Advertise on podcast: L’Abri Rochester

(power of the visual image)

Phenomena of teachings or doctrines changing or not getting passed on to the next generation.

Discusses history of psychology, comparing viewpoints and usefulness over against the Word of God.

A look at those in evangelical history who boldly stood up against Racism.

Who Wrote the Bible? The Concept of Authorship in the Old Testament and Ancient Near East Have you ever wondered why so many of the books of the Old Testament appear to be written by 'anonymous'? For example, Samuel died about halfway through the first book named after himself. Surely he did not write 2 Samuel! Did a Moabite peasant girl write the book of Ruth? Did Jonah write an unflattering story about himself as the anti-hero? How about the end of the book of Deuteronomy; did Moses write about his own death? Who collected the oracles of the prophet Jeremiah, or the oracles of Isaiah? From our modern perspective, we think of a book as written by an individual author. We even copyright our work so it cannot be reproduced. It becomes the author's intellectual property. But this is not how 'authorship' was viewed in the world of the Old Testament. In viewing literary works from Mesopotamia, for example, we find that the authors are almost never named. In fact, authority was located in the text, not the author(s), who was either anonymous, or at best, deemphasized. When a person is named, it is unclear whether he or she is the 'first one' (i.e., the originator), or the copyist, or editor, or all of these things (the term used for this is 'tradent'). At best, authorship was considered a collective enterprise, with the content handed down (and sometimes updated or modified) to succeeding generations. With this in mind, for Bible believing Christians, my goal in this presentation is to show that we can still believe in the divine inspiration of Scripture, even if the concept of individual authorship in the biblical world was different than our own. Mark Chavalas is Emeritus Professor of History, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, where he taught ancient Near Eastern and Biblical history for thirty-five years. He is the author or editor of a number of works on Mesopotamia and Israel, including Mesopotamia and the Bible, and the IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. Currently, Mark does a podcast on Bible backgrounds with Keagan Walz. https://www.youtube.com/@BuriedBiblePodcast. He and his wife Kimberlee live in La Crosse, WI and have six adult children and four grandchildren. 20260911WhoWroteTheBible-DrMarkChavalas

(Handout below the Blurb) A Brief History of the Soul   We will look at the idea of the soul from ancient times to the present. Questions will be raised about the effort to banish the soul altogether in the name of contemporary science. A Christian account of soul-body integration will be defended.     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/ In The PICTURE: Prof. (Dr.) Charles Taliafero holds a pen, which he dropped during the discussion after his lecture, He was talking about the speed of the Earth's rotation and then asked us what the speed of the pen was, was it the speed of the earth plus the rate of fall? I guess you would have had to have been there - he was talking about how we evaluate or perceive things as stable. \\//  Handout below \\// Friday Night Lecture @ L’Abri September 4th, 2026 Prof. Charles Taliaferro A Brief History of the Soul   It is now widely recognized by cognitive scientists, psychologists, historians, and philosophers that some distinction between the person (soul, mind, self) and body is a natural, even "common sense" assumption. But we know from ancient philosophy onwards, there have been thinkers that embrace this distinction (Pythagoras, Plato, Plotinus, Augustine) and those who see the soul or mind as a mode or dimension of the body (Aristotle) or the very same thing as the body (Epicurus, perhaps Tertullian).   The early books of the Bible suggest an earthy anthropology (God breathes on dust or earth in Genesis 2:7) which is why (to this day) some orthodox Jews measure human death, not by brain death or the irreversible loss of consciousness but by expiration --inability to breathe. In later Old Testament texts we see a gradual acknowledgement of humans being (or having) souls --Wisdom literature, Daniel, Ezekiel. The New Testament affirms a holistic approach (body and soul are unified in this life) but allows for separability --one's body may be destroyed and yet the soul is with God. This is in keeping with medieval theology, the Reformation (Luther, Calvin)   Historically, west and east, there has been a tension between MONISM (everything is one kind of thing, matter or mind, for example) and PLURALISM (there are multiple different kinds of things / realities). I offer comments on three issues.   Christian Holism. In this view, in a healthy, integrated embodiment, one has the virtues of the 5 senses, proprioception, cognitive powers, memory, reason, emotions, agentive powers. This has a bearing on health and "final things" or eschatology.   The prospects of Christian Materialism today: Advocates claim it is more scientific, more Jewish, less Platonic. Critics reply that science has not established a single case of mind-brain identity (correlation is not identity) and it conflicts with Christian teaching about death and the incarnation.   AI and the Self: AI has encouraged a mechanistic view of the self. Intelligence is equated with information processing and problem solving; memory = data retrieval; agency = optimized decision-making, etc. Some argue for the distinction between intelligence and consciousness, but arguably the simulation of intelligence is not itself (robust) intelligence. Reasons will be provided for recognizing the irreducible reality of the self as a conscious subject enduring over time as opposed to our being processes or events or an illusion.     Charles Taliaferro Ph.D. MA (Brown) MTS (Harvard) MA (URI) BA (Goddard) Professor Emeritus of Philosophy and Emeritus Overby Distinguished Professor, St. Olaf College, USA. Editor-in-Chief of Open Theology, editorial board member Agatheos, RSR, PC, Kanz Philosophia: A Journal for Islamic Philosophy and Mysticism. For a profile, see: https://wp.stolaf.edu/philosophy/charles-taliaferro-profile/   20260904HistoryOfTheSoul-PrCharlesTaliaferro

Leadership That Solves Problems: Seven Themes from Biblical Characters Christianity is far more than devotional super-spirituality; our proven capacity to shape imperfect leaders who craft solutions to intractable problems is one of our greatest apologetics. Recently, an international team conducted an inductive study of the Bible's worthy leaders and discovered seven themes that marked their problem-solving leadership: a) earnest faith; b) compelling vision; c) bold determination; d) protective concern; e) strategic discernment; f) just character; g) leadership cultivation. How can these seven leadership themes help today's leaders glorify Christ as we solve 21st century problems?   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? (revised and updated 2022) and Developing Redemptive Change Agents: Discipleship That Helps Nations Flourish Rather Than Flounder (2021). Bob and Susan have been married for 51 years, are the parents of four sons, and grandparents to 13. They live near Stillwater, MN.     20260828-LeadershipSolvesProblems-DrBobOsburn

Holding onto our Humanity in the Age of the Machine   It's been said that there is nothing new under the sun, but every era in history certainly has its own flavor. Now that nearly all of us have steady interactions with screens, social media and artificial intelligence, we find ourselves in the middle of a technological revolution that is no less than rewiring our brains. Writers like Paul Kingsnorth and Wendell Berry say that we are deep into the Age of the Machine “a world in which the lines between human and artificial intelligence are increasingly blurred. Is this an exciting or terrifying prospect? What really are the things that make us human? Will our society be divided (as Berry has said) by those who choose to live like machines and those who don't? There is certainly no lack of questions! But, it's always a good time to have a conversation about what it means to be human because it brings up all the big questions of what gives us meaning, purpose, and hope. Daniel Miller is an organic vegetable farmer and has a degree in political science from the University of Minnesota. His essays have appeared in the Minnesota Daily Green Blade, and Critique. He and his wife Hannah live near Zumbro Falls, Minnesota with their five children.   20260821HumanityIntheMachineAge-DanielMiller

Christian Wisdom for the Age of AI     There is not a day that passes without another announcement or news item about AI. We encounter it at our workplaces (where we are often encouraged to adopt it), when we go online and are presented with AI summaries of our searches, and in our schools and universities, where AI-produced work is quickly becoming a real problem. It is all around us, whether we like it or not. Proponents of AI sketch utopian visions of the future in which AI will solve all our problems, while opponents of AI sketch dark, dystopian visions of the future. Amidst all this noise, how can we think Christianly about AI? Is AI just a tool, albeit a very powerful tool, or is it more, or something different? What wisdom does the Christian tradition, with more than 2000 years of thinking about God, ourselves, and the world, have to offer in this confusing time?   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 M.Div. 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) where he also conducted computational astrophysics research. 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.   20260814ChristianWisdomForAI-AJPoelarends

Contemplative Prayer: An evaluation of Centering Prayer   Centering prayer is a contemplative prayer practice developed in the 1970s, drawing on earlier Christian contemplative traditions. Whilst it falls under the broader category of contemplative prayer, it is distinctive for its similarities to certain forms of Eastern meditation. Increasingly popular among some evangelicals, it raises an important question: is it a recovery of an ancient Christian practice, or a move away from a biblical understanding of prayer?     Imogen Lowe is a mother of four rambunctious children and a transplant from the UK to Minnesota. In the rare moments she finds spare time, she enjoys baking, reading, and creating things. Most recently, she has crocheted far too many snakes and is looking for a new animal to tackle. She is often found sipping tea made from herbs in her garden and consistently provides an unwilling but apparently delicious snack to the insect population.         20260807ContempletivePrayerImogenLowe

(Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D. Syllabus is below)     Pascal's Apologetic     Blaise Pascal is a rich resource on apologetics. We will look at his famous wager argument, along with his argument that Christianity best explains human nature.   Douglas Groothuis is Distinguished Professor of Apologetics at Cornerstone University and the author of over 20 books, including Beyond the Wager: the Christian Brilliance of Blaise Pascal and Christian Apologetics, 2nd ed.   (Syllabus) Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D., Distinguished Professor, Cornerstone University [email protected]. DouglasGroothuis.com. @DougGroothuis. Podcast: TruthTribe     Blaise Pascal’s Case for Christianity   The Genius of Blaise Pascal   A. Amazing life of Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)   Scientist, philosopher of science   Philosopher and theologian   Masterful writer of French prose   B. Pascal as an apologist; not a fideist (unlike Soren Kierkegaard)   C. Nature of apologetics.   Defend the Christian worldview as objectively true, compellingly rational, and pertinent to all of life (1 Peter 3:15)   Pascal’s Case for Christianity   A. Not fully worked out because of his early death.   B. His apologetic can be reconstructed.   Order. Men despise religion. They hate it and are afraid it may be true. The cure for this is first to show that religion is not contrary to reason, but worthy of reverence and respect. Next make it attractive, make good men wish it were true, and then show that it is. Worthy of reverence because it really understands human nature. Attractive because it promises true good.1   C. We consider only two elements: the wager and the deposed royalty argument; there are more. See Douglas Groothuis, Beyond the Wager: the Christian Brilliance of Blaise Pascal (InterVarsity Academic, 2024). The Wager: Risks, Rewards, Options   A. We should bet on God being real instead of betting on God’s unreality in light of the possible consequences.   I should be much more afraid of being mistaken and then finding out that Christianity is true than of being mistaken in believing it to be true.2   B. Theoretical reason: Is P true? How can I know this?   C. Prudential reason: What do I gain or lose by believing P? What actions should I pursue on this matter?   D. The outcomes and belief states   Believer, if Christian God exists: Gain: eternal life; avoid hell. Infinite gain Loss: worldly pleasures. Finite loss   Believer, if Christian God does not exist: Gain: pleasures of religion. Finite gain Loss: worldly pleasures and truth. Finite loss   Unbeliever (atheist or agnostic or member of other religion), if Christian God exists: Gain: worldly pleasures. Finite gain Loss: eternal life; gain hell, infinite loss   Unbeliever, if Christian God does not exist: Gain: worldly pleasures. Finite gain Loss: nothing.   E.  Given the stakes, we should investigate the claims of Christianity with an open mind and open heart and not be indifferent.   There are only three sorts of people: those who have found God and serve him; those who are busy seeking him and have not found him; those who live without either seeking or finding him. The first are reasonable and happy, the last are foolish and unhappy, those in the middle are unhappy and reasonable.3   The Human Problem and Puzzle   A. The question and the problem of humans (#149/430)   What sort of freak then is man! How novel, how monstrous, how chaotic, how paradoxical, how prodigious! Judge of all things, feeble earthworm, repository of truth, sink of doubt and error, the glory and refuse of the universe! (131/434).   B. How to live with the human burden in light of reality; “deposed royalty” who can be restored through Jesus Christ   C. What are the options? We will look at two “live hypotheses” (William James) for many today.   A True, Rational, and Significant Explanation.   A. True explanation of the human condition: one that agrees with objective reality; factual; realism.   B. Rational explanation: one that explains who we are in accordance with the evidence and sound reasoning.   C. Significant explanation: one that gives us value, meaning, and realistic hope for being human in the world. Philosophical anthropology is a very important part of any worldview.   D. Manner of explanation: abduction (inference to best explanation)   Has a broad scope: explains more than its rivals   Doesn’t have internal contradictions   Accords with other well-established beliefs   Views of Being Human: The New Age Worldview   A. New Age or spiritual worldview: Ken Wilber, Oprah Winfrey, Deepak Chopra4   Background belief on humanity   a. Pantheism: everything is divine.   b. Monism: all is one (or nondualism)   c. Morality is not absolute, but good and evil dissolve into a universal and impersonal oneness.   New Age view on humanity   a. Human nature is really a divine nature: we are one with an impersonal deity.   b. Human problem: we have forgotten our true identity as divine, one with all things, and unlimited. c. Human solution: Find the divine within through meditation, yoga, self-realization seminars.   Questioning New Age philosophy   a. Human beings are limited in power and goodness; this is evident and not a delusion or matter of ignorance.   b. There are moral realities that reveal a moral dualism: good and evil; right and wrong; virtue and vice. Rape is always wrong; kindness is better than wanton cruelty.   Christianity: Deposed Royality   A. Background belief: personal theism—God as Creator, Lord, Judge   B. Pascal’s point can be strengthened by natural theology: arguments for God’s existence from nature and in accord with reason.5   C. Human nature: created in God’s image and likeness (Genesis 1:27)   Uniqueness of humanity: ethics, culture, language, religion   Human greatness: creativity, intelligence, etc. (#113/348)   Thinking reed. It is not in space that I must seek my human dignity, but in the ordering of my thought. It will do me no good to own land. Through space the universe grasps me and swallows me up like a speck; through thought I grasp it.6   Human dignity: image-bearers of God (Psalm 8:3-5)   Disjunction from the rest of the living world; different in kind, not just degree   “Rumors of glory”—Bruce Cockburn D. Human problem: we are fallen, warped, alienated, deposed (#131/434)   Human evil: sexism, racism, pettiness, greed, envy, ad nauseum   Our moral and spiritual corruption (Psalm 14:1-3; Mark 7:21-23)   Corruptio optimi pessima: “There is nothing worse than the corruption of the best.”   The essential problem: pride, self-centeredness, egotism   Escaping our condition through diversion (#620/146)   Diversion. If man were happy, the less he were diverted the happier he would be, like the saints and God. Yes: but is a man not happy who can find delight in diversion?7   E. Neither angel nor beast, but human (#121/418)   It is dangerous to explain too clearly to man how like he is to the animals without pointing out his greatness. It is also dangerous to make too much of his greatness without his vileness. It is still more dangerous to leave him in ignorance of both, but it is most valuable to represent both to him. Man must not be allowed to believe that he is equal either to animals or to angels, nor to be unaware of either, but he must know both.8   F. Humans! Wretched and great (#106/403)   G. The reality of death (#434/199); life kills us all; finite time to figure it all out (Hebrews 9:27).     Finding Truth, Hope, and Purpose   A. The human condition requires a radical, transcendent cure   Impossible on our own; possible through God’s initiative (#148/428)   B. Jesus Christ provides this liberating cure for all people   Jesus: You must repent (Matthew 3:2) (#378/470)   Jesus provides forgiveness, reconciliation, and restoration (John 3:16-18; Romans 5:6-8: Ephesians 2:1-10)   6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us (Romans 5:6-8).   The message is liberating for everyone; we are all deposed royalty (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 4:12; I Timothy 2:5-6) (#417/548)   C. Being human with knowledge, hope, and integrity   Honesty about oneself: deposed royalty, fallen (#212/528)   Jesus is a God whom we can approach without pride and before whom we can humble ourselves without despair.9   A world view that makes sense of oneself and others   Putting the pieces of the human puzzle together, solving the problem   The strength to love and serve through Jesus Christ, “the Mediator” (Pascal’s term)   A living reality, not simply the best explanation of humanity   The Christian’s God is a God who makes the soul aware that he is its sole good: that in him alone can it find peace; that only in loving him can it find joy: and who at the same time fills it with loathing for the obstacles which hold it back and prevent it from loving God with all its might Pascal (#460/544; see also #352/526).   Provides incentive to give oneself selflessly to God and God’s liberating program for humanity.   Pascal’s challenge: seek God (#131/434; #149/430)   Know then, proud man, what a paradox you are to yourself. Be humble, impotent reason! Be silent, feeble nature! Learn that man infinitely transcends man, hear from your master your true condition, which is unkno

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.” Fundament

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 coul

(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)