Analytical Thinking

[redleghunter]

...well, now that that is settled, I guess we can all just close our accounts here on Christian Forums and get on with life.

I think the point was an assertion was answered by an assertion.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I think the point was an assertion was answered by an assertion.

Yeah...I kind of get the impression that incomplete comments were being generally expressed between two (or more) of the viewpoints given above. If only the Christian faith really COULD be simplified and streamlined down to purely, clearly logical terms ... but I'm afraid it's not to be, really, no matter how much we hope and wish that our particular viewpoints about Jesus and the Bible will avail us complete comprehension of God's Will.

 

[LoricaLady]

You know, the person who knows and loves Jesus, who experiences the conviction, strengthening, illumination of mind, comfort, and material supply of God on a daily basis does not wonder if God exists and if the Christian faith is true. Too often, people claiming to be Christians do not really know what it means to walk with God, to experience Him, every day. They aren't sure what God's conviction is; they don't recall ever seeing God's truth in a new, and deeper, and fuller way; they have never really experienced His strengthening in the face of temptation; they don't know what it is to be comforted by Him, and so on. Is it any wonder, then, that they grow skeptical of their faith and of the God it claims to reveal? Arguments, however philosophically clever, cannot ever make up for actually walking with God. Your friend's skepticism needs to be met ultimately by the Person of Christ, by God Himself, not by arguments about Him. In the light of this fact, I offer you the following website links:

www.reasonablefaith.org
www.str.org
www.coldcasechristianity.com
www.crossexamined.org

Amen and amen. Once you really encounter the Savior you know and you know that you know Who He is.

 

[LoricaLady]

It is more important to obey the Lord's commandments than it is to understand why we need to obey the Lord's commandments. They are there to help us. Someday we will understand why.

I think He wants us to understand right now. When Messiah was asked which of the Commandments were the most important - not asked which were now null and void as some think - He quoted the Old Testament which says to love YHWH, aka God, with all our hearts and souls and minds and to love others as ourselves. As for the 10 Commandments they are all about love. If you love the Lord you don't bow down to other gods and you keep His Sabbath holy. If you love others you don't steal from them or murder them, etc. That's why He said that all the Law and the Prophets hang on love.

It's all about love. "If you love Me keep my Commandments." Love is the why.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

On a separate note, I would avoid Calvinism or what they like to call "reformed" theology (to hide its founder) as that is divorced from logic when it comes to God. They can reason out everything except God being morally good so at that point, reason has to be jettisoned to conform with the theology. So if your friend is struggling with the rational, Calvinism will only make matters words.

I feel the same way about Arminian/Weslyian systems of theology, they should have not rejected St. Augustine, nor the theology of the Reformers, but some just think they know better than those before them, too bad so sad.

 

[Bruce Leiter]

How does one remain faithful while struggling with analytical thoughts?

I am attempting to aid someone with this.

If you have any resources - such as books or blog articles - I would love to explore anything you recommend.

Thank you so much for your support.

God bless xx

I recommend my first book, Doubtbusters! God Is My Shrink!, not because I wrote it but because it answers your question directly as a postmodern Mere Christianity. I as myself befriend two skeptics and share my unusual reasons for believing in God and my unusual experiences with him. Its title is on Amazon. Enjoy!

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Actually, Reformed theology is the only correct theology.

And those who hold it are totally intolerant of any other position, same as Calvin the founder of the faith. Death to those who disagree. This fruit alone is enough to convince a thinking man that something is wrong with a theology that insists those who accept it become intolerant of their Christian brethren thinking anything different.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I feel the same way about Arminian/Weslyian systems of theology, they should have not rejected St. Augustine, nor the theology of the Reformers, but some just think they know better than those before them, too bad so sad.

Except those who are not Calvinists do not write that their way of thinking is thee only way. Different fruit. And if we were to have a discussion with those who are not Calvinists, who understand God, you will not find that they reach a wall and abandon logic. You might feel differently, but the facts are such that the Calvinist position requires the abandonment of reason and logic at an early reached point. This is just not so with a coherent theology that does not insist on Calvinist intrepretation of God and salvation. God is rational, you know. And those who know Him discover that we can love God with our minds and He and His ways are completely coherent. It is a really beautiful thing.

 

[Dave-W]

The former chief Rabbi of the UK - Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks - gave an address this past spring where he addressed the mindset difference between Hebrew thought and Greek thought. He puts it down to right brain vs left brain. Left brain separates things for analysis, while right brain joins things together for meaning. He links that to right to left reading for Hebrew going to the right brain and left to right reading (modern languages) goes to the left brain.

 

[Dave-W]

On a separate note, I would avoid Calvinism or what they like to call "reformed" theology (to hide its founder) as that is divorced from logic when it comes to God.

I feel the same way about Arminian/Weslyian systems of theology,

I would submit that BOTH Arminian and Calvinist positions are the product of left brain analysis of scripture.

The bible was NOT written from a left brain analytical mindset or viewpoint; and I would submit that to try to understand it in that mode will lead to errors.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I would submit that BOTH Arminian and Calvinist positions are the product of left brain analysis of scripture.

The bible was NOT written from a left brain analytical mindset or viewpoint; and I would submit that to try to understand it in that mode will lead to errors.

God thinks in left and right sides and He explains it really well if one is prepared to adjust or sometimes abandon ones preferred position.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The former chief Rabbi of the UK - Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks - gave an address this past spring where he addressed the mindset difference between Hebrew thought and Greek thought. He puts it down to right brain vs left brain. Left brain separates things for analysis, while right brain joins things together for meaning. He links that to right to left reading for Hebrew going to the right brain and left to right reading (modern languages) goes to the left brain.

I recall Arabic is from right go left. Does this mean that they too think like the jews? Just applying the theory to real life.

 

[Dave-W]

I recall Arabic is from right go left. Does this mean that they too think like the jews? Just applying the theory to real life.

Yes. Less analytical and more relational.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Yes. Less analytical and more relational.

Do you really see all who read left to right as more analytical? Does this those who can’t read are neither more analytical nor more relational?

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

I would submit that BOTH Arminian and Calvinist positions are the product of left brain analysis of scripture.

The bible was NOT written from a left brain analytical mindset or viewpoint; and I would submit that to try to understand it in that mode will lead to errors.

My thought is, everyone who approaches Scripture, approaches it with assumptions or presuppositions, a network of beliefs (however large or small, organized or disorganized) through which they interpret and process with the brain what is read with the eyes. Not until the words connect with the heart, the eyes given sight by the grace and mercy of God, they are as literature to the brain.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

My thought is, everyone who approaches Scripture, approaches it with assumptions or presuppositions, a network of beliefs (however large or small, organized or disorganized) through which they interpret and process with the brain what is read with the eyes. Not until the words connect with the heart, the eyes given sight by the grace and mercy of God, they are as literature to the brain.

I think the whole left right brain division unfounded. It probably comes from the materialist world view that assume matter is everything. That is, if you’re right handed, it influences your thinking. If this were true, there’d be only two kinda if people. As it is, there are more than two kinds. They don’t divide into analytical or relational. People who love think and people who think also love.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Except those who are not Calvinists do not write that their way of thinking is thee only way. Different fruit. And if we were to have a discussion with those who are not Calvinists, who understand God, you will not find that they reach a wall and abandon logic. You might feel differently, but the facts are such that the Calvinist position requires the abandonment of reason and logic at an early reached point. This is just not so with a coherent theology that does not insist on Calvinist intrepretation of God and salvation. God is rational, you know. And those who know Him discover that we can love God with our minds and He and His ways are completely coherent. It is a really beautiful thing.

Usually Calvinists are accused being too logical. Many years ago, when I started studying theology in a more systematic manner, I found so few systematic theology works written by non-Calvinists. By comparison I found many written by Calvinists. Interestingly, one of the aims of systematic theology is to distill theology in an organized coherent consistent manner, demonstrating the links, the overlap, the relationship between one doctrine and another, it is fascinating, well to me at least, but I am a bit different. Oh yes, God is rational, and this may be a bit of a shock, but it was through Calvinists, that I learned conceptual, immaterial, universal, absolute laws of logic, can only be accounted for objectively in the mind of God (objective truth), perfectly and exhaustively. But anyway, this is not an area for debate, and I am refraining, but hopefully something to think about, if not there's always the Puritans to read.

 

[Dave-W]

Do you really see all who read left to right as more analytical? Does this those who can’t read are neither more analytical nor more relational?

Ah. Left brain at work.
You are dividing it down to individuals rather than looking at the culture as a whole. These are observations for entire people groups rather than single persons.

 

[Radagast]

same as Calvin the founder of the faith

You keep saying that.

Death to those who disagree.

Did I say that? Did I say that?

the Calvinist position requires the abandonment of reason and logic at an early reached point

Really?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Usually Calvinists are accused being too logical. Many years ago, when I started studying theology in a more systematic manner, I found so few systematic theology works written by non-Calvinists. By comparison I found many written by Calvinists. Interestingly, one of the aims of systematic theology is to distill theology in an organized coherent consistent manner, demonstrating the links, the overlap, the relationship between one doctrine and another, it is fascinating, well to me at least, but I am a bit different. Oh yes, God is rational, and this may be a bit of a shock, but it was through Calvinists, that I learned conceptual, immaterial, universal, absolute laws of logic, can only be accounted for objectively in the mind of God (objective truth), perfectly and exhaustively. But anyway, this is not an area for debate, and I am refraining, but hopefully something to think about, if not there's always the Puritans to read.

I agree we won’t debate here. And I appreciate your openness and honesty.

My experience is that Calvinists are not analytical but emotional in their position. As evidence I offer the claim by one that their position is the ONLY right theology. They cannot possibly know this therefore it’s an emotion reason. This is fairly common in their history and my interactions with them.

Now I notice that Calvinism itself has brought you to seem to jettison any hope of understanding the logic of God. This is exactly what I said and so I am not the least surprised but expected this response. I have listened to Sproul and White and they easily and often say they do not understand points of their theology and how that is supposed to hang together. They do as you did. They jettison the possiblity of rationally understanding God. One will not go very far along with Calvinists before this occurs.

Now you explain it as in the standard of perfect and exhaustive, two adjectives no writer of the Bible required before they claimed to know the ways of God, the mind and heart of God and His plans. They knew Him, most of them and loved Him with their minds understanding logically and rationally the living God. Come to think of it, there is no field of study where one has to know perfectly and exhaustively before one can be confident that one understands the subject. The standard you apply is not applied anywhere in any field of knowledge. We do not need to know perfectly or exhaustively before we see the logic of God or any other knowledge men can know.

But I am convinced no Calvinist can reach this level and so most assume, as Calvinism has lead you to do, there is no logic to be grasped by men when it comes to God.

I am here to say that I know and understand God with my mind and He and His ways are marvelously logical and perfectly rational. No one has to be able to exhaustively know God to be able to know Him at all. This is, after all, eternal life according to Jesus. I take him as the expert on the subject.

This is somewhat off the OP but it is important that the poster realize that anyone inquiring about the reasonableness or logic of the ways of God needs to steer away from Calvinism. That was the reason I brought it up.