Review of Richard L Smith’s,
Such a Mind as This: A Biblical-Theological Study of Thinking in the Old Testament
(Eugene, Oregon: Wipf & Stock, 2021), xxvi + 418 pp.
Does the Bible have anything to say about epistemology? This is a question that I have pondered for quite some time. Until quite recently, little attention had been paid to this question by biblical scholars, with some even rejecting the idea of the Bible yielding a coherent theory of knowledge. Richard Smith’s Such a Mind as This, is a significant contribution to the recent spate of serious work that has been done by way of articulating a biblical epistemology. Smith is an international citizen and scholar, having received his Doctorate from Westminster Theological Seminary, then serving for a while in Prague, and now living in Argentina where he is involved in writing, teaching, and mentoring students.
In Such a Mind as This, Smith limits himself to the Old Testament which he says calls us repeatedly to what he delightfully labels “intellectual piety” – loving God with our minds (xxiii). “The Old Testament shows that we are built for intellectual curiosity. God wants us to ask questions – and to find answers in his communication to us. Indeed, God created the whole world as a school in which every experience is an invitation to think and learn” (xxii). This is a good summary of the book.
The book is organized around three questions (xxiv). The first: How did Adam and Eve think before the fall? Chapters 1 & 2 give us a careful exposition of an Edenic epistemology as found in Genesis 1 & 2. God created a world and situated Adam and Eve in his creation as thinkers. Smith introduces a theme that runs throughout the book – God’s covenantal relation with his creation, including humankind. God modelled for Adam and Even how to represent his interests in the garden as apprentice rulers, builders, investors and thinkers. This covenant also relates to epistemology. There is no knowledge apart from the covenantal bond between the Creator and creation. Adam and Eve were called to listen to God in order to understand the world they lived in. God taught them through nature, guided pedagogy and speech (23). Adam and Eve were “embedded within a web of meaning and infrastructure imposed by the Creator” (41). They were not “epistemologically autonomous” but were called to humbly submit to God and the world that he had created (41-2).
Sadly, the biblical story continues with a description of the fall of Adam and Eve in Genesis 3-11, which leads to their banishment from Eden. This brings us to the second question of Old Testament epistemology. How does mankind think after the fall? Smith describes the resulting “exilic epistemology” in Chapters 3-7 of his book. Here he follows Dru Johnson in highlighting the basic question raised in Genesis 3-11: Who we are listening to? Prior to the fall, Adam and Eve listened to God. They then made the tragic mistake of listening to the crafty serpent and trusting their own eyes and their own understanding when they looked at the forbidden tree and saw “that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes” (Gen 3:6). “They set themselves up as the final arbiters of truth, the judges of good and evil, and the ultimate interpreters of reality” (63). God is now deemed to be “epistemologically irrelevant” (72).
Smith goes on to illustrate exilic epistemology in three different ways. Chapter 4 describes intellectual sinfulness as embodied in the worldview of Egypt and the mentality of Pharoah. Both Moses and Pharoah witness the same dramatic plagues, but they don’t evaluate them from an epistemologically neutral position. Pharoah is guided by his religious worldview and self-identity as a son of Re. Moses interprets the wonders of God in terms of Hebrew cosmology, Yahweh’s counsel, and the covenant with Abraham (88). Chapter 5 examines the self-directed quest for knowledge related by Qohelet (the Preacher) in the book of Ecclesiastes, resulting in confused and contradictory depictions of reality. Lesson to be drawn from Ecclesiastes: “be ever vigilant about mixed-bag epistemologies and worldviews” (117). Chapter 6 provides a helpful analysis of the book of Proverbs which is organized “almost entirely around the theme of two ‘ways’: two life paths (wisdom and folly), two worldviews (Yahweh and other gods), and two guides (Lady Wisdom and Lady Folly)” (121). This double perspective is summarized in Proverbs 1:7. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction.”
Chapter 7 examines exilic epistemology as described by the prophets, Isaiah and Jeremiah. Isaiah begins with an expression of God’s yearning for his people to truly understand. “Come now, let us reason together” (Isa 1:18). Instead we get one of the most poignant summary explanations of unbelief found in the Old Testament, where Israel is described as hearing but not really understanding, seeing, but not really perceiving, and as having hearts that have become dull (Isa 6:9-10). Jeremiah too is called to address a “foolish and senseless people, who have eyes but see not, who have ears but hear not” (Jer 5:21). Chapter 7 concludes with what are perhaps the most alarming verses in the Bible: “But my people did not listen to my voice; Israel would not submit to me. So I gave them over to their stubborn hearts, to follow their own counsels” (Ps 81:11-12). What an accurate description of contemporary epistemological relativism.
There is a third epistemological question that is addressed in the Old Testament and that is highlighted by Smith in the remaining half of Such a Mind as This: How does a sinner learn to love God with the mind? Chapters 8-14 describe a “redemptive epistemology,” a penultimate stage in God’s story of creation, fall into sin, redemption, and restoration (217). These chapters begin with a call to repentance as a first step in escaping the ravaging effects of sin. Here we are given an exposition of themes in Isaiah and Psalm 94 which highlight the need for repentance. A redemptive epistemology starts by affirming two essential truths about human knowing: finitude and fallenness (214). We need to repent of our lust for autonomy. Noah and Abraham are described as examples of a humble epistemology which reverses the sin of Adam and Eve in that they really listen to God’s voice.
The next two chapters are devoted to the book of Deuteronomy which Smith describes as “the Rosetta stone of redemptive epistemology” (219). Here we learn that a redemptive epistemology recognizes that Yahweh Elohim demands absolute and universal adoration, as expressed in six covenantal announcements using the formula “Hear O Israel,” known as Shemas, the best known of which is found in Deuteronomy 6:5. “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.” Deuteronomy also gives us a pedagogical infrastructure which is devoted to nurturing intellectual piety, or “such a mind as this,” a heart and mind that fears God and keeps all his commandments (Deut 5:29).
Chapters 11 & 12 examine the book of Job as “a real-world test of redemptive epistemology under extreme pressure” (291). It is not often that the book of Job is treated from an epistemological point of view, but the result is a fascinating and insightful interpretation of this story. “The book of Job shows that our epistemological context is very complex. We often imagine ourselves as self-directed and self-sufficient thinkers” (315). Job learned otherwise when in the end he encounters God who asks him, “Who is this who darkens knowledge by words without knowledge” (Job 38:2). What an assault on the modern ideal of autonomy. Smith describes Job as “an Old Testament epistemic hero” (344). “He demonstrated how to love God with the mind in the real world of sin and enigma” (344).
The final two chapters wrestle with the problem of practicing a redemptive epistemology within a context that is hostile to God and his revelation. Chapter 13 examines Jeremiah’s advice about discerning God’s voice in the midst of the disorientation that would be part of impending exile. The chapter concludes with a brief meditation on Psalm 137. “How shall we sing the Lord’s song in a foreign land?” (Ps 137:4). The final chapter provides a more positive answer to the plaintive question raised in Psalm 137 by looking at how Daniel and his three friends navigated loving God with their minds in a foreign land.
While these final chapters include brief hints about discerning truth in a cacophony of competing voices in our time, I would have liked to see more application to our contemporary world. What does redemptive epistemology look like for Christian scholars in our universities today? How do Christian scholars redeem “secular” scholarship? And what help is there for laypeople struggling with foreign ideologies that permeate medicine, economics, politics and race relations? Smith refers a number of times to the sons of Issachar who possessed understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do” (1 Chron 12:32). Smith has certainly given us the theological grounding for understanding our times. But I would have liked more by way of applying his careful and instructive analysis of the epistemology in the Old Testament to the challenges that we face in our contemporary world.
Of course, addressing these questions would require many more pages in an already long book. I would recommend that Smith write a sequel to his Such a Mind as This. But he is to be commended for giving us a lucid and inspiring account of the biblical and theological foundations for an epistemology that has huge implications for us as Christians living in a world of competing and polarizing opinions.
Elmerjohnthiessen's Blog 