Head Knowledge Christianity
27 Oct
“Let us beware of an unsanctified knowledge of Christianity. It is a dangerous possession, but a fearfully common one in these latter days. We may know the Bible intellectually, and have no doubt about the truth of its contents. We may have our memories well stored with its leading texts, and be able to talk glibly about its leading doctrines. And all the time the Bible may have no influence over our hearts, and wills, and consciences. We may, in reality, be nothing better than the devils.”
~ J.C. Ryle
Expository Thoughts on the Gospels: Luke, volume 2, 125.
I would love to see the entire context of that quote. I particularly object to the title you gave to the quote. There is no mention of the term “head knowledge” in the quote from Ryle. While I would agree that knowing the propositional truths of the Bible and “believing” them are two different things, there is no dichotomy between “head knowledge” and “heart knowledge” as your title implies. I am not sure Ryle would have agreed with such a false dichotomy either.
In fact, Gordon H. Clark argues strongly that 70-75% of the biblical references to “heart” in fact speak of the “mind” or of “thinking.” Therefore, true faith is understanding and believing or assenting to the propositional truths taught in the Bible. Sanctification is what follows justification and the two most certainly not be confused. Justification is perfect because it is accomplished by Christ in his active and passive obedience for us. Justification takes place outside of us on the cross while sanctification is inherent in our hearts and is always short of the mark and imperfect.
I would highly recommend to everyone Gordon H. Clark’s book, What Is Saving Faith?. It’s published by the Trinity Foundation and is a worthwhile read. See: http://www.trinitylectures.org/product_info.php?products_id=60
You can also read a fair review of the book at:
http://www.faithalone.org/journal/bookreviews/clark,%20gordon.htm
The one complaint I have about this review is where Gary Nebecker says: ” Further qualification is likewise due in the distinguishing between “generic faith” and saving faith. In the case of the latter, this reviewer suggests that the pre-regenerating work of the Holy Spirit affects the will and enlightens the mind to the truth of the Gospel; whereas the former does not necessarily include divine intervention. ”
Clearly, Nebecker is taking a view similar to Arminianism where he thinks saving faith is preceeded by a general grace given to all and the deciding factor must be the will, not regeneration. However, the biblical view is that saving faith itself is a gift of God preceeded by regeneration (John 3:3-8; Ephesians 2:8-9; John 6:36-47, 65). The will cannot be changed apart from regeneration (Titus 3:4-7).
Charlie
Justification and sanctification are most certainly not to be confused, that is.
Charlie,
Maybe I should have called the title of this Ryle quote: “Beware of a Mere Intellectual Christianity”, since that is exactly the thrust of Ryle’s quote. No, “head knowledge” is not directly used; however, it is most certainly implied.
Ryle is making sure, as he does so very well, that the Bible is not just known intellectually, but that it permeates and has “influence over our hearts, and wills, and consciences.”
Pick up a copy of Ryle’s commentary on Luke, which is linked directly below the Ryle quote, for the entire context.
Soli Deo Gloria Charlie.
Well, Ryle isn’t infallible. Clark argues strongly that believing alone is what saves us. What you are saying is that “sanctification” is part of “justification” since “influence over our hearts (read mind here), and wills, and consciences” has to do with sanctification, which is always imperfect.
No one would dispute that sanctification is unimportant. Sanctification is the fruit of true belief and understanding of the Gospel. However, to add any aspect of sanctification to justification is to add works to justification by believing/faith alone.
I think if read the 39 Articles of Religion, Articles 9 through 18, you will see that works are treated as separate from faith but that works spring naturally out of true faith:
Article XI
Of the Justification of Man
We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort; as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification.
De Hominis Iustificatione
Tantum propter meritum Domini ac Servatoris nostri Jesu Christi, per fidem, non propter opera et merita nostra, iusti coram Deo reputamur. Quare sola fide nos iustificari, doctrina est saluberrima, ac consolationis plenissima; ut in Homilia de Iustificatione hominis Fusius explicatur.
Provenance
Based on the Confession of Würtemberg.
Article XII
Of Good Works
Albeit that good works, which are the fruits of faith and follow after justification, cannot put away our sins and endure the severity of God’s judgement, yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith, insomuch that by them a lively faith may be as evidently known as a tree discerned by the fruit.
From: http://www.members.tripod.com/~gavvie/39articles/articles.html
I just discovered Charles Spurgeon’s thoughts on “The Deceitfulness of Head-Knowledge” over at Nick Uva’s site The Daily Spurgeon.
Interesting how they both echo each other on this topic.
Love is what sanctification produces, though. Orthodoxy is what you must believe to be saved. In other words, right doctrine is essential to salvation. To divorce the two is to endorse theological relativism and liberalism. Exalting “love” above truth is essentially a lie since you have to understand what Jesus said and who He is in order to believe in the first place.
This quote from Spurgeon sounds inspiring but Spurgeon was fallible. He’s not the pope. I would also add that in certain places in his sermons, Spurgeon was an Arminian. This is probably due to his “fellowship” with Arminians and his conversion at a methodist church.
Justification is by faith/belief alone. Sanctification is the fruit which naturally springs forth from a believer but sanctification is always imperfect. Not even “loving” others is perfect and can therefore never be the basis or ground for our justification.
Charlie
That should have be “loving others is IMperfect” and can never be the basis for justification.