On Wed, 05-4-05 2:38 pm
Escaping the Matrix:
Setting Your Mind Free to Experience Real Life in Christ
by Gregory A. Boyd and Al Larson
Publisher: Baker Books
Release: April 2005
Price: $11.19
ISBN: 0-8010-6533-X
Gregory A. Boyd is senior pastor of Woodland Hills Church in St. Paul, MN. He is the founder and president of Christus Victor Ministries and former professor of theology at Bethel Seminary in St. Paul. He is a graduate of Princeton Theological Seminary (Ph.D.) and Yale Divinity School (M.Div.).
Al Larson is a nationally board certified counselor and president and founder of Dynamics of Growth, Inc., which provides counseling to families and individuals. He is also the founder and developer of Cooperating with God for a Change (c), a new concept in Christian counseling. He has M.A. in psychology from Liberty University and a Ph.D. in clinical pastoral counseling from the Minnesota Graduate School of Theology.
Disclaimer: This book was given to Eternal Perspectives by Mind & Media as a gift from Baker Books for the purpose of this review. Eternal Perspectives is not affiliated with Baker Books and is not paid for the review.
Overview of Escaping the Matrix
In some way or another most of us are “stuck”–in a secret sin we can’t control or maybe by an inability to stand up for ourselves. In this book, the authors use the vehicle of The Matrix film trilogy to argue that our struggles with habitual sin, thought patterns, damaged emotions, and phobias happen because we do not know how to take charge of the way we experience reality. The authors draw on biblical and psychological insights to provide practical resources for helping believers escape the matrix of the world system that ensnares them. While this book is aimed at the newest generation of Christian readers, all ages will be inspired by the book’s innovative strategies for experiencing a deeper life in Christ.”
Authors Gregory Boyd and Al Larson provide their solution for problematic sanctification in this blend of neuropsychology, experiential psychotherapy, and soteriology. The book uses the movie as a metaphor for sin, salvation, and sanctification and encourages readers to “take the red pill” in order to enter into a deeper and more joyful experience of the life of Christ.
The book is divided into two parts: What Is the Matrix? and Escaping the Matrix. Each chapter (there are nine in all) has an exercise at the end designed to empower the reader to implement the emphases of the chapter.
The authors stress that the world in which believers live is under the control of Satan – referred to as the “Architect” throughout the book – and is hostile to the purposes of God. Drawing tight parallels between the world as depicted in The Matrix and that revealed in the Bible, they ask a series of questions to strengthen the connection:
What if the real world not only mirrors the movie “The Matrix” in terms of the splinter we all have in our brains but also in its explanation of this splinter? What if it’s true that we allow the neurological activity in our brains to be significantly controlled by forces outside of ourselves? What if at least some of what we think is real is actually an illusion? And what if this is the explanation for why we don’t consistently experience ourselves as being what Scripture says we truly are?
“What if there really is a Matrix that holds us in bondage?”
This Matrix, the authors argue, exists in the neurological networks that exist in every person’s physical brain. Comparing the brain to a computer, the world system exists as a Matrix of “neurochips” that determine thoughts, feelings, and behaviors.
Life in the Matrix is a perpetual cycle of triggers and deterministically activated neural-nets that we did not choose to have installed . . . Under the right circumstances – the right trigger – the neurochip is activated. Once activated, it deterministically communicates a message and creates a feeling as part of its message, and it does so in a fraction of a second, beneath the level of consciousness. To the extent dictated by the neurochip, you are a slave, a neurochip- controlled robot that will experience reality according to whomever or whatever installed the neurochip in you.”
The Matrix of neurochips creates an illusion, the authors explain, leading us to experience the world inaccurately: it is a “holographic virtual reality we experience in our minds.” To the extent that Christians are not living according to their new, true identity in Christ, they are like the people in pods in the movie: enthralled and captivated by a fantasy.
The solution is multifaceted but essentially can be summarized as “living as a resurrected Neo” (the hero of the movie), since “Jesus is the true Neo.” It involves becoming a “detective” of our minds, “uninstalling” the Satan-installed neurochips that perpetuate the illusion, and learning to claim the truths about our new identity in Christ. To accomplish this, Boyd and Larson provide nine exercises to free the mind of the believer:
-
1. Assessing our bondage to the Matrix;
2. Becoming a detective of your mind;
3. Discovering the modalities of memory;
4. Learning to adjust your inner world;
5. Experiencing Jesus;
6. Exercising faith in your true identity;
7. Silencing the judger and releasing the lover;
8. The “Theater of Life in Christ,” and,
9. “Setting faith” for the true you.
Central to the exercises and critical for “escaping the Matrix” is the practice of imaginative prayer or “cataphatic spirituality,” which the authors describe as a
“traditional form of spirituality that involves praying with (not to) mental and physical images . . . It is most fundamentally rooted in Paul’s teaching that we are transformed by mentally beholding the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 3:16-18; 2 Cor 4:1-6).”
Evaluation of Escaping the Matrix
This book is the latest of a seemingly unending chain of psychologically- and psychotherapeutically-informed attempts to facilitate sanctification. Some of the points made are true and valuable; at the same time, it commits some serious, prevalent errors concerning the nature of salvation and sanctification in the Christian life. Rather than attempt to persuade you through detailed analysis – which would require a much longer post – I will provide areas of concern, quote representative passages from the book, and allow you to come to your own decision.
Before beginning to examine Escaping the Matrix, however, some background information is necessary.
Orientation
To understand the approach taken in this book, it is profitable to consider a few excerpts from two reviews of Seeing Is Believing, an earlier book by Boyd. The first is offerred by Gary Gilley and is available in full here. It is obvious from the start that Gilley is no follower of Boyd but, while likely biased in his assessment, nevertheless provides some information and background about the author.
Boyd is best known as a leading proponent of the heresy known as open theism . . . Seeing Is Believing is another giant step away from biblical truth, this time into the New Age mysticism. Boyd’s thesis is that ‘It’s not what we believe intellectually that impacts us; it’s what we experience as real’ (p. 12) . . . How does one go about experiencing Jesus? Using 2 Corinthians 3:17-4:6 as his main text, Boyd tells us that imagination, when guided by the Holy Spirit and submitted to the authority of Scripture, is our main receptor to the spiritual world (p. 196). The problem is that our Western mindset rejects imagination as make believe (pp. 72, 86, 95, 127-128, 134, 205). So it is necessary to reject this worldview and adopt an Eastern, mystical understanding. When this happens we begin to use our imagination to discover the real Jesus . . .
“Boyd attempts to show in chapter six that both Scriptures and church history back his view. Scripturally he attempts to link the visions, dreams and appearances of God and angels in the Bible with imaginative prayer . . . [i.e.,] objective visions in the Bible are the same as imaginative experiences today . . . What Boyd does not do is prove imaginative prayer (or cataphatic spirituality – pp. 93-94) from either Scripture or truly biblically-based Christian leaders.”
The second review is provided by Bob DeWaay in a Critical Issues Commentary, which is available online. DeWaay first provides a definition of cataphatic prayer from a Creighton University article before giving his own assessment of the practice:
‘Another form of prayer, called cataphatic, honors and reverences images and feelings and goes through them to God. This form of prayer also has an ancient and well-attested history in the world of religions. Any sort of prayer that highlights the mediation of creation can be called cataphatic. So, praying before icons or images of saints; the mediation of sacraments and sacramentals; prayer out in creation – all these are cataphatic forms of prayer.’”
“This is not about someone thinking about Jesus and perhaps imagining what He might look like (whether or not that is a good idea is worth discussing but it is not at issue here). This is about a technique that will put one in an altered state of consciousness (whether they call it that or not) in which an image of Jesus becomes the living Christ and the person experiences the reality of this Christ who speaks to them. They are gaining information from Christ (if it is really Him – a claim they cannot prove) beyond what is written in the Bible. This information cannot be gained through normal means of study or normal means of knowing. It is secret, spiritual information. Therefore, it is forbidden (Deuteronomy 29:29).
Given this background, it is apparent that Boyd and Larson are now providing a detailed technique for accomplishing “cataphatic spirituality,” which is actually little more than a form of religious guided imagery. Whether or not one agrees with the practice of such imaginative prayer, it is beyond disagreement that the practice shares much in common with suggestive, hypnotic techniques employed by psychiatrists, psychologists, and psychotherapists.
Guided imagery begins by creating a state of relaxed alertness, usually by deep relaxation techniques. Subjects are then guided through an appropriate imaginary experience in order to achieve the desired results. As the reviewer contends, it is a state of altered consciousness that could be described as a light hypnotic trance. When employed by Christians, it is quite common to imagine Jesus coming to the subject and “healing” the individual by providing them with assurance, forgiveness, or some additional insight or knowledge. The seance-like atmosphere raises serious questions about the legitimacy of such a practice and, more importantly, about the true identity of the “images” that are conjured up.
Concern: Sin and Responsibility
There is a determinism and avoidance of responsibility taught in the book that is troubling and unbiblical. Rather than being active participants and thus culpable for our sins and our sin nature, people generally and Christians particularly are portrayed as passive victims of Satan and external forces. The following quotes are representative; note especially the passive role of the individual:
Life in the Matrix is a perpetual cycle of triggers and deterministically activated neural-nets that we did not choose to have installed.”
For the truth is that our entire sense of reality is formed by the neurological activity in our brains . . . To the extent that deceptive neurochips have been installed in us, we experience reality as other than it truly is. We are to this extent prisoners of our own mind, chained in ways we did not choose. Our prison was largely chosen for us.”
There are a few places in the book where people are actually said to be responsible for sin but there is no attempt to harmonize these statements with those that imply just the opposite. Given the preponderance of externalizing comments and the nature of the techniques utilized, it is hard to see how people are personally accountable for the sinful behavior in which they participate.
Concern: Anthropology and Sanctification
Although these two disciplines are technically separate, they are practically inseparable. Boyd and Larson present and reflect an understanding of salvation and sanctification that is at odds with traditional, orthodox Christianity.
The spirit of the regenerate person genuinely wants to live in relationship with God and to do his will. All that God says is true about us in Scripture is true on this level. We are in our innermost being identified with Christ and are holy, blameless, filled with all the fullness of God, etc.
. . . our experience is rooted in the electrical-chemical firings in our brains. Thus, every single aspect of the life of a person who trusts in Christ that doesn’t conform to God’s truth must be assessed as due to neurochips . . . If you want to be free to experience real life – the true you – you must believe that you are more than all the forces of causality that impact you. You must accept that you are not fated to be who you have experienced yourself to be up to this point. To escape the Matrix, you must resolve to believe that what God says about you is true however much your past or present experience tells you otherwise. However real the old you seems, you must accept that it is not true.”
Apparently, then, when Paul described himself – in the present tense – as the foremost of chief of sinners (1 Tim 1:15), he failed to discern what was not true about himself.
The approach to sanctification – i.e., “living as a resurrected Neo” – as taught by Boyd and Larson is predicated on a misunderstanding of salvation and the process of sanctification. They seem to understand salvation as the realization of the New Covenant promises in all its fulness at the moment of salvation. What orthodox Christianity has always held regarding Paul’s teaching on salvation and sanctification – positional or forensic truth – is rejected and a new understanding is substituted in its place.
Throughout the Book of Romans, Paul speaks of aspects of salvation that are forensically true of the believer. These various dimensions of salvation await fulfillment in heaven, although they are given to us in increasing measure during this lifetime as we mature spiritually.
Boyd and Larson, however, implicitly teach that the believer is already in full possession of maturity and only await the removal of deceptive and defective neurochips to experience all that has been given to believers at the moment of salvation. The following quote from the book, while somewhat confusing, reveals their basic conceptualization of the struggle of sanctification and the Christian life:
If you are like most believers, the you that you experience is not the real you. The real you is trapped inside the you that is conformed to the Matrix of the world . . . The you that you experience is the you that has been largely defined by your upbringing, your past experiences, the culture into which you’re submerged, the media that bombard you, and the false conclusions at which you’ve arrived by the distorted operations of your own fallen brain. To the extent that this you doesn’t agree with the you that is in Christ Jesus, the you you experience is a lie.
The you that you experience as real is the total constellation of neural-net installations in your brain . . . If the you that you experience is not the true you, you have been defined from the bottom up rather than the top down, and the outside in rather than the inside out . . .”
This is psychobabble disguised as theology. It is not only bad theology, it is bad psychology and psychotherapy.
Note the following list of things that, according to the authors, are experientially true for believers. Some indeed are true but others are forensic truths that are being realized but not fully present in this lifetime (I have added my assessment and comments in []:
The truth we’re asking you to believe – or rather, God is asking you to believe – is, in fact, almost unbelievable . . . everything that belongs to Christ by nature is shared with you by grace. This isn’t nice poetry; it’s factually true. You really are “in Christ”! Being “in Christ” means:
You are in Christ’s abundant life, which is nothing less than the eternal life of the triune God . . . [True]
You have the same perfect righteousness . . . [Yes, but I also continue to have a sin nature]
You are as dead to sin and as reconciled to God and as free from condemnation as Christ is . . . [Forensically, yes; experientially, no]
You are heir of all the blessings to which Christ is heir . . . [Yes, praise God!]
Though you once were ‘far away,’ you are now as near to God as Christ himself is . . . [Forensically, but not always in practice - cf. Jas 4:8]
You have the same Spirit of God, the same fearlessness, and the same love, joy, and peace that Christ himself has . . . [Again, forensically true]
You now participate in the dance of the eternal triune God and are made a participant in the eternal divine nature . . . [Do the Baptists know about this dance?]
Boyd and Larson, it appears, have failed to heed the warning set forth by Moo in his commentary on Romans (NICNT):
“For Paul, as in the OT, ‘righteousness of God’ is a relational concept. Bringing together the aspects of activity and status, we can define it as the act by which God brings people into right relationship with himself. With Luther, we stress that what is meant is a status before God and not internal moral transformation – God’s activity of ‘making right’ is purely forensic activity, an acquitting, and not an ‘infusing’ of righteousness or a ‘making right’ in a moral sense. To be sure, the person who experiences God’s righteousness does, necessarily, give evidence of that in the moral realm, as Paul makes clear in Rom 6. But, while ’sanctification’ and ‘justification’ are inseparable, they are distinct; and Paul is badly misread if they are confused or combined.” (emphases mine)
Concern: Method of Change
As mentioned above, the “cataphatic spirituality” or “prayer” is essentially guided imagery and a mental machination intended to produce a desirable end. It is the error of Gal 3:3, i.e., using fleshly or worldly means to accomplish a godly objective. Consider the following exhortations and recommendations:
So how do we create truth-communicating events in our minds? The same way we created deception-communicating events in our minds. We create events in our minds by experiencing something in our minds as though it were real.
Compare this:
This is the essence of the Matrix: we experience as real things that are not true.
with this:
. . . you might ask God to help you imagine a story that explains what might be motivating this person to be the way he or she is – a story that elicits compassion rather than judgment. The story need not be factual . . .
Apparently, things can be real and true even though they are not factual.
There is a “name it, claim it” or “word of faith” feel to the practices, too:
The New Testament sometimes refers to the thoughts and emotions that constitute our internal world as our soul (psyche). By talking to your soul in the third person (e.g., by saying, ‘Soul, listen up . . . ,’ see Luke 12:17-21), we gain a disassociated (detached, objective) perspective. We isolate and empower that part of us that is more than our thoughts and emotions . . .
“Speak each verse to your soul. Say, ‘Soul, listen up. Because of what Jesus did for me, I am . . .,’ and then recite the truth of the verse. After each verse you’ve spoken to your sould, close your eyes and vigilantly and patiently wait for your soul to respond. Attend carefully to what you hear, see, or feel inside yourself when you speak the truth of the verse to yourself . . .
“Don’t just recite information about how you think you’d be different. Get a picture of yourself and see how you’re different. Listen to how this God-glorifying you thinks and speaks differently from the way you presently tend to think and speak. Observe how you feel about things when you manifest the truth of who you are in Christ, and note how it’s different from the way you presently tend to feel about those things. Don’t just know about the true you; experience the true you.”
Concern: Various
I could go on, but won’t. I’ll close with some general concerns I have about what the book implies.
First, Escaping the Matrix does not encourage or stress the importance of community: all of the activities can either be accomplished individually or (at most) with a counselor. It is American individualism at its worst, denying the need for the Holy Spirit in other believers to minister to me. Body life is unnecessary for growth and maturity according to Boyd and Larson.
Second, the Holy Spirit (in me and other believers) and the Bible are not enough: these techniques are vital for growth.
These exercises are indispensable if you are to set your mind free to experience real life in Christ . . . If we are going to take every thought captive to Christ, we’re going to have to do so according to the rules that govern thought . . . You can’t fight experiential cancer with a Band-Aid of conceptual information.”
Reading this, one wonders how Martin Luther, John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards or any other believer managed without the “necessary” information in this book. This attitude is troubling for another reason, however, which is the third concern:
What does this say about the manner in which Jesus Christ trained His twelve disciples. If these fantasies and imaginations are critical for genuine spiritual growth, why is there no record of Jesus teaching the disciples to enter a light trance and visualize this or that? Was Jesus uninformed or unconcerned?
Fourth and finally, this is sancification through self-esteem. The focus is on the self, on freeing oneself and examining oneself and becoming oneself. The focus is not on Christ. As appealing as these techniques might be to our narcissistic culture, they are contrary to the selflessness and other-centeredness of the New Testament.
We are to fix our eyes – not on ourselves or imaginations or neurochips or chocolate chips – but on the Author and Finisher of our faith (Heb 12:1-2). It is by dwelling on Him – and Him alone – that we are transformed into His image (2 Cor 3:18).
And the best way to “escape the Matrix”? Don’t buy the book.
Excellent review. I am reading this book as well and am about ready to pack it in after only a couple of chapters. The authors prooftext The Matrix as often as the Bible! And the exercises, as you so aptly point out, are really nothing more than secular/occultish in nature. What a mess this book is.
Just so your readers know a more complete story of Greg Boyd, Dr Boyd has been involved in a very big controversial debate on “open view theism”. Most of the debate was with another incredibly sharp theologian Dr. John Piper.
You can get a good idea about what this is all about here…
http://www.google.com/u/desiringgod?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=greg+boyd&btnG=Search
Here is another link.
http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/001022.html
This is just a small warning, but a bit cautious and discerning in this realm.
Wayne M.
http://qandablog.typepad.com
Escaping the Matrix
A review for Mind
I thought the book was excellent.
At last a methodology that addresses taking every thought captive. Dr Boyd is a pastor of a large Church and preaches on community more clearly than anyone i have ever heard.
So Mike we have heard what you have thought of the method the book employs what is your method?
What is your advice to the young believer that grew up in the abusive home? Those that need healing and restoration. What spiritual exercises do you deploy or does God just unilaterally change you and you sit back and let it happen?
I would love to hear your comments .
pat
Pat:
If you genuinely want to know my method, then read my post on the subject, “Christ on the Brain.” It’s a long but an adequate introduction to brain-based change – which also happens to be the method Christ employed (I don’t know that He “deployed” any methods)with the disciples. Neuropsychology has only identified the brain functions and principles that God built into us.
The question of methodology is not whether or not it’s effective – antidepressants and electroshock treatments are also effective, if you want to look into them – but whether or not they are biblical. I’ve been doing “clinical discipleship” for 20+ years, have studied countless methods and evaluated them on the basis of biblical teaching.
That Dr Boyd is the pastor of a large church is swell. So is Joel Osteen and so is Robert Schuller. What does that prove? Is he correct because he has a large church? That’s an ad hominem argument and unconvincing.
I’ve worked with and been a young believer who grew up in an abusive home; I know about healing and restoration. I know about pain and futile crusades to earn love. But I won’t yield to the foolishness of the Galatians or buy into a snake-oil treatment, no matter how many degrees the person has or how big his church is. That Dr Boyd is also an open theist does nothing to convince me of his discernment or commitment to truth, BTW.
The biblical process of sanctification certainly takes longer, though, so if you’re looking for a quick fix stick with Boyd. Or maybe L. Ron Hubbard’s “Dianetics.” In my B.C. days, nihilism and hedonism worked great for me, too. Is it true because it works? Pragmatism may say it’s true because it works, but I don’t.
Did I somewhere in my review imply that sancification is a passive process? If you take the time to read just about any of my other posts, I think you’ll find that I’m anything but passive.
If you are sincerely interested in understanding the flaws of such an approach, I have a list of books you can read. Let me know.
Mike,
Thanks for the reply and forgive my lack of thought. I have read a lot some of Doctor Boyds books and have found them quite helpful.
I have also listened to a large number of his sermons given at his Church.
I mentioned him being the pastor of a large church because he laboured with God to plant it and grow it from a small group. This coupled with the emphasis on relationships in his sermons and the meaning of fellowship tells me that the guy believes in healing and restoration through the body. I have heard him directly address this in many of his sermons.
The book is a snapshot of his and Al Larsons ideas. They advocate bible meditation, prayer , fellowship all fairly orthodox avenues you’ll agree but in a radically new way. Some of it is drawing from Ignatius De Loyola’s writings, namely his spiritual exercises.
I was not trying to advance the argument that Dr Boyd having a large Church meant anything other than he believes in Christianity lived out in community. His sermons will tell you as well as his book “Repenting Of Religion” why fellowship is important and what true fellowship is.
I wasn’t able to find your article ” Christ on the brain” on the internet so if you could give me a link and I would also appreciate the names of the books you mention. I am thinking of training to become a counsellor as there is a big need wher I live.
In Christ
Pat
Pat:
The link is here: http://eternalperspectives.com/2005/01/26/christ-on-the-brain-in-one-bite/
I also posted my major writing project online, but most of it is in the above post. It may not go into some aspects of brain-based learning so, if you’re still interested after wading through the above, let me know.
[...] e a negative review in the future, should any book be deserving of it! UPDATE: Check out this review. It’s a lot more in depth than mind and makes s [...]
Mike-
Mike-
Oops, I accidentally hit submit! Anyways, I read your review and want you to know that I was a client of Dynamics of Growth and I’m not sure that we are talking about the same thing. I’ve never felt hypnotized nor have we ever done any “deep relaxation techniques”. I’m some what saddened that you are giving a bad review of this book and the form of counseling that is done, when you haven’t experienced it yourself. I won’t go into my testimony, but I can say that my life has changed more than I could have ever imagined. I believe this has happened because of God. I take FULL responsibility for my sin and I have never felt that I was excused from my sin while in counseling. I would have to say that I now take more responsibility of my sin since I’ve been in counseling. I do believe that we are called to be transformed by the renewing of our mind. That sounds great, but how do you do that? My small group (formed through Woodland Hills Church, which does have a strong sense of community) would tell me that I needed to take my thoughts captive, again sounds good, but how do you do that? Well I learned those things through counseling. I truly believe that I am on the road to transformation and all the glory goes to GOD! I am truly saddened that you gave this book a bad review, my life is changed because of the work God has been doing, and I believe God is using Greg and Al to do this work, and now with the tools I’ve learned God and I can do change in my life together!
God Bless,
Angie
Angie:
I’m glad you have benefitted so much. But the book didn’t change you: the Holy Spirit, working through the counselor, effected the change. There’s a lot of research to demonstrate that people tend to get better no matter what the approach and technique might be. Some approaches are biblical, however, and some aren’t. Some are in the gray areas of our experiences and knowledge.
My review was based on what was in the book. I haven’t experienced this therapy but, based on what they promoted and described, I cannot agree with the techniques or emphases. That does not take anything away from your growth, but it does suggest that you could have gotten to the same point another, more biblical (in my professional opinion) way.
Of course, you’re not the one who’s going to be questioned about the techniques at the bema seat: Boyd and Larson will be, and so will I: people place a lot of trust in us and we are in a role of teacher/shepherd with our clients. If Boyd and Larson want to answer for their approach, that’s their business. I will have to explain my own – and my review, too. That’s as it should be.
I don’t recommend this type of therapy, wouldn’t do it (although I did some guided imagery/hypnotherapy in the past – and still do relaxation), and think I have biblical reasons for opposing it.
Can you find biblical support for it? I don’t mean direct references, of course, but similar practices or teachings. Have you found anything that might argue against it?
Whatever your answers may be, you’ll be accountable for it from this point forward: we’re not responsible until we know. Now you know; now you have to defend your position. Not to me, of course, but to God.
Maybe you’re right, but I would be hard-pressed to find biblical support for such a practice. Anecdotal arguments don’t persuade me at all. Explain your experience by the Bible and I’ll listen. – Mike
Hi Mike,
Thanks for the review. I just finished reading both the book and your post and am hoping to interact with you on some of the points you brought up.
I’m reading through your ‘Christ on the Brain’ as well (I enjoy the humour in the opening few paragraphs, *smile).
Will write again later.
Blessings,
Alwyn
Hi Mike,
I hope you don’t mind this huge post. If you wish, feel free to remove it and just refer to http://www.angelfire.com/journal/althehare/escapematrix.htm
It’s just that I’d like other people to respond as well (if they choose to), as part of my project of understanding the issues better.
My first impression of the book is that here are two guys who’ve crafted a psychological technique to improve our imaginations and align them with (what they believe to be) Biblical truth. Their methods (seem to) have a solid neurological basis, they’re not asking us to believe in Satan, not asking to believe lies, not asking us to compromise on every other ‘Christian’ thing Christians do and so if it helps – and assuming that filling our imaginations with images of Jesus is not unbiblical – why not try it?
Still, being the cautious non-innovative dude I am, I’m looking around for people who seem to have a HUGE problem with the book. Yours is the first really substantial critique I’ve come across. I’d like to respond to it based on your own sections:
1. Boyd’s Orientation
I feel that linking his ideas with New Age mysticism simply begs the question. We’d probably have to go deeper into DeWaay’s review (which I won’t do here) but since your section, Mike, doesn’t actually provide Scriptural refutation of Boyd’s thesis in Seeing is Believing, I have to give it a pass until more exegesis is done to show why it’s unBiblical Christians should not produce images of Jesus in their minds as part of their sanctification.
Likewise, with your comments that Boyd’s practice “shares much in common with suggestive, hypnotic techniques employed by psychiatrists, psychologists and psychotherapists.†Many Christian practices share much in common with practices and activities in contemporary society. The issue is whether Scripture forbids it (either explicitly or implicitly).
“Séance-like†atmosphere? True identity of the images conjured up? Once again, I think we need more solid objections than labels and pseudo-insinuations. I don’t mean any offense, Mike, but I’m sure you’ve had at least a few images of Jesus in your lifetime, haven’t you? How would you feel if people raised questions about the ‘true-identity’ of said images? How is this different from what you’re writing about Boyd & Larson?
2. Sin & Responsibility
Boyd & Larson do not, in my reading of the book, deny sin or personal accountability for it. The emphasis on our lack of choice in the various installations of neurochips merely restates the fact (as illustrated throughout the book) that our brains ‘take in’ events and memories SOME of which impact us without our conscious awareness. I think at least some neurological evidence shows this is true (doesn’t it, Mike? You probably know this better than me) and I can’t see how we get from this basic neurological fact to “We’re not accountable for our sinful behaviour†let alone, “We don’t need to be accountable for our sinful behaviour†(something which I reckon you feel Boyd & Larson are implying).
In my view, therefore, this is at best a misunderstanding and at worst a red herring.
3. Anthropology & Sanctification
The issues raised here are fascinating for theological enthusiasts but I don’t think it goes to the heart of the matter. The list of “You are†affirmations were meant to remind the believer of often forgotten truths regarding our standing with God. If we can SAY it and claim it from Scripture, I don’t see anything wrong (or at least, not yet) with IMAGINING it.
I mean, to put it simplistically, someone with your view of salvation/sanctification could just REMOVE those verses quoted in the book you believe are only forensically true and keep only those you believe are experientially true as well. At most, you’d have a shorter list(!) though I’m pretty sure you can still produce MANY images and ‘movies’.
Therefore, I don’t think Boyd & Larson’s method hang on any particular Christian theology. It’s about imagining Biblical truth and replacing our everyday visions of un-truth with what we know from the Bible to be true. The heart of Boyd’s & Larson’s work concerns imagining truth as opposed to merely believing it, thereby reaping experiential rewards from such imagination. Whilst I agree there MAY be something questionable about it and there ARE numerous questions involved, Mike, I just don’t think you’ve raised these in such a way to make your objection against them convincing. So, again, if you’ve got doubts about some of the phrases they use (e.g. “You are now as near to God as Christ Himselfâ€), then just put those aside and use other true-er ones.
On a related note, I’m not sure about the significance of 1Tim 1:15. My amateurish exegetical skills notwithstanding, I think Paul’s declaration (which was probably meant to highlight his former persecution of Christians) is made in context of much thanksgiving and praise and if we can imagine – using Boyd & Larson’s method – God hugging/holding/loving us as sinners then there’s really no inconsistency with what Paul writes. It’s also unlikely that Paul intends to make an unqualified theological truth-claim that he is the ‘chief of sinners’ as a) there are unrepentant sinners around (surely we don’t think Paul is ‘worse off’ than them, do we?) and b) Paul has written about being a ‘slave to righteousness’, which presumably he is, vis-à -vis being a ‘slave to sin’, which he presumably isn’t but some still are. Paul, in my view, was therefore not so much constructing propositional theology as he was using hyper-bole (not sure if this is the right word) to remind both himself and his readers of the depths of sin God saved him from, and doing so in the context of thanksgiving to God (something Boyd & Larson would almost certainly encourage in words and imagination!).
To repeat, Boyd & Larson did not tell us to deny we are sinners. In fact, I think they would tell us to reflect on God’s grace to us in spite of our sin and our ‘new creation’ status in Christ.
4. Method of Change
Putting aside the exegetical controversies surrounding Galatians, I’m afraid I can’t agree that Boyd & Larson’s approach constitutes a ‘fleshly’ or ‘worldly’ means to accomplish a godly objective, in the same way that I don’t think that using the Internet, taking aspirin, or going for work-outs are non-godly options to do the work of Christ or heal/better our health. Once again, I think you’ve begged the question.
I also think you may have misrepresented Boyd & Larson with your statement (of their work) that… “Apparently, things can be real and true even though they are not factual.†If I’ve read them correctly, I think they only mean to say that things can be experientially REAL without being factual. I don’t see them as telling us to believe in lies or hold fantasy as truth (the correctness of their theology notwithstanding, as per your ‘Anthropology & Sanctification’ section).
Furthermore, Boyd was trying to encourage us towards compassion, as opposed to judgment, for another. He’s telling us to love the person, yet often our minds (and thus our experience of reality) think judgmentally of them, conjuring up negative stories/’movies’ which reinforce our judgment of them. As we DO NOT KNOW ‘what may be motivating this person to be the way he or she is’, the issue of truth is secondary in the proposal that we imagine a story which elicits our compassion.
But, really, if this feels too deceptive, then it’s just a short step to ask God to give us as true as possible a mental picture of these persons’ circumstances in the prayer that our minds will be transformed towards loving them more.
I’m also less concerned than you seem to be with this quote:
“Don’t just recite information about how you think you’d be different. Get a picture of yourself and see how you’re different. Listen to how this God-glorifying you thinks and speaks differently from the way you presently tend to think and speak. Observe how you feel about things when you manifest the truth of who you are in Christ, and note how it’s different from the way you presently tend to feel about those things. Don’t just know about the true you; experience the true you.â€
Boyd & Larson have already explained in the opening chapters (and I think Boyd has also done so a little in Seeing Is Believing) the inadequacies of conceptual information vis-à -vis experience. A careful (and charitable, I might add) reading of their work, IMO, will yield the conclusion that they’re not DENYING truth or saying it’s not important. They are offering suggestions and/or mental tools to make our true concepts and beliefs a more integral part of our mental/emotional experience.
We are worlds away from a ‘name it, claim it’ tactic and the lack of concern with truth that (I gather) you’re ascribing to them.
To briefly address your various concerns:
You’re probably right that the authors feel that their exercises are ‘indispensable’ to experiencing real life in Christ and I too feel that they’ve exaggerated their case. Still, even if we disagree with them on the indispensability of their method, this doesn’t entail we can’t, let alone shouldn’t, try out their ideas. Reading good spiritual books is NOT ‘indispensable’ for growth in Christ, but you’re probably still gonna get the next John Piper paperback, right? (smile).
You write that the book doesn’t encourage/stress the importance of community or that the authors don’t believe that Body Life is unnecessary for growth and maturity. A book on private prayer or personal Bible study probably won’t seem to ‘encourage/stress the importance of community’, this hardly warrants the conclusion. We have to see what the subject matter is. In any case, it’s a weak objection, one easily circumvented by the authors putting in a few lines affirming community (e.g. doing TNT in a group which, as I understand, is what’s done at their seminars anyway) and which doesn’t address key issues.
I also find it amazing that you can write that “The focus is not on Christ. As appealing as these techniques might be to our narcissistic culture, they are contrary to the selflessness and other-centeredness of the New Testament.†Boyd & Larson tell us to imagine Christ being with us, to ‘see’ Him next to us, holding us, etc. Ironically, this would de facto mean that Christians who follow their method have more images of Christ in their minds than those who don’t! How is this NOT ‘focusing on Christ’? And whilst I don’t think this automatically makes anyone more sanctified, I simply cannot see how their work can be labelled ‘narcissistic’, even less can I see how these caricatures help in our evaluations.
Finally, Mike, I think your review would be strengthened by:
a) An evaluation of the scientific or neurological basis of their methods (did they represent the scientific consensus fairly? Did they omit certain bits of neurological information which greatly damages their case for their method?)
b) A stronger theology of Christian imagination (exactly what is sinful about imagining Jesus with us and others in time and ‘beyond’ time? Which passages are most relevant?) I believe Boyd has a theological section in his ‘Seeing Is Believing’ where he anticipates and responds to some criticism of his theology of Christian imagination. Maybe you can start there?
I hope this critique of your critique helps. Do let me know if you feel I’ve misread either you or the book. I’m seeking to understand more about this topic and your review was a good start to get me going.
Blessings,
Alwyn
Hi it’s me again!
I decided to read through the reply’s of other people after posting my own. What stood out to me was Angies’ reply. She has been in contact with Dynamic Growth and got free and experienced these excersises first hand.
What made me wonder a bit was that you (Mike) said that:
“anecdotal arguments don’t persuade me at all. Explain your experience by the Bible and I’ll listen.”
We all do agree (you, me, Angie, Boyd and Larson) that everything has to be tested against the Bible. You seem to think that what is described in “Escaping the Matrix” is a method that the Bible describes as wrong. Or possibly you rather means that because these excercises are not written in the Bible they are wrong.
There are some considerations that I think would be worth looking at:
1. I can’t find a single verse that even implies that these excercises are wrong. Of course you can argue about some theological stands, and I can defend them (with the Bible) but the excercises in themselves can’t be dispelled by the Bible. Please show me if I’m wrong.
2. These excercises aren’t described in the Bible, but the principlies that they rest on definitely are. We are to take our thoughts captive and teach them to obey Christ (the book shows a way how to do that), we are not to conform to the pattern of this world and the Bible are full of promises and descriptions of life in Christ. Of course we are also “encouraged” to pray about all things. There are more to be said in scriptural support of the book but this should be enough.
The Bible says that we should take our thoughts captive and teach them to obey Christ. But it doesn’t say how. There’s probably plenty of ways and “Escaping the Matrix” shows one.
It’s the same with other things. Bible says e.g. that we should show hospitality. There are myriads of ways of how to apply that truth/principle. If I wrote a book about a way relevant to our culture, it might not be described EXACTLY in the Bible.
If Christians were to follow your line of reasoning about only doing what’s EXACTLY in the Bible we would have to stop do a lot of what we are doing today. Does it say anything in the Bible about EXACTLY how the structure of leadership and EXACTLY who should decide what and how? No! But the Bible gives us some guidelines in the New Testament. Some principles. The way in OT isn’t transferable to our days, – not EXACTLY anyway.
I could argue the same way about music, churchbuilding, projectors, good christian counselling and hundreds of other things.
So, my point is: Why do you have a problem with Boyd and Al’s excercises from a Biblical point of view? Isn’t it using the principles of taking thoughts captive to be able to live more fully for God and also the principle of praying.
To me it seems more like it’s your own misconception about their excercises as weird seances that is the problem, apart from that they don’t agree with your Calvinist theology.
I’m sorry if I’m straight at it, I don’t mean to be rude, I just sincerely want to hear your thoughts around these issues.
Gee Mike, you’re such a loving and caring guy who really knows how to shout down the internet.(not smiling)
I came onto this blog as some pre-work on Greg Boyd who is visiting Ireland next month (Aug 06) and was impressed by some of the responses although not agreeing with many.
I think you have shot yourself in the foot and have confirmed to me the stereotypical funadmentalist/calvinist/evangelical image. Ie cold and closed in their thinking and not big on debate (as obviously their way is the only truth.)
I would agree very much with David from Sweden – as a 21 yr old he’s pretty much on the money as far as I’m concerned.
BTW – I’m a 48 year old Irishman who has done a bit of church leadership, some theology and a lot of thinking of how and why the church has got it so wrong and lets the ‘world’ set its agenda by refencing movies like the Matrix to write books about.
Based on your response to David from Sweden –
you’re probably not going to read this anyway.