ACU Blogs | Abilene Christian University

Looking at Human Nature Through Spiritual EyesAmy JimenezDr. Vic McCracken and Dr. Jaime GoffBIBM/BMFT 696: Theological Perspectives on Human Behavior31 May 2013Looking at Human Nature through Spiritual EyesRob Bell says that we live between two trees. He is referring to origin story in the book of Genesis (Ge 2:9) where God created two trees, the tree of life and the tree of knowledge. Unable to control the moral freedom given to them, Adam and Eve eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge before they are able to eat of the tree of life and live forever. Consequently, their disobedient choice led to shame, separation, suffering and death. Contrastingly, in the book of Revelation (Rev 22:19), God allows a glimpse of a time when He will lovingly restore the tree of life, allowing mankind to eat its fruit of eternal life. Human beings, as souls embodied in flesh, long for this balance between knowledge and life, not only within themselves but as they relate to others. Niebuhr calls this a conflict between creatureliness and transcendence that results in sin. Jesus, God himself in human form, came to the earth to bridge the chasm between flesh (knowledge) and Spirit (life) by sacrificing himself on a third tree, the cross. He intentionally left his Spirit to enable human beings to be agents of reconciliation to the fallen world. As ministers and pastoral counselors, as we consider how to engage human nature in a way to bring balance, reconciliation and peace to a conflicted world, we must lean into this powerful redemptive energy that God has placed in human beings, created in his own image, to affect other human beings through relationship.Image of GodGenesis is a book of beginnings, answering questions of the origins of God, his creation, the cosmos, the world, mankind, and God’s chosen people, Israel. Perhaps the most complex origin and its subsequent development is the relationship between God and man, and this reflected image between human beings. Genesis 1-11 deals extensively with the origin of mankind and his/her complex relationships. In Genesis 1:1-2:3, an account is written in which God creates an earth that he calls good, but crowns his creation with male and female, created in His unique image, and calls them “very good.” Genesis 1:26-27 says, “Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” In the ancient Mesopotamian world, an “image” was believed to carry the essence of that which it represented. This imagery was often used in references to kings who set up images of themselves in places where they wanted to establish their authority. So a plural God creates mankind, reflecting his essence and enacting his governing work (dominion over the earth.) Thus, God created two forms of a complex human being, male and female, in order that their manifold expressions could set forth his varied, triune presence of God in this world. In Genesis 2:4-3:24, a further account details the intentional creation of male and female to be in complimentary, helpful relationship to one another and in intimate relationship with God. Genesis 2:18 says that woman was a helper whom God made suitable for man and further in Genesis 2:24-25, the man and woman were called to become one flesh, intimately naked and vulnerable before one another, without shame. Genesis 3:8 paints the picture of God walking and interacting with the images of himself that he had created. Karl Barth, a twentieth century German theologian, set this relational nature of man as a tenet of this understanding of God. At the core of his theology is the rejection that a human being as an isolated thinking individual. He says that as male and female in the image of God, sociability is the most essential characteristic of human nature. He describes the essence of human nature as a dynamic relation of soul and body to one another as well as in relation of self to others. Similarly, Dietrich Bonheoffer, another twentieth century German theologian, hinged his theology of mankind in the image of God, as a relational being, defining man’s nature only as he relates God in others. He says, “Every human being is raised by God, so to speak, to the status of nobility as His creation, as a child of God, and lives in a personal relationship with God. The basic social category is that of the I-you relationship. The ‘You’ of the other human being is the divine ‘You.’ John Calvin adds that “a mirror cannot reflect something unless it is in relationship with it.” Thus God is reflected in proportion to man and woman’s relationship with him and with each other.A final element of the image of God in which human nature is created and established in mankind’s capacity to change and grow. Not only is the image of God present in man and woman in their ability to reason and their freedom to make choices, but capacity, calling and relationship converge to enable human beings to make choices as God would. In Colossians 1:15, Paul declares that Jesus Christ was the “image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” Human beings are not static. In the reflective image of God, humans are constantly being transformed as a function of the glory of the Lord that they are able to behold. (2 Cor 3:17-18) Theology studies God as its object: the triune God who reveals himself as a living subject, mankind. The Fall and SinIn Genesis 3, separation between God and his created man and woman is introduced. Adam and Eve willfully choose to eat what is forbidden, fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The serpent is introduced as an external representation of evil who psychologically and physically tempts the woman to disregard the authority of God, appealing to God given capacity to be wise. Disobedience was not performed in isolation; it involved Eve’s relationship to God (disobeying his directive), to the serpent (acknowledging his persistent and persuasive voice,), and to Adam enticing him to lessen the burden of disobedience by sharing it with her. As a result of this action in Genesis 3, Adam and Eve’s “eyes were opened” and they knew that they were naked. A new instinctive response of human beings to hide and conceal the truth was born. Swift punishment from God included suffering, enmity, physical toil and labor, and eventual physical death for the serpent, woman, and man, but specifically in their relationship to each other. In Genesis 3:22, the Lord God said, “Behold the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil.” This enhanced element of God-likeness extended man’s freedom of choice to overstep its bounds, creating inequity before God. The result was banishment by God from Eden and restriction between the tree of life and mankind. Although God graciously covered them with clothing and continued to communicate with mankind outside the Garden, the intimacy of these God- man, and man-woman relationships were now complicated and marred by the effects of sin in the world. These same barriers both define and limit human behaviors today.C.S. Lewis, renowned academic philosopher, one time atheist, and influential Christian apologist, identified a fundamental truth about human nature and the world in which we live. He said, “All human beings, across all cultures, have a curious idea that they/others ought to behave in a certain way and can’t really get rid of it. At the same time, they do not behave that way.” He asserts that the fact that the thing that judges between the impulse to help others and the impulse of self-preservation, itself cannot be one of the two basic impulses and must be moral law, or the “law of human nature.” This law suggests that there is a Power beyond our basic impulses, inside ourselves trying to get us to behave in a certain way. “When one recognizes themselves as wrong with that Power, (God) the Christian message of reconciliation between God and man beings to talk.”The primeval history of man in Genesis 1-11 details the extreme limits of this “mistaken, deficient, lacking, at fault, or missing a specific mark behavior (sin) to which all mankind is capable of in relation to God’s moral law. Each account deals with mankind’s struggle to accept or reject relationship with God and cohesive relationship with fellow man. The successive episodes of human transgression include fratricide, (Ge 4:1-16) illicit sexual practices with divine creatures, (Ge 6:1-4) pandemic societal violence (Ge 6:11-12) where every thought of man was evil all the time, and finally assault of heaven itself in the building of the Tower of Babel. (Ge 11:1-10) These examples exemplify sin, further defined by Cover, as “conscious and responsible action, against the unconditional authority of God in order to decide for himself what way he should take, and to make God’s gifts serve his own ego.”Niebuhr defines sin as a result of the anxiety of man born out of the tension between his natural desires and his God-like image. Because man has the capacity to make his own decision and to choose between good and evil, this freedom often results in the overstepping of the boundaries set by God. He defines pride as the natural result of man trying to control the world around him as only God can. Our God-like image combined with the freedom afforded us and our subsequent knowledge of good and evil, tempts man to consider him/herself as God. Pride leads to utter self concern and self-indulgence, manifesting itself in idolatry and sensualities of all forms and practices. James, a Jewish leader in the early church, gives more insight to the continuum of the psychology of sin when he says “Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.” His theology is in line with Niebuhr, in that he defines pride (self-centered desire) as the locus of temptation. He highlights the steady building of thought processes that give birth to action and lead to death. Noteworthy, however is the truth that sin is born intrapersonally but gives birth to action and death like consequences only in interpersonal relationships to other people.Agents of RedemptionPaul exhorts Christians to be ministers of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:17-20), imploring mankind “on Christ’s behalf to be reconciled to God!” Vocational ministers, informed by theology, address the spiritual, mental, and physical needs of people, as ambassadors for God, imparting his desire to redeem mankind from sin and restore right relationship with Him and others through Jesus Christ. Modern psychology, with or without theological perspective, also recognizes a great need to restore healthy mental functioning and dysfunctional human systems of relationship to one another through the professional fields of mental health counseling, psychiatry, and psychology (empirical research and development of theories to better understand, engage, and change human behavior.) Healthy dialogue and integration between the fields of theology and psychology are helpful from a Christian perspective, to indentify the dynamic systems at play both within a person and between people and to uncover the necessary conditions, removing barriers, to enable openness to the power of God to change human thought and behavior. Two modern psychological theories yield helpful insights to the field of Pastoral Counseling and compliment the theological framework presented in Scripture related to mankind, created in the image of God but subject to sin and its consequences. First, Bowen theorized a system of family interactions utilizing differentiation to deal with anxiety within the system. The interpersonal capacity of differentiation refers to balancing forces of separation and togetherness, taking responsibility for one’s experience, initiating and receiving intimacy voluntarily, and establishing clear boundaries. Intrapersonal differentiation refers to defining and attending to the ideas and experiences within oneself in the face of anxiety, to enable self-control and balanced reactivity. Isolating patterns of triangulation in this model, where a person dysfunctionally brings in a third person to avoid conflict, minimize responsibility, or pit one person against another, is particularly helpful in this model to gain awareness and engage in concrete ways of relating differently to each person within the system. God dealt with Cain in a similar way in Genesis 4:6-7, when he graciously spoke to him before he decided to kill his brother Abel. “Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.” God isolated Cain’s triangulation as he attempted to avoid the anger and rejection he felt toward and from God by reacting in jealously and rage toward his brother, Abel. God also pointed out the intrapersonal anxiety that was threatening the internal balance of Cain’s psychological and spiritual health. The Bowen’s Family Systems Theory has been proven to be empirically effective in engaging people in religious questing, as an individual experiences and expresses his or her orientation to toward the sacred. This is a model that complements a spiritual friendship between a pastoral counselor and a struggling individual, seeking to orient themselves to God both internally and externally in their particular context. Internal Family Systems Therapy (IFS) is another theorized model of human behavior and intervention that is informed by a theological perspective. A basic premise of IFS is that “instead of lacking resources, people are seen as being constrained from using innate strengths by polarized relationships both within themselves and with the people around them. The model is designed to help people release these constraints, thereby releasing their resources. The model embraces the multiplicity of the normal, functional mind, categorized into four basic personality types, that work together in balanced coordination to enable healthy thinking and behavior patterns. The Self is the integrative nature that keeps the other three personality patterns, the Manager, the Exile, and the Firefighter in balance, so that the whole self is able to interact with others in a healthy way. This is congruous with the relational aspect of the image of God in which human beings were created. In Ephesians 4, Paul admonishes Christians to “ with regard to your former way of life, put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; ?to be made new in the attitude of your minds; ?and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.” This new self, created to be like God, does have the resources it needs to renew the attitude of the mind, a concept embraced by the IFS therapy model. As a pastoral counselor, utilizing the manager, exile, and firefighter metaphors to understand human intrapersonal and interpersonal patterns of thought and relational behavior, can help a pastor to better understand people as they seek to submit these patterns to the Lordship of Christ, and to be made new in the attitude of their mind. IFS seeks to restore balance, harmony, leadership and development to the complexity of human thought and behavior Finally, spiritual direction can be a valuable approach from a pastoral perspective to enable one to align their self image with their God image. May says, “the image we have of ourselves – one component of “identity” – deeply affects how we meet the world and the attitudes with which we encounter images of God. We are at core endlessly mysterious, and our self-images are simply expedient symbols of who we really are. This is, of course, also true for our images of God.” Barth asserts that due to the extent of human sin and brokenness, and its sociological and spiritual implications in the world, the “real man” can be known only as the human reality is revealed by God. He claims that sin has distorted the human character to such an extent that we cannot clearly perceive ourselves without the light of grace to illuminate one’s sin. Thus, the “true nature behind our corrupted nature, is not concealed but revealed in the person of Jesus, and in his nature, we recognize our own, and that of every man.” Perhaps, there are elements to uncovering one’s true self that are beyond the realms of predictable systems and human rational thought. The discipline of spiritual direction involves entering into focused, intentional, and often open-ended contemplative prayer and listening on the behalf of a person, to allow God to reveal a person’s identity in Christ and through spiritual formation. If this is beyond one’s scope as pastoral counselor, referring someone to a person trained in spiritual direction can be a useful tool to integrating theological with psychological perspectives to effect thought and behavior.ConclusionIf life is lived between two trees, one might ask why the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was placed in the center of the garden to begin with. Why tempt man to break the intimacy with mankind that God so earnestly desired? Bonheoffer postulates that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was placed in the center of the Garden of Eden, not as a malicious trap intended to entice mankind to disobey his directive, but as a representation of where God belongs in our lives. Only from the center of our lives, he suggests, can we choose to obey God in a way that will govern every aspect of life. God’s definition of good and evil, his infinite wisdom, and his grace and mercy in Jesus, reside in who God is, not who we think he should be. Unfortunately, since creation, human beings have been subject to the earthly consequences of sin in the world. We are no longer free to fully and freely obey, to live in a world with nothing wrong with it, to be people with nothing wrong with us because of the nature of sin. However, access to the tree of life is made possible through Jesus Christ. Full, abundant, mentally healthy, and relationally rich eternal life is possible as a disciple of his, a redeemed child (image) of God. WORKS CITEDBell, Rob. Nooma Trees 003. DVD. Videos produced by Flannel, a non-profit organization producing a series of videos by Rob Bell. Grandville, MI: Flannel, 2005.Bonheoffer, Dietrich. Dietrich Bonheoffer Werke, Volume 1. Edited by Eberhard Bethge Et Al. Translated by Daniel Bloeschard and James Burtness. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1996.Cover, Robin C., and E.P. Sanders. Anchor Bible Dictionary. 6 Si-Z ed. Edited by David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.Dramm, Sabine. Dietrich Bonheoffer: an introduction to his thought. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007.Entwistle, David N.. Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2010.Hall, Douglas John. Imaging God: Dominion as Stewardship. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986.Lewis, C.S. Mere Christianity. San Francisco, CA: Harper, 1952.May, Gerald G., and M.D. Care of Mind Care of Spirit. New York, NY: Harperone, 1992.Niebuhr, Reinhold. The Nature and Destiny of Man Volume I: Human Nature. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1941.Peterson, James C.. Changing Human Nature: Ecology, Ethics, Genes, and God. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 2010.Price, Daniel J. Karl Barth's Anthropology in Light of Modern Thought. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 2002.Rootes, Katie M. Heiden, Peter J. Jankowski, and Steven Sandage. "Bowen Family Systems Theory and Spirituality; Experiencing Relationship Between Triangulation And Religious Questioning." Contemporary Family Therapy: An International Jouranl. 32, (2010, June 1): 89-101.Schuele, Andreas. "Uniquely Human: The Ethics Of The Imago Dei In Genesis 1-11." Toronto Journal of Theology. 27, (2011, March 1): 5-16.Schwartz, Richard C. Internal Family Systems Theory. New York, NY: The Guilford Press, 1998.Shuster, Marguerite. "The Mystery of Original Sin." Christianity Today. (2013, April 1): 39-41.Walton, John H. The NIV Application Commentary Genesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download