Expecting congregants to deplete their mental energy in efforts to prevent certain verbal descriptions from prompting mental images is counterproductive. I think it better for congregants to focus on the sermon’s message without troubling themselves about any mental images that may naturally occur in the process.

The Bible is not a logically organized collection of abstract propositional statements of theological and philosophical truths. The Bible is instead a divinely inspired account of God’s redemptive work in history. This infallible record of redemptive history progresses toward, climaxes in and reflects upon the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth. Preaching that is rooted in this historical context often suggests to the mind of the listener mental images representing concrete historical realities. Among these concrete historical realities are the acts of Jesus described in the gospel narratives and the Old Testament descriptions of God’s appearing to people through created forms. How is a preacher to preach on texts such as these? There are different approaches depending on one’s understanding of mental images that are representations of deity.

Before going on, let me make clear that I am not talking about mental images that are attempts to depict the inner essence of God. The Bible never gives a verbal description of the inner essence of God, which no man has seen or can see. The inner essence of God is eternal and thus indescribable and undepictable. Any effort to depict the divine inner essence visually or mentally would be a serious transgression of the second commandment. All such efforts are futile attempts to do the impossible.

Yet what about the Old Testament accounts of God’s appearing to people in created forms through visions and theophanies and the New Testament accounts of the life of Jesus, who is God Incarnate? When preaching from such texts, what approach should the preacher take considering that verbal portrayals may inspire mental images? I will broadly describe three possible approaches and then recommend one of the three.

The first approach is simply to elaborate on the concrete details in the text. For example, a text may imply that Jesus’ head was stained with blood from thorn wounds. The blood of Jesus can be a synecdoche for Jesus’ human nature (the part for the whole), and a mental image of that blood can be a metonymy for the divine person subsisting in that human nature. A mental image of the blood could then be a mental representation of the second person of the Godhead.  Nevertheless, this first approach simply elaborates on the blood without concern that some may envision the blood in their minds. Mental images such as this, though not absolutely necessary to understand what was said, are often a natural and normal part of mental comprehension. Some ministers only elaborate on these concrete realities, and others sometimes go a step further and encourage their listeners to envision them.

A second approach is to emphasize and promote such mental images as channels of worship to God and as channels of grace from God. Some churches teach that one may venerate an image through a lesser form of worship and that the worship will terminate on the prototype of the image and not on the image itself. Some churches also teach that the sacrifice of the cross as an historical event is mystically present whenever they observe the Lord’s Supper. Some churches could similarly teach “that Christ and the events of his life become present to us here and now through the power of human imagination.” (See the section “The Genre of a ‘Life of Christ’” in the Introduction by Milton Walsh to part one, volume one of The Life of Christ by Ludolph of Saxony.) The Jesuits in the Roman Catholic Counter-Reformation developed and promoted “spiritual exercises” that stressed the imagination’s use of all five senses as a means of being present at historical events in the life of Jesus.

A third approach is for the preacher to warn his congregants against mental images before preaching on certain texts. In preaching on the crucifixion, for example, the preacher could exhort his congregants to think of the crucifixion only in terms of propositional statements about the crucifixion without any mental imagining of what the crucifixion might have looked like. Or the preacher could advise his congregants that they may imagine a man on a cross in order to get a better sense of the crucifixion but only so long as they are careful not to identify that man with Jesus. Here are two sample warnings taken from Ralph Erskine’s book Faith No Fancy:

If therefore, when a believer hath his mind occupied about the knowledge and faith of this truth, That Christ hath a true body, an imaginary idea of that body should obtrude itself, and form an image of that body in his brain, and so shewing it, where it really is not, and where it does not exist, nor cannot be seen; he ought to deal with that imaginary idea as Abraham did, Gen. xv.11 When the fowles came down upon the carcases, he drove them away: So ought believers to drive such vain imaginations away, as they would do the devil himself tempting them, and diverting their minds from the faith of that truth, to an idle fancy about a human body. If he cannot rid himself of it as long as vain thoughts lodge within him, yet he ought daily to pray and plead with God, that he may be delivered from it; otherwise he cannot attend unto the Lord without distraction, 1 Cor. vii. 35. (p. 102, 1ines 29ff.)

An imaginary idea, for example, of his blood, is an idle vain imagination: because it cannot view the divinity thereof, as being the blood of God, Acts xx 28. (p. 312, lines 40ff.)

I agree with the first approach which accepts mental images when they are a natural part of comprehending a verbally delivered message. I strongly disagree with the second approach, which makes mental images functional idols and considers them to be mystical channels of transforming grace. I also disagree with the third approach, though not nearly so strongly. I think that expecting congregants to deplete their mental energy in efforts to prevent certain verbal descriptions from prompting mental images is counterproductive. I think it better for congregants to focus on the sermon’s message without troubling themselves about any mental images that may naturally occur in the process.

Read More