is good (and if it is good, it’s a vehicle for righteousness).

Everything in the world that is not sin—even physicality, sex, and violence (in their God- ordained places), etc.—is good. This is an important point, folks, because of the implications for our worldview and how it impacts our subsequent view and practice of the Arts. Next week, we will (God willing) take up this viewpoint.

For additional teaching on the distinction of the world and world-system check out the “Windows to Glory” series by visiting www.patreon.com/KemperCrabb

The Sons of Issachar: Knowing What Israel Should Do Part 10

In this post we continue examining the implications of the example of the Sons of Issachar (1 Chr 12:32) for Christian artists today (e.g., understanding the times and knowing what we should do).  Last week, we saw that the attitude that rejects the senses and the body (and thus rejects God’s Creation as evil), and consequently refuses to embrace the ways that such human experiences as sexuality, sensuality, and violence are presented in Scripture (Prov 5:18-19; Ezek 23:19-21; Judg 3:21-22; 1 Sam 15:32-33; etc.) is largely due to a pagan system of thought known as Platonism.  Platonism teaches that only non-physical things (like the human spirit) are good, and that all physical things (our bodies, the earth, and all matter) are infected with evil and are to be devalued.

This system of thought crept into the Church early on, as many men educated in Platonic thought (as all educated men of the time were) converted to Christ, but inadvertently carried this unbiblical view into the Church.  Please remember that these men of the Early Church were truly men of God who lived exceptionally holy lives and who were frequently brilliant thinkers.  The early Church Fathers are the ones who, in the early centuries of the New Covenant Church, amidst great conflict with heretics and frequent social unrest, fought to hammer out in uncompromising forms the clear Truth of the basic teachings of Scripture on such subjects as the Nature of the Holy Trinity, the Mystery of the Incarnation, and the Deity of the Holy Ghost (all of which were hotly contested by the heretics and pagans of the period), what we think of now as basic Christianity, the Creedal Truths that define orthodox Christian belief.

They were frequently persecuted, martyred, exiled, etc., for fighting for and holding these Truths.  The fact that the orthodox Church continued, the Reformation happened, and we are Christians today, is largely due to their efforts in handing on to godly men the unvarnished, clearly articulated Truth of the Bible.  These men were giants in the Faith, and we all stand on their shoulders (not the other way around).

How did this happen? How could the greatest Christian men of their time have made such a mistake (and they were truly great men and great minds—remember that we all are made of dust)?  Recall that they were educated in Platonic thought, which was the dominant philosophical thought-grid of their time.  The problem was that some of the basic aspects of Platonism seemed to be in accord with Holy Writ (though they were actually not, as we shall see).  This produced a confusion of terms, and thus a confusion concerning the nature of holiness.  The biblical terms in question: the “world” and the “flesh.”  Consider these passages:

“For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish.” (Gal 5:17)

“For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells. . .So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.” (Rom 7:18, 25)

“For if you live according to the flesh, you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.” (Rom 8:13)

Whoa.  Maybe Plato was right.  NOT.

The word “flesh” is used at least three ways in Scripture: (1) The most general way is a simple reference to humanness; (2) It is also used to refer to the physical body; (3) Its narrowest use, the way it is used in the passage we looked at, is in contrast to “Spirit” and refers to the sinful human nature which includes the mind and soul.  

Let us look a bit more closely to see if the Platonic view assumed by many of the Fathers is applicable here.

Galatians 5:19-21 tells us what the shape of the work of the flesh (its practice and patterns) looks like: “Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.”

All of these things listed are clearly designated as sinful behavior in Scripture.  There is, please note, no mention of sensual enjoyment or physical pleasure in a godly context (such as sex in marriage, say) or of physically as such.  Only sinful activity in condemned.

Romans 7:13-8:14 tells us even more about the principle of the flesh (go and look this up, oh lazy one, that you may learn; the passage is too long to replicate here).  Verses 17-20 of this passage point out that what prevents the Christian from doing the good that he wants to do is “sin, that dwells in” him, the principle of sin, elsewhere called “the old man.”  Verses 21-25 of chapter 7 speak of the struggle between “the inward man” who delights in God’s law against the “evil that is present in me.”  Verse 23 speaks of “the law of sin in my members” that wars against the inward man of verse 22, e.g., the principle of sin that makes use of bodily desires to manifest itself.

Romans 8, verse 9 says that you are not in the flesh if the Spirit dwells in you, because, according to verses 10 and 11, the body is dead because of sin, but it will (for the Christian) receive life through the Spirit who raised Jesus from the dead.  Verse 13 says we are to put the deeds of the body that realize the leadings of the flesh-nature (the sin nature, the old man) to death by the Holy Spirit’s power.

St. Paul teaches in Romans 6:5-23 that, on the basis of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection, we are able to share in the Spirit’s power to put the flesh-nature’s deeds to death.  For what purpose?  Verses 12 and 13 tell us: “Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts.  And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God.”  We are not to present our bodies to sin (the old man, the flesh-nature), but to God to be instruments of righteousness instead of instruments of unrighteousness.

Did you get that?  Yielding our bodies to God is the way of spirituality.  Romans 12:1 commands us: “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.”

If God commands us to present our bodies as acceptable and hold sacrifices to Himself, He must not hate them after all.  1 Corinthians 6:13b underscores this when it says: “Now the body is not for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.”  Pretty straight ahead.

The opposite of spiritual is not physical.  The opposite of spiritual is sinful.  Our bodies (including the senses) are the arena of our spiritually.  We are not spirits trapped or housed in bodies, but are spirits in bodily state.  Physicality is integrally bound up with spirituality (1 Cor 6:13-15; Phil 3:20-21: 1 Cor 15:12-15, 6:18-20; etc.).  Our bodies will be changed to an unfallen state at the Resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-58; 1 John 1), as the Lord Jesus is physical in His Glorified Body forever.

Christ’s Incarnation not only redeemed us from our sin, but also renewed God’s Image in man, sanctifying the full range of human experience and existence (John 1:25; Rom 5:11-19; 1 Cor 15; etc.) including the senses.  The senses are not evil; only the idolatry of the senses is evil.  The senses are good, like all created things, when used as God intended.  The bodily experience is necessary for spiritually and life.  This is good news for artists, but bad news for Plato and his ancient and modern followers who think that any category of human experience, even the sensual, is off-limits for a proper biblical expression.  We still, however, have not addressed the biblical concept of the world.  Next post, God willing, we shall.

The Sons of Issachar: Knowing What Israel Should Do - Part 9

Last post, as we continued our study of the example of the sons of Issachar (1 Chr 12:32) for Christian artists today (e.g., understanding the times, and knowing what New Israel, the Church, should do), we began to consider the question of how much artistic freedom Christian artists and audiences have artistically.  The question was asked: what things cannot be seen, heard, or considered artistically, either by the artists or the audience, without incurring sin?

To answer this, we looked at the Bible to see how depictions of the categories of human experience most frequently considered suspect by Christians today were handled by the inspired writers (2 Peter 1:20-21) of Holy Writ.  The categories we considered were depictions of nudity, sex, and graphic violence.  We discovered that all of these were addressed in Scripture in ways that would be thought wicked by a large part of today’s Evangelical Church.  (The passages discussed were: for nudity, Proverbs 5:18-19; for the sexual acts of the wicked, Ezekiel 23:19-21; and for graphic violence, Judges 3:21-22 and 1 Samuel 15:32-33.)  We concluded that all of life’s categories are to be addressed legitimately, as long as it is remembered that no category of life, artistically rendered or not, should ever promote sin.  They should, rather, promote righteousness and help inhibit sin.

The final arbiter of how that is to be done is, of course, God, and He has given us His infallible Word (2 Tim 3:16-20) to tell us how to do just that.  We clearly see from the Scriptural passages just listed that His idea of how to depict human actions like sex and violence in order to promote righteousness (the promotion of which is one of Scripture’s primary purposes) differs substantially from the ideas of most modern Evangelical Christians.  The question posed in the last post was: why is there a difference in God’s idea and we modern Christians’ ideas on this subject, especially when we claim to be ruled by Scripture?  Why do American Christians have so much difficulty accepting that these and all categories of life in godly contexts are legitimate?

At the core of the problem is confusion about what biblically constitutes holiness (e.g., how should a Christian believe and act in order to honor Christ?).  This confusion is a result of two pagan systems of thought which have crept into the Church’s views early on (and have been competing with fully Biblical doctrine ever since): Platonism and its evil child, Gnosticism.

In the world of the Early Church, educated men were trained in Platonic thought just as modern men are taught naturalism (which is the underpinning of evolutionary scientism, modern psychology and sociology, etc.).  When these educated men converted to Christ, they carried with them inadvertently a thought grid, or way of looking at the world, that was formed by Platonic thought, and this affected the way they looked at parts of the Bible.

Plato taught that the physical body should be rejected as “mortal trash,” and denounced works of art as inferior copies of the eternal Forms or Essences, useful only as a religious way to escape from the visible and the physical.  From the loins of Platonism sprang a system of thought called Gnosticism, which held that all matter and our bodies, the entire physical world, are innately evil, and that only non-physical things (like the human spirit) are good.

Splitting the created world into bad parts and good parts in this fashion is called dualism.  Dualism is in direct conflict with the Bible, which explicitly says that everything God created is good (1 Tim 4:4; Gen 1:9, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31).  (I am not, of course denying the Fall and its radical and monstrous consequences, as we will see in the next post.  Remember, though that both St. Paul and Moses were very aware of the Fall, and still wrote in 1 Timothy and Genesis, respectively, about the goodness of Creation under the Holy Spirit’s direction [2 Peter 20-21]).

Generally, the Early Church Fathers renounced Gnosticism’s hard-core denunciation of the physical, but they unfortunately frequently retained the matter/spirit dualism in its milder Platonic form, which, remember, was the received educational wisdom of the day.  This led many in the Church to devalue art, sex, the body, and the physical world generally.  This viewpoint has been passed down through the centuries in various forms to today’s Church, and has been (and still is) at war with Biblical, Creation-affirming, Incarnational Christianity, watering the Faith down and radically and negatively affecting the Arts amongst Christians.

Why did the exemplary and godly Fathers of the Church continue to identify with this pagan view of reality?  Why do Christians still today continue to (though it is called by a different name now)?  The answer lies in a sad confusion of terms.  What terms?  The world and the flesh, which terms we will (God willing) consider closely next week.

For additional teaching on holiness, visit Patreon.com/kempercrabb

The Sons of Issachar: Knowing What Israel Should Do, Part 8

Ehud stabbing Elgon (Judges 3)

The last two posts presented an overview of this series on a study of the Sons of Issachar (commented in 1 Chr 12:32) as a model for Christian artists.  One of the two things they were commended for was “knowing what Israel should do.”  Knowing what Israel should do translates for us today into the necessity of knowing Scripture as the divine blueprint for what we are to believe and to do as members of Christ’s Church, the spiritual Israel (Gal 3:6-9; Eph 2:11-22, 3:6; Rom 2:28-29; etc.).  This involves knowing what Scripture teaches, its content and forms, knowledge of which prepares the Christian “for every good work” (2 Tim 3:16-17), which includes the good work of obedience of Christ’s call to a musical/artistic ministry.

Beginning this week, we will consider the pressing question of how much freedom the Christian artist has, which is related to the question of how much freedom the Christian audience has.  What things cannot be seen, heard, or considered artistically, either by the artist or the audience, without sinning?

These are questions which face almost all Christians in America (and the world) today, not just artists, but all Christians who watch movies or TV, who read fiction, or listen to music (especially contemporary music of anysort, including modern and contemporary classical and CCM).

To answer these questions, we must see how Scripture limits the categories of human experience.  What categories are off-limits to the Christian according to the Holy Writ?  Let us look at some of the categories most objected to by Christians today: depictions of nudity, sex, and graphic violence.  Does the Bible, through which the Holy Spirit speaks (2 Peter 1:20-21), treat these categories, and, if so, how?  How does the greatest work of art in creation, the Bible, treat these subjects?  Straightforwardly? Let’s see:

Does the Bible eschew sensuality or put negative connotations on it?  Witness Proverbs 5:18-19: “May your fountain be blessed, and may you rejoice in the wife of your youth.  A loving doe, a graceful deer—may her breasts satisfy you always, may you ever be captivated by her love.”  This, along with other portions of Scripture (notably the Song of Solomon) all address sexual sensuality in the context of marriage without shying away from, or pulling any punches about, sexuality.

What about the sexual acts of the wicked?  Does Scripture address these explicitly?  Read Ezekiel 23:19-21: “Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt.  There she lusted after her lovers, who genitals were like those of donkeys, whose emissions were like that of horses.  So you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when in Egypt your bosom was caressed and your young breasts fondled.”  Here we have the Prophet Ezekiel speaking God’sassessment of Israel’s wicked behavior as God through Ezekiel brings charges against Israel.

Does God’s Word contain graphic descriptions of violence?  Judges 3:21-22 says, “So Ehud came to him (now he was sitting upstairs in his cool private chamber).  Then Ehud said, ‘I have a message from God for you.’  So he arose from his seat.  Then Ehud reached with his left hand, took the dagger from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly.  Even the hilt went in after the blade, and the fat closed over the blade, for he did not draw the dagger out of his belly; and his entrails came out.”  Here we hear the detailed story of the violent assassination of the tyrant Eglon by the righteous deliverer Ehud, raised up by God for this purpose.

Samuel the Prophet, God’s advisor to Kings Saul and David, is graphically recorded as enforcing God’s sentence against Agag when Saul failed to in 1 Samuel 15:32: “Then Samuel said, ‘Bring Agag, king of the Amalekites here to me.’  So Agag came to him cautiously, and Agag said, ‘Surely the bitterness of death is past.’  But Samuel said, ‘As your sword has made women childless, so shall your mother be childless among women.’  And Samuel hacked Agag to pieces before the Lord in Gilgal.”

Now, obviously, the context of sex and violence in Scripture promotes a correct understanding of these categories of human action (e.g., porn movies and hardcore slasher movies are not being justified in the Bible, or in this post).  However, all of the categories of life are addressed.  It certainly appears that God has in place His plans for both sex and violence.  Remember the context, though: No category of life, artistically rendered or not, should ever promote sin.  On the contrary, the purpose of all these categories, both in art, and all categories of life, is to promote righteousness and help inhibit sin.

Something else that should be obvious is that, in the proper contexts, neither sex (in marriage) no violence (in legitimate uses) are inherently evil.  This is patently obvious from the Scripture reviewed here, and a host of other passages.  Why, then, did Charlie Peacock receive criticism for a song in the 90’s which addressed sexuality in his and his wife’s relationship, and James Byron Huggins receive the same for his depictions of graphic violence in his Christian novels?  Why has the band Atomic Opera received criticism for the cover of their album Penguin Dust, which is of a naked child playing on a beach?  Why do some coalitions of Christians condemn any artistic depiction of violence and sexuality (even in biblical contexts) as sinful, when the Bible, as we have seen (even in the small sampling in this post), uses both violence and sexuality in godly context?  Why do Christians in America today have so much difficulty accepting that these and all categories of life in godly contexts are legitimate?  There is an answer to this question, and we will (God willing) take it up in the next post.

The Sons of Issachar and the Task of the Christian Artist Revisited Part 2

In my last post, we began to sum up the implications of what it means for the Christian artist to apply one of the two prongs of the model of the sons of Issachar (1 Chr 12:32) to his artistic vocation—“. . .knowing what Israel should do.”  As we saw then, this phrase translates for us into the necessity of knowing the Bible as the divine blueprint for what we are to believe and do, both as individuals and as corporate members of Christ’s Body.  The other prong, by the way, is “understanding the times,” which equates into the need for us to understand our historical and cultural situation in order to influence our society, by our artistry, toward submission to Christ.)  As we saw earlier, the Word of God remains our only guide to the unchanging Truth we must communicate to constantly changing history, societies, and traditions (2 Tim 3:16-17, Isa 8:20, etc.).

We must assess all things through the lens of the Holy Scripture to gauge the worth of those things, and to know how to proceed in moving the culture around us toward obedience to the Law of Christ.  This means, of course, that the Bible is absolutely central to any Christian calling, and Christian artistry is not excepted from that necessity for biblical orientation.  The bottom line is that Christian artists (like all Christians) must know the Bible as to both its content and form, and as to how that content and form impinge upon his vocation.

Now, for most Christians (especially we Evangelicals), this is almost an axiomatic truism.  We’ve heard that we must know Scripture so often that we must have stopped hearing it.  Yet most of us do not know Scripture well at all.  Why not?  There are, I think, two primary reasons for this (though there are many more peripheral reasons):

First, we are lazy.  Western civilization in general (and American culture specifically) has been growing increasingly lazier over the last forty years or so, and the Western Church has not escaped the influence of this trend (if, in fact, there is good evidence we contributed to it greatly).  Despite the fact that, at no time in the Christian Church’s two-millennia history have more helps for individual and congregational Bible study on all levels existed, fewer and fewer people are bothering to use the incredible opportunities to learn God’s Word that have been laid before us.  We increasingly insist on smaller and smaller, less challenging, more easily “digested” increments of Scripture (milk instead of meat, cf. Heb 5:12-14), and only want to sip at this insipid gruel in the few minutes set aside for preaching at the Sunday morning service we graciously interrupt our important lives to attend (provided, or course, it doesn’t run over into the ball game or our lunch time).

We must put aside our laziness and selfish pursuits to study God’s Word and Will.  God does not honor laziness, as the Parable of the Talents (Matt 25) so effectively (and chillingly) teaches.  Solomon the King wrote that the ear of the wise seeks knowledge (Prov 18:15), as does the heart of him who has understanding (Prov 15:14).  The wise, he says, store up knowledge (Prov 10:14), and the one who loves instruction loves knowledge (knowledge is imparted through instruction, (Prov 12:1)).  Proverbs 23:12 delivers a straight command: “Apply your heart to instruction, and your ears to words of knowledge.”

Most of us don’t even read Scripture daily, much less study and learn it.  In a time when millions of books, tapes, videos, etc., exist to help us shape our study of the Bible, this is a travesty, and a shame to us all.  Let us cast aside our weight and sin of laziness, to run with endurance our God-given race (Heb 12:1-2).  Lazy one—Repent!

Secondly, American Christians do not know the Bible well because, increasingly, the Church’s understanding of the nature of spirituality has been captured by an extremely experience-oriented doctrine that despises and/or ignores the intellectual and historical aspects of the Faith.  Don’t misunderstand me, here—it isnecessary and desirable that we experience, in a living relationship, the Lord Jesus’ Love and Fellowship.  We must have that ongoing experience as part of our lives if we are to be truly biblical in our faith.  But it is equally important that the objective content of Christian Faith be part of our lives.  Otherwise, we become warped and unbalanced.  Let me point out a few of the results of our current experientially-oriented situation.

As the Church has gradually divested Herself of ties to doctrinal content and historical reality (e.g., who the Bible says Jesus was, and that He really was at all), She has seen rise from her ranks heretics who deny that Jesus was God, or that He truly resurrected from death, or, for that matter, that He lived at all.  These things don’t really matter, these infidels say, it only matters that you know Him in your “spiritual experience” (most of these folks work at seminaries or head up denominations now).  Another group of heretics have fallen prey to the universalistic teaching of the New Ages, saying that doctrine doesn’t matter, just the experience of “the Christ we can all feel and love.”

Admittedly, these are both extreme examples, but they are also both logical extensions of the experience-dominated Christianity all too frequently taught today.  Generally, though, the influence of experientialist teaching has resulted in Christians who know about God, but aren’t that interested in working to know aboutHim, except as it helps them continue to cop their Jesus-buzz (and the less effort they have to expend on that, the better they like it).  The quest for good Christian vibrations can’t be interpreted, in the experientialists’ view, by paltry things like serving the world by bringing biblical Truth to bear across the spectrum of human need and despair, and bringing the culture of dying humanity into line with God’s All-Encompassing Word.

Since, to a greater or lesser degree, the clear majority of Evangelicals today have been influenced by experientialist imbalance, these millions of Bible studies help sell to few Christians, and our Christian bookstores are rife with books of (mostly bad) fiction, quick-fix psycho-babble, and kitschy Jesus junk, with few commentaries, systematic theologies, in-depth study helps, etc.  They don’t sell well (if at all).

This is most curious to me, because the simple truth of the matter is that the quality (and quantity, ultimately) of Christian experience disintegrates increasingly in direct proportion to the lack of knowledge of Scripture’s objective content.  The only way to tell, you see, if an experience is really Christian (and not New Age or neo-orthodox, say) is by checking it against the Bible’s Teaching.  Further, if no check is consistently made of ongoing experiences, and they do depart from orthodox Christian experience, God is highly likely to withdraw Himself from the situation, and guess who steps into the divine vacuum to give a few experiences of his own (2 Cor 11:14-15)?

Biblical balance is desirable (the opposite imbalance, intellectualistic anti-experientialism, results in cold, dead, dry legalism, by the way).

Both of these things (laziness and experientialism) that keep Christians from knowing Scripture must be repudiated and repented of by the Church for a number of reasons (the Anger of God Is a good one that comes to mind), not least of which is the one that ties in to the model provided by Issachar’s sons for the artist today:  We cannot “understand our times” unless we know the Bible.

Knowledge of the Word is primary in our artistic task, because we cannot accurately assess to any depth the times we live in without the comprehensive knowledge imparted by Scripture.  The Bible is the lens to correct our fallen vision.  Like the sons of Issachar, we must work hard, roll up our sleeves, and don those biblical glasses.

The Sons of Issachar and the Task of the Christian Artist Revisited

A few weeks ago, I began a series of posts dedicated to exploring the ways in which the example of the Sons of Issachar, recorded in 1 Chronicles 12:32, applied to the task of the Christian Artist in our time.  I feel it necessary to re-cap, at least as an overview, the general thrust of past posts, to provide continuity with what is (Lord willing) to come.

The First Book of Chronicles, in its twelfth chapter, lists the groups of warriors who came to support David the Psalmist while he was living at Ziklag in order to escape King Saul’s wicked persecution of him.  These soldiers recognized that Israel was to be given to David by the will of God (v 23), and pledged themselves and their abilities to David to help accomplish that end.  This passage lists not only these men, but also notes their talents.  Verse 32 reads, “Men of Issachar, who understood the times and knew what Israel should do. . .” (NIV).  I believe that these sons of Issachar displayed a vital ability that today’s Christians (especially those who are artists) need desperately to recover.  What precisely, the reader may ask, is this ability?  What does it mean to “understand the times and know what Israel should do?”

The knowledge of what Israel, God’s People, should do, can be based on one thing only: Holy Scripture, which as the Light of our path (Ps 119:105) and the Way to Life (Prov 6:23), is the Church’s only infallible guide and standard for faith and duty (Prov 29:18; Isa 8:20, Gal 1:8, 1 Thess 2:13, 2 Tim 3:16-17, etc.).  The Bible speaks to the entire spectrum of human existence, providing for mankind’s guidance and illumination for every situation ever to be faced by our race.  The Word of God is the divinely-inspired body of written Truth that reveals the knowledge of the Triune God, His Creation, and His Saving Acts on behalf of His people.  This body of knowledge is the basis of theology (“the knowledge of God” in Greek), and all Christians should strive to learn and understand Scripture so that they may have an ever-increasing knowledge of God (theology) to inform and shape every aspect of our lives and actions, so that we might know what God would have us do in every circumstance we pass into.  The importance of theology for the obvious: it provides the biblical “way of seeing” that gives the artist the content or subject matter of his art, as well as influencing the form of his art, as the artist learns how the various art forms in Scripture are used by God and His Church to communicate knowledge of Him to different (and all) cultures.

The sons of Issachar knew the Bible and its commands and precepts (and so should we).  But what, then, does it mean to “understand the times?”  This means that the sons of Issachar knew the meaning of the historical situation that Israel found herself in.  They understood the history (the origins, development, culture, sociology, etc.) of Israel and the nations surrounding her, as well as the interchanges and relationship of Israel within herself and with the nations round about.  They knew the temper and mood of their people and culture.  They had obviously put serious effort into studying their nation’s history and cultural development.  This type of knowledge is just as important for Christians today as it was in David’s time.  If we as artists fail to understand our history and cultural development, it will hamper the effective fulfillment of our artistic calling greatly.  Only as we understand these areas will we know how to effectively communicate the timeless Truth of Christ in such a way that the culture of our own time will understand and be engaged by it.  Only an understanding of our culture’s place in history (how it developed into the cultural nexus it is, and what it is developing toward) will clue us in as to the forms of art that will most readily be received today by the people around us, and as to what the most pressing needs of our contemporary society are (such as the current abortion holocaust crisis, and the breakdown of the concepts of absolute right and wrong, etc.).

Both types of knowledge (the historical and the theological) were necessary to the sons of Issachar’s ability to discern the times, and both are necessary to us today if we as Christian artists are to be any help to the Church’s mission to fulfill her Great Commission (Matt 28:18-20).  Issachar’s sons were only able to interpret their time because of their knowledge of the key to the parable of history, the Bible.  However, if they had not intimately known their history and cultural development, they wouldn’t have been able to apply scriptural revelation to it, and thus their scriptural knowledge, while good, would have been useless to God’s people in a practical (or applied) sense.  Both kinds of knowledge together are what allowed the sons of Issachar to help fulfill God’s Will in their own lives, and in the life of their nation.

This is no less true for us today.  If we are to speak effectively as artists (or as Christians of any other calling) to what the Church and our culture are to do, we must emulate our ancient brothers in the Faith, and seek to understand the times through the lens of Scripture.  God willing, we will finish the re-cap next week.

For more Theology and the Biblical View of History, go to www.Patreon.com/kempercrabb

Symbols

This week, I am diverging a bit to recap the influence of symbols on the revelation of God in art.  Following are examples of the impact of symbological reality in various people’s lives.  St. Patrick used the common Irish clover to help the pagan and newly-converted Irish understand the concept of the Trinity.  There was oneclover plant (showing the ousia, the unity of being or essence in the divine Trinity, e.g., the unity of God), but three separate leaves on it (representing the hypostases, or Persons in the Trinity, e.g., the diversity of God), altogether giving a symbolic analogy of the Trinity.

Patrick believed that God had made the plant, the clover in that way, to image an aspect of His Being.  He was also helped by the fact that the Druidic religion taught a Divine Being who had three faces or aspects (Duw-a-digon), which Patrick took as a foreshadowing of the coming of the full revealed truth.

In the same vein, Don Richardson, in his three excellent books, Peace Child, Lord of the Earth, and pre-eminently, Eternity in Their Hearts, demonstrates forcefully that God has set symbolic pointers to Himself in every pagan culture.  

If we see these key pointers, we can use them as a springboard for effectively and meaningfully preaching the gospel to a pagan society.  In Peace Child, Richardson discusses the difficulty missionaries had in presenting the gospel to a primitive culture to whom the greatest good was treachery.  In their view, Judas was the hero of the gospel story!!!  Only by realizing that the generally frequent warfare between the (naturally treacherous) tribes could only be effectively halted by the mutual exchange of hostages (the respective chiefs’ sons, generally) who lived as a peace-child, and by presenting Christ as the Peace-Child between God and man, were there (numerous!!) conversions.

Eternity in Their Hearts shows how such symbolic representations exist in every culture (they have to, because of the nature of reality), and how effective they have been, can be, and are in missions work, if we understand and use symbolic theology.  I wept through this book.  It restored my flagging faith in missions.  I was calling friends and reading (large) portions over the phone to them.

Pastor C.H. Kang, a Chinese minister, in distributing Bible portions of the Book of Genesis as a chaplain in a mission hospital in China about fifty years ago, noticed that the ideographic Chinese written character for boatwas comprised of a combination of simple characters meaning “a vessel,” “eight,” and “person,” and thought it interesting that Noah’s Ark, the first great boat, had just eight (human) passengers: Noah and his wife, his three sons, and their wives.

He noticed that, also, the character for to create consisted of the components “dust” (mud), “mouth,” and “able to walk.”  He thought of Genesis 2:7: “Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed (with His mouth) into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living being (not a baby, but an adult, able to walk).

Devil is “son” plus “garden” (field) plus “secret” (private), plus “alive” indicating Satan’s (an angelic “son of God” [Job 1-2, Gen 6:1-4]) secret approach to Eve in Eden.  The devil radical plus “cover” and “two trees” equals a tempter, i.e., Satan tempted Eve under the cover of two trees, the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Four decades later, Pastor Kang had traced the history of Genesis up to the Tower of Babel (Gen 1-11), and traced the migration of the Chinese to their present locale in the 4,500-year-old Chinese script.  He had also written a book on the subject called Genesis and the Chinese.  He had led many Chinese to Christ through the demonstration of this truth.

At the time the written language of China was being formulated (BC 2500), the Chinese were a monotheistic people who worshipped Shang ti, the Emperor of Heaven.  It wasn’t until two thousand years after that Taoism and Buddhism (both polytheistic cults) arose in or came to China.

Thus the Oriental alphabetic ideograms (214 radicals, or pictographs; 700 ideographs comprised of two or more simple characters united to give a new idea; and some 20,000 phonetic characters that are radicals brought together for sound rather than meaning [relatively modern]) in their earlier (radical or pictography) state parallels the history of Genesis to the eleventh chapter.

Pastor Kang and an American pathologist who served in Thailand for years, named Ethel Nelson, together wrote a book about this called The Discovery of Genesis.  (Highly recommended)

G.K. Chesterton, English journalist, novelist, lecturer and scholastic man of letters was a devout Roman Catholic, and one of the few Victorian Christians who castigated and debated publicly (and with great success) the advent of evolutionary theory, rather than turning tail and hiding his head under a mound of anti-intellectual pseudo-“faith.”

He wrote the Father Brown detective stories, Napoleon of Notting’s Hill, voluminous amounts of excellent poetry, biographies of St. Francis of Assisi and St. Thomas Aquinas, and apologetical works, The Everlasting Man, Heretics, and Orthodoxy.  The last three works were answers to the secularistic thought of his day, espousing over against them historic, orthodox Christianity as the only real alternative.

A deep understanding of symbols and allegory was central to his apologetic (or defense) of Christianity as Reality.  For instance, one of the two major arguments in Orthodoxy was presented in a chapter called “The Ethics of Elfland,” in which Chesterton argued that the symbolism even in children’s fairy tales mirrors the pattern of reality so much (especially since even fairy tales are part of God’s created order) that one can see reality’s basic nature (i.e., general revelation) in the tales themselves.

This is just a small sampling that shows the influences of symbols and their importance on the revelation of God in Art.

For additional teaching on The Arts and Symbology check out the Worship series and the Windows to Glory series www.patreon.com/kempercrabb