By Dr. Douglas Groothuis
On Being Rational As Christian
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.¹
Jesus calls us to love God with our heart, soul, strength, and mind (Matthew 22:37-39) and Paul says we should be transformed through the renewing of our minds (Romans 12:1-2). How do these instructions pertain to philosophy? Philosophy trades on applying rationality to truth claims. It uses reasoned arguments to secure conclusions or to refute false viewpoints or worldviews (see 2 Corinthians 10:3-5). But can someone be too rational? Might philosophy hurt someone because it encourages the use of rationality? “Yes and no,” is my answer. It depends on what we mean by being “too rational.” Let us start with “No, you cannot be too rational.”
Being Rational
If “being rational” means examining reality through reason, then one cannot be too rational. To fail to examine reality through reason would mean to be irrational, which is a cognitive defect. One should hold beliefs for good reasons (of various kinds)² and not hold them in an unreflective manner. One should also be able to defend one’s beliefs rationally and to critique views one does not believe in critically when this is significant. (Some disagreements are trivial and not worth the time.) In this sense, one cannot be too rational since rationality is a tool for attaining knowledge. Understanding how arguments work and how to detect logical fallacies is conducive to human flourishing and glorifies God when practiced by the Christian. We should think well for God’s sake.³
Too Rational?
However, one might be “too rational” in the sense of fixating or obsessing on rational evaluation at the expense of other meaningful and good aspects of life. If one attends a musical concert performed by excellent musicians, it is advisable to enjoy the music and not puzzle over philosophical problems (although they may occur to one spontaneously). Or a philosopher could put philosophy ahead of basic human relationships and the need to develop emotional understanding. That is, one could place rational intelligence above emotional intelligence to the detriment of one’s own character (and vice versa). This was true of philosopher Derek Parfitt, especially later in his life, when he shunned old friends for the sake of his obsessive study of philosophical issues.⁴ In fact, this philosophy did not highly esteem human beings as such, as does a biblical anthropology.⁵
Human Rationality is Not Enough
One might also be “too rational” by admitting into one’s worldview only what can be established apart from biblical revelation. Some philosophers believe that human reason needs no support from a Christian worldview for its existence, meaning, and efficacy, and who deny the knowledge available uniquely in the Bible through divine revelation. These unbelievers isolate reason from its source in the Logos (John 1:1-2) and wrongfully trust their autonomous reasoning to secure a rationally adequate worldview. Francis Schaeffer used the word “rationalist” for this kind of thinker, but he never disparaged the use of reason in pursing truth:
Humanism in the larger, more inclusive sense is the system whereby men and women, beginning absolutely by themselves, try rationally to build out from themselves, having only Man as their integration point, to find all knowledge, meaning, and value. We must also ensure that the word rationalism, which means the same thing as humanism in the wider sense, is not confused with the word rational. Rational means that the things which are about us are not contrary to reason; or, to put it another way, man’s aspiration of reason is valid. And so the Judeo-Christian position is rational, but it is the very antithesis of rationalism.⁶
Any philosophy that excludes God and his revelation is the kind that Paul warned about:
See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ (Colossians 2:8; see 2 Corinthians 10:3-5).
The Cross and Rationality
Some claim that Christ’s redemptive work on the Cross is irrational and can only be accepted by a faith apart from reason. Others take it as irrational and reject it as such. Both options are wrong. Paul writes of the offense of the cross in 1 Corinthians 1:18-26, saying that “the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God (1:18). He goes on to say that the world did not find the power of the cross through its wisdom.
Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1:22-24).
Paul writes of how Christ’s work is perceived by unbelievers. It challenges their worldview and way of life, whether that of unbelieving Jews or Greeks. He does not claim that Christ’s atoning death is itself irrational. Rather, it challenges at the root any human pretension to righteousness before God and any program to please God without the saving provisions demonstrated through Jesus Christ’s sacrifice on our behalf. J. P. Moreland notes this:
[T]his passage is more accurately seen as a condemnation of the false, prideful use of reason, not of reason itself. It is hubris (pride) that is in view, not nous (mind). God chose foolish [sic] moria) things that were offensive to human pride, not to reason properly used. For example, the idea of God being crucified was so offensive that the Greek spirit would have judged it to be morally disgusting.⁷
Biblical scholars and theologians have articulated the logic of Christ’s substitutional death as the means of salvation with cogent reasoning. Given the holiness of God, the sinfulness of sin, and God’s desire to save fallen people, the atoning work of Christ is the only rational answer.⁸
Rationality for God’s Glory
We are God’s creatures who were given our rationality and our whole personality, given by an infinite-personal God who made us in his image and likeness (Genesis 1:26-27). Our abilities are God’s gifts to us. We owe God everything, as creatures and as redeemed sinners (if we are redeemed). As Paul asks, “What do you have that you did not receive?” (1 Corinthians 4:7). God’s gift of rationality should be employed to its full capacity to attain knowledge that is good for ourselves and the world, but never in a way that ignores or minimizes other healthy aspects of our personality, such as emotional intelligence. Nor should our rationality float free of God’s revelation given in Holy Scripture. Rather we should glorify God in our thinking, learning, writing, and communication. In fact, we should out-think the world for Christ!
1. Pascal, Blaise. Pensées (Penguin Classics) (p. 29). Penguin Books Ltd. Kindle Edition.
2. Proper basic beliefs are held without the support of other beliefs, but it is still rational to hold these as foundational beliefs. There are also improperly basic beliefs, such as belief in the Great Pumpkin or the equivalent.
3. See John Piper, Think: The Life of the Mind and the Love of God (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2011) and James Sire, Habits of the Mind (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2000).
4. Paul Nedeliski, “How Ideas Made Derek Parfitt, Hedgehog Review (Fall 2023), https://hedgehogreview.com/issues/markets-and-the-good/articles/nothing-personal.
5. See Douglas Groothuis, “Meaning, Work, and the Value of Persons: Comparing Derek Parfitt and Francis Schaeffer,” Christian Research Journal (February 8, 2024), https://www.equip.org/articles/meaning-work-and-the-value-of-persons-comparing-derek-parfit-and-francis-schaeffer.
6. Schaeffer, Francis A. The God Who Is There (The IVP Signature Collection) (p. 25). InterVarsity Press. Kindle Edition.
7. Moreland, J.P. Love Your God with All Your Mind: The Role of Reason in the Life of the Soul (p. 43). The Navigators. Kindle Edition
8. See Douglas Groothuis, “The Atonement: Understanding it Properly” and “The Atonement: Defending it,” Christian Apologetics, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity-Academic, 2022). See also John Stott, The Cross of Christ (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1986).
Comments