Cheated of Glory - Philosophy

I. Introduction: The faith of the Colossians was in peril. There were oppositions from all sides and from within. One of the dangers to their faith was the enticement of the philosophies of the world. If they heeded the deceitful words they could be cheated of the glory that awaits those who are faithful to Christ unto death.

II. Text: Colossians 2:1-10

III. Paul’s concern for the Colossians and Laodiceans.

A. Paul was concerned that false teachers would come in and cheat them of the glory of their salvation through empty words.

B. He did not name a specific false teacher but warned them to avoid any doctrine that was contrary to the true Word of God.

C. He warned that some would try to deceive, or beguile them.

D. Gromacki: Beguilement involves faulty logic which is not based on the authoritative word of God. In non-biblical literature, it denoted cheating by false teaching. Jude also warned about false teachers: Jude 3-4, 16-19.

E. Some would use persuasive or enticing words.

F. This is speech purposefully designed to persuade others. This was not Paul’s way of teaching: “ And my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.” 1 Corinthians 2:4-5

IV. He was concerned that some would cheat them through philosophy.

A. The word “cheat” literally means to plunder or take captive.

B. They would be cheated of their glory and taken captive by Satan. They had to “be aware” of this and be on guard.

C. Philosophy

D. Philosophy literally means “lover of knowledge or wisdom.”

E. Much of philosophy assumes that man can understand all things and learn all things by his own reason.

F. This is a humanistic approach where man is the center of knowledge. Most often, this philosophical approach assumes that there is no God or that if He exists, nothing can be known of Him.

G. The Philosophical Deception (much from Francis Schaeffer’s book How Should We Then Live.

H. The early philosophers

I. According to Plato, if there are no absolutes, then the individual things (the details) have no meaning

J. From a moral standpoint, if there is no absolute moral standard, then one cannot in a final sense say that anything is right or wrong. We need an absolute, final and ultimate standard to give our morals, values, and life meaning.

K. Before the modern period, during the time of the Greeks up through the 19 th century, philosophers hoped to reason their way to truth.

L. They rejected God and believed that man could begin with himself and gather enough facts to understand and define universal truths. They believed that they would eventually succeed in determining, by reason alone, a unified and true knowledge of reality which would answer all the questions of life.

M. Early scientists

N. Many scientists believed in an open system where man and God were outside of the effect. This view used cause and effect to determine why things were the way they were. Eventually, influenced by their philosophy, scientists moved to a closed system, where there was no God and man was just part of the machine.

O. Modern scientists

P. Since the modern scientists believed in a closed system, it had to be assumed that matter and energy are eternal.

Q. The human mind and soul had to be explained in terms of chemicals, matter, and energy. Since modern man reasons that he is just part of the machine, everything that he does must be explained in terms of chemical reactions and the characteristics of matter. Schaeffer: “Man, with his proud humanism, tried to make himself autonomous (sufficient without God-rfd), but rather than becoming great, he found himself ending up as only a collection of molecules—nothing more.” Ultimately, there is no freedom of will since our actions are determined by our chemical makeup. Therefore, no one is responsible for his actions since he is just part of the big machine. Darwinism attempted to explain the development of man from the matter of the universe.

R. Modern Philosophy

S. As noted earlier, the early philosophers thought that they would eventually develop a philosophy that would answer everything. Modern philosophers recognized that this humanistic idea failed and gave up any hope at a unified answer to all questions.

T. Some philosophers reasoned that since man is a product of the development of matter (that he is just part of the machine), then there are no universals there are only the facts of our world.

U. Some philosophers, like Jean-Jacques Rousseau, deemphasized reason and felt that the ideal man was the savage out in the rainforest who has never been corrupted by reason and progress. He thought that modern man was in chains and needed to be free from all authority. His work on the Bohemian ideal, the hero who fights all of societies standards, values, and restraints strongly influenced the hippie world of the 1960’s. Some went so far as to make nature the God yet the problem was that nature is both cruel and non-cruel. The result of this philosophy was that if nature exists as the standard to live by, the cruelty becomes equal to non-cruelty. Their great conflict was that man is part of the machine but they wanted to hold onto the idea of man having freedom. Men like Immanuel Kant tried to produce unity between the concepts of meaning and value with the world of science but failed, preparing the way for the split in ideas that characterizes our world.

V. Friedrich Hegel believed that no single proposition of truth could fully explain something because its opposite is always found.

W. He reason that truth is found in the bringing together the truth and its opposite into a single truth (for which and opposite will be found…) This is important for us to understand. In modern philosophy, truth is not considered an absolute, but in a synthesis of the true and untrue things observed. This idea of “no absolute truth” is pervasive in the religious world, so people do not consider the Bible the absolute truth but feel that one must seek truth in synthesizing what is observed in the Bible and the world.

X. Another important person in our story is Soren Kierkegaard who believed that one must find answers without reason and proposed the “leap of faith” to find value.

Y. Modern man finds himself in this dilemma: in order to find meaning and value in life, he must separate himself from reason. Some believe in God, not based on reason, but they feel that they must believe in something. You see, people affirm that man is just part of the machine, but they can’t life like machines. They must have meaning to their life even if it means taking a “leap upstairs” but in doing so, they deny their ability to reason.

Z. Some, like Aldous Huxley, believed that truth is in one’s head and that through drugs one could find truth.

A. Of course, if truth is in one’s head, there is no way of hoping to establish absolute truth. Music was found as the vehicle to carry the mentality of the drug culture and the quest for truth in one’s head. Seeking meaning through non-rational means opened the door for Hinduism and Buddhism since both are in one’s head and negate reason. It is no coincidence that Eastern religions came in with the drug culture. Some turned to psychedelic rock to find the “final experience” without drugs. Some turned to art. Others turned to the occult. The split between reason and non-reason is the situation of modern man.

B. This split is prevalent in the religious world.

C. Religious liberalism

D. Religious liberalism was embarrassed by the supernatural but tried to hold onto the historical Jesus without the supernatural elements. Yet, Albert Schweitzer, who tried to define this Jesus of history, determined that it is impossible to take the supernatural out of the New Testament and keep the historical Jesus.

E. Higher criticism

F. Theologians claimed that the Bible had many mistakes but the “word” breaks through. This clearly put religion in the area of non-reason. The result was a view that the Bible does not give truth in propositions that could be verified nor does it give absolutes. The result is not faith in something, but faith in faith. God is simply a word, nothing is left but the religious experience.

G. What we are left with: the new liberal theology

H. Since the Bible does not touch history or the cosmos, has no real basis for applying its values in a historic situation and thus the morals and laws are arbitrary and can be reversed at will. There is no explanation for evil, finally everything equally is God; and cruelty is non-cruelty. Paul Tillich, a Harvard Divinity School theologian, concluded logically that if we are left only with the word God (with nothing behind it), there is no reason not to cross out the word itself.

I. Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)

J. First one to say in a modern way that God is dead. Understood that if God is dead to the secular man or the theologian, then everything for which God gives an answer and meaning is also dead. He eventually went insane perhaps as the only philosophic answer if the infinite-personal God does not exist. Nietzsche understood the tension and despair of modern man who believes that God is dead yet cries out for meaning that can only be found in the infinite-personal God. Nietzsche wrote, “But all pleasure seeks eternity—a deep and profound eternity.” Without God he pointed out that a person can only make “systems” to define one’s life (noble service or the fastest downhill skier) so that he does not have to think of big questions, such as why things exist at all. The system can even be a theological word game. This is where modern people, building only on themselves, have come.

V. Avoiding deception

A. The source of all knowledge

B. The source of all knowledge is not man.

C. Man is an observer. Man can classify what he sees and can learn about nature. Man is a product of greater knowledge and not the source.

D. Nature is not the source of knowledge.

E. Nature reflects the wisdom of a higher being. Nature is magnificent, orderly, and evidence of a higher logical though. Nature is also a product of greater knowledge, not the source.

F. God is the source of all knowledge.

G. Colossians 2:2b-3 In Him are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. His ways are higher than our ways, Isaiah 55:8-9.

H. God’s word is the means of transmitting the knowledge to us.

I. Colossians 2:6-7 (be established in Christ).2 Corinthians 10:3-5. This is why Paul prayed that they would be established in the knowledge of God and His will, 1:9.

J. If we are established in the word of God, words of truth and reason, we can stand against those who would captivate us with the empty philosophies of the world.