-------------------------
This seems to be a discussion of nurture vs. nature. Are people born naturally talented (and by analogy, specially gifted by God), or are the environment, dedication to the craft, and training more important (or by analogy, service to the church that comes by self-improvement)? The author wants to apply this to the spiritual gifts.
He believes that giftedness is acquired, not bestowed, in the same manner as physical or intellectual skills are developed. He provides no biblical reason for this, since he quotes only five words of Scripture.
We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.
-------------------------
The 10,000 hours rule
The 10,000 hours rule was first popularised by Malcolm Gladwell in his landmark book Outliers, published in 2008. (Who? Is this man a Christian thinker, theologian, or pastor? No. Does he bring some sort of gravitas to the discussion? No. Why then does the author spend half his article discussing this man's book? Well, it fits his narrative.
Gladwell describes the efforts of psychologists to try to discover whether there is anything innate about talent. Is Steve Smith ‘naturally gifted’ in some predetermined way that once he picked up a cricket bat, the art of batsmanship came instinctively to him? Did the game of cricket mesh in some deep way with something in his soul? Was his gift for cricket almost supernaturally given to him?
We have a hard time relinquishing that idea, even though as Gladwell shows it actually has no basis in fact. Of course, there are some prerequisites for being an elite sportsperson or a world-class pianist: a nine-fingered person is unlikely to become the latter and physical dimensions play a part in the former. But all that aside: is genius born, or made?
Almost entirely made, would seem to be the answer. If you analyse the lives of some of the most extraordinarily ‘gifted’ people in all fields, you will find that environmental factors played an enormous part in their becoming so gifted. And this is the significance of the ’10,000 hours’ rule: the elite performers in every area will have spent as many as 10,000 hours practising in their given area. Think Tiger Woods: from two years of age, trained in golf by a fanatical father. Andre Agassi describes his own wrathful father’s obsession with the tennis success of his son from before primary school. Don Bradman spent endless hours hitting a golf ball against a corrugated iron surface with a cricket stump because he had nothing else to do. Johnny Wilkinson famously practised his goal-kicking on Christmas Day.
In each case ‘natural ability’ ‘giftedness’ or even ‘talent’ can’t even begin to account for the extraordinary powers of these people. So why do we persist in using language that implies that someone has had a supernatural visitation of some kind? I think partly it is because what we see in the talented (so-called!) is almost miraculous to us; it seems to come from nowhere and to look effortless. It is us saying that abilities are mysterious.
But also, by calling it a ‘gift’ we seem to say: the bestowal of such abilities comes by some arbitrary force beyond us, and if I am not a concert pianist or tennis ace then that is not my fault. It helps us maintain our sense that we are equal, even when some people seem to possess capabilities of which I can only dream. And that’s a comfort, because our envy of the gifted is in part because they have such an easy time with identity: they simply seem to know that they are a chess player or a sculptor, and they don’t have to spend fruitless hours questing after some alternative purpose to their lives.
Spiritual gifts
Now, I want to use the thesis of Outliers to explore the Biblical notion of spiritual gifts. (How about you use the Bible to explore spiritual gifts?)
These are not surprise events, but things that were always supposed to take place within the natural sphere, and for which purpose it was in fact made. (Are we still talking about spiritual gifts, or have we wandered off into determinism?)
Now, when Paul addresses the Corinthians about the matter of ‘spirituals’ in 1 Corinthians 12-14 (he actually doesn’t start by using the term ‘gifts’), he doesn’t mean by ‘spiritual’ what we mean by ‘supernatural’. (Undocumented claim.)
The 10,000 hours rule
The 10,000 hours rule was first popularised by Malcolm Gladwell in his landmark book Outliers, published in 2008. (Who? Is this man a Christian thinker, theologian, or pastor? No. Does he bring some sort of gravitas to the discussion? No. Why then does the author spend half his article discussing this man's book? Well, it fits his narrative.
Jump ahead a few paragraphs if you don't want to waste time on Gladwell.)
Gladwell describes the efforts of psychologists to try to discover whether there is anything innate about talent. Is Steve Smith ‘naturally gifted’ in some predetermined way that once he picked up a cricket bat, the art of batsmanship came instinctively to him? Did the game of cricket mesh in some deep way with something in his soul? Was his gift for cricket almost supernaturally given to him?
We have a hard time relinquishing that idea, even though as Gladwell shows it actually has no basis in fact. Of course, there are some prerequisites for being an elite sportsperson or a world-class pianist: a nine-fingered person is unlikely to become the latter and physical dimensions play a part in the former. But all that aside: is genius born, or made?
Almost entirely made, would seem to be the answer. If you analyse the lives of some of the most extraordinarily ‘gifted’ people in all fields, you will find that environmental factors played an enormous part in their becoming so gifted. And this is the significance of the ’10,000 hours’ rule: the elite performers in every area will have spent as many as 10,000 hours practising in their given area. Think Tiger Woods: from two years of age, trained in golf by a fanatical father. Andre Agassi describes his own wrathful father’s obsession with the tennis success of his son from before primary school. Don Bradman spent endless hours hitting a golf ball against a corrugated iron surface with a cricket stump because he had nothing else to do. Johnny Wilkinson famously practised his goal-kicking on Christmas Day.
In each case ‘natural ability’ ‘giftedness’ or even ‘talent’ can’t even begin to account for the extraordinary powers of these people. So why do we persist in using language that implies that someone has had a supernatural visitation of some kind? I think partly it is because what we see in the talented (so-called!) is almost miraculous to us; it seems to come from nowhere and to look effortless. It is us saying that abilities are mysterious.
But also, by calling it a ‘gift’ we seem to say: the bestowal of such abilities comes by some arbitrary force beyond us, and if I am not a concert pianist or tennis ace then that is not my fault. It helps us maintain our sense that we are equal, even when some people seem to possess capabilities of which I can only dream. And that’s a comfort, because our envy of the gifted is in part because they have such an easy time with identity: they simply seem to know that they are a chess player or a sculptor, and they don’t have to spend fruitless hours questing after some alternative purpose to their lives.
Spiritual gifts
Now, I want to use the thesis of Outliers to explore the Biblical notion of spiritual gifts. (How about you use the Bible to explore spiritual gifts?)
My observation is that we have the same lazy habit in talking about spiritual gifts in the Christian life as we do in talking about gifts in general. (We think it is lazy to conflate talent with spiritual gifts.)
That is: we appeal to something spooky (i.e., the Holy Spirit...)
That is: we appeal to something spooky (i.e., the Holy Spirit...)
to explain where they come from, and we yearn for them as a marker to our identity. What’s more, the idea of a non-deliberate, almost spontaneous experience simply sounds more authentic than something we have rationally considered. (This entire presentation is oddly skewed. The author is intent on using secular philosophy to explain biblical concepts.
No one claims that "spontaneous experience is more authentic" as justification for their spiritual gifts. The fact is, the Holy Spirit is the bestower of spiritual gifts:
1Co. 12:7 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.
Ro. 12:6 We have different gifts, according to the grace given us.
This may be why the author quotes so little Scripture. It disagrees with him.)
I think this is based on a false dichotomy between the ‘natural’ and the ‘supernatural’.
Let me explain: we tend to divide events in the world between the ‘natural’ (those caused by natural or physical means) and the ‘supernatural’ (those events that in some way are caused by non-natural agents). (Ro. 8:6 The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace...)
I think this is based on a false dichotomy between the ‘natural’ and the ‘supernatural’.
Let me explain: we tend to divide events in the world between the ‘natural’ (those caused by natural or physical means) and the ‘supernatural’ (those events that in some way are caused by non-natural agents). (Ro. 8:6 The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace...)
But Scripture doesn’t do this, since God is sovereign over both. (Ahhh, Scripture. Tell us about this, please. Oh, You won't.)
There are no non-supernaturally caused events as far as the Bible is concerned. (Ahhh, Scripture. Tell us about this, please. Oh, You won't.)
Neither are any supernatural events, not in fact the way the world was supposed to be – even though the ordinary course of events may be suspended or interrupted for a time (when the dead are raised, or when the sick are healed). ("Ordinary?" Is there some difference between "non-supernatural" and "ordinary?" Sir, you embraced the latter but dismissed the former. Please explain.)
These are not surprise events, but things that were always supposed to take place within the natural sphere, and for which purpose it was in fact made. (Are we still talking about spiritual gifts, or have we wandered off into determinism?)
Now, when Paul addresses the Corinthians about the matter of ‘spirituals’ in 1 Corinthians 12-14 (he actually doesn’t start by using the term ‘gifts’), he doesn’t mean by ‘spiritual’ what we mean by ‘supernatural’. (Undocumented claim.)
Only, we are so used to thinking of talents and abilities in general as ‘supernatural’ or that we readily assume that this is exactly what he means.
Actually, that’s not how the passage turns out. By ‘spiritual’, Paul means rather something about the purpose of the gift. It is given for the purpose of edifying – or ‘building up’ - the church.
At one level, he is completely uninterested in what the gift is, but supremely interested in what it is for. And it is spiritual when it serves to unite the body of believers in love – by causing them to proclaim Jesus as Lord, which you can only do if you have the Spirit of God.
This is what true spirituality is: proclaiming Jesus is Lord and living as if it were true.
The list of gifts in 1 Cor 12:28 is fascinating, since it contains things we would ordinarily think of as completely non-miraculous (the gift of administration, anyone?) alongside gifts our habit tells us are ‘supernaturally’ given. (All spiritual gits are supernatural.)
This makes sense, since Paul also says you can ‘eagerly desire the greater gifts’ – which are greater because they serve more effectively to promote unity and love in Christ. You can desire them - which means I think that you can acquire them through training and practice. (Or acquire them by asking the Holy Spirit. We see the author makes his selection according to his agenda.)
We also must observe that, quite apart from seeing a spiritual gift as a means by which I might find my true self, or actualise my inner being, a spiritual gift - if it is in fact ‘spiritual’ - is a gift I exercise in the service of others. It isn’t about me having an experience of God, but about other people and their needs.
In fact, as Paul goes on to explain, the parts of the body cannot live without one another. The ‘spiritual gifts’ are given to the church in order to maintain its bodily life entire.
This perspective is particularly liberating, since the gift given to my brother or sister, or to me, is in fact ours, for our benefit, and not simply for the benefit of the person possessing the gift. To envy the person who has the gift is silly since their gift is something that belongs to all of us in any case.
To return to Outliers, however: that a gift is acquired though conscious decisions, self-discipline and practice does not mean it is in any less sense ‘a gift’. (Sigh... We have little interest in what a secular author has to say about an unrelated topic.
Actually, that’s not how the passage turns out. By ‘spiritual’, Paul means rather something about the purpose of the gift. It is given for the purpose of edifying – or ‘building up’ - the church.
At one level, he is completely uninterested in what the gift is, but supremely interested in what it is for. And it is spiritual when it serves to unite the body of believers in love – by causing them to proclaim Jesus as Lord, which you can only do if you have the Spirit of God.
This is what true spirituality is: proclaiming Jesus is Lord and living as if it were true.
The list of gifts in 1 Cor 12:28 is fascinating, since it contains things we would ordinarily think of as completely non-miraculous (the gift of administration, anyone?) alongside gifts our habit tells us are ‘supernaturally’ given. (All spiritual gits are supernatural.)
This makes sense, since Paul also says you can ‘eagerly desire the greater gifts’ – which are greater because they serve more effectively to promote unity and love in Christ. You can desire them - which means I think that you can acquire them through training and practice. (Or acquire them by asking the Holy Spirit. We see the author makes his selection according to his agenda.)
We also must observe that, quite apart from seeing a spiritual gift as a means by which I might find my true self, or actualise my inner being, a spiritual gift - if it is in fact ‘spiritual’ - is a gift I exercise in the service of others. It isn’t about me having an experience of God, but about other people and their needs.
In fact, as Paul goes on to explain, the parts of the body cannot live without one another. The ‘spiritual gifts’ are given to the church in order to maintain its bodily life entire.
This perspective is particularly liberating, since the gift given to my brother or sister, or to me, is in fact ours, for our benefit, and not simply for the benefit of the person possessing the gift. To envy the person who has the gift is silly since their gift is something that belongs to all of us in any case.
To return to Outliers, however: that a gift is acquired though conscious decisions, self-discipline and practice does not mean it is in any less sense ‘a gift’. (Sigh... We have little interest in what a secular author has to say about an unrelated topic.
A spiritual gift by definition is spiritual. Let's requote a Scripture:
1Co. 12:7 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.The Greek word for "manifestation" is phanerōsis, which means an action or event that brings something hidden into plain view. Clearly, we receive this showing forth of the Holy Spirit, which is an empowering gift from Him.
Ro. 1:11 I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong...
Here we see the combination of "spiritual" [pneumatikon, of the Spirit] and " gift" [charisma, a grace-endowment] that the author previously denied.
So, a spiritual gift is a showing forth of an endowment of the Holy Spirit.)
In the case of ‘spiritual gifts’, what makes them ‘spiritual’ is not that they were spontaneously acquired or that they are miraculous in some way, but that they are exercised for the building of the church of Jesus Christ. (This is precisely why they are important: They are miraculous in some way. Miraculous empowerment to serve the Church.)
So, then: if you are exercising a ministry in the church which is meant to build up the congregation, practice your gift! Don’t think it is somehow less spiritual or authentic if you don’t. It may be an apparently mundane capacity and not at all ‘supernatural’ – (All spiritual gifts are supernatural.)
but it may be completely and utterly the work of the Holy Spirit. And hone this gift not because it is the path to your own self-expression and to meaning in your life, but rather because God has provided the church with the means for it to grow.
No comments:
Post a Comment