Escape from Reason – part 8

Reformation, Renaissance and morals

There are many practical results of the differences between Renaissance and Reformation thought. For example, the Renaissance set women free. So did the Reformation, but with a great difference. The women of the Renaissance in Italy were free, but at the great cost of general immorality.

Why was this? It goes back to the then current view of nature and grace. These things are never merely theoretical, because men act the way they think. In the upper storey there were the lyric poets who wrote of ideal love. Then below in the lower storey there were the novelists and the comic poets who wrote of sensuality. There was a flood of pornographic books.

This element of the Renaissance period did not stop with the sensual materials, but worked out into the way men lived their lives. The autonomous man found himself in a duality. He would engage in the sensual with one woman and marry another to bear his children and cook his meals. The autonomous elements flowed over into the whole structure of Renaissance life.

In contrast, the Reformation set women free because the Bible elevates women as co-heirs with men to the grace of life. They have different roles in the family and in the church, but in the area of their state before God and in redemption there is no distinction between men and women. “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”

The whole man

In the Reformation view of man the soul is not more important than the body. God made the whole man and the whole man is important. The doctrine of the bodily resurrection of the dead tells us that God loves the whole man. The Bible therefore opposes the Platonic view which makes the soul more important than the body. The Biblical view also opposes the humanistic position where the body and autonomous mind of man become more important, and grace is reduced to the unimportant.

The Biblical position, rediscovered at the Reformation, says that neither the Platonic view nor the humanistic view will do. First, God made the whole man, and He is interested in the whole man. Second, when the historic space-time Fall took place, it affected the whole man. Third, on the basis of Christ’s person and work on the cross, and having the knowledge that we possess in the revelation of the Scriptures, there is redemption for the whole man.

The great hope of the Christian is that the whole man will enjoy the full benefits of redemption in a resurrected body free from the state of sin. Paul says in Romans 6 that even in the present life we are to have a substantial reality of the redemption of the whole man. This is to be on the basis of the shed blood of Christ and in the power of the Holy Spirit by faith. Even though it will not be perfect in this life, there is the real lordship of Christ over the whole man.

This is the Reformers understanding of the Scriptures that Christ is equally Lord of nature and grace. There is nothing autonomous, nothing apart from the lordship of Jesus Christ and the authority of the Scriptures. God made the whole man and is interested in the whole man and has promised to redeem the whole man. The result is a unity of thought. Thus at the same time as the birth of modern man in the Renaissance there was the Reformation’s answer to his dilemma. In contrast, the dualism in Renaissance man has brought forth the modern forms of Humanism, with modern man’s sorrows.

The Reformation and man - the condition of man revealed

The Bible tells us something wonderful about man. Among other things, we know his origin and who he is; he is made in the image of God. Man is not only wonderful when he is a Christian; he is also wonderful as God made him in His image. Man has value because of who he was originally before the Fall.

We cannot deal with people like human beings; we cannot deal with them on the high level of true humanity, unless we really know their origin and who they are. God tells us that He created man in His image. So man is something wonderful. Here is a problem with modern liberalism. Men are not seen this way. They are seen only as higher animals, not image bearers of the personal, infinite God.

God tells us something else about man. He tells us about the Fall. This introduces the other element that we need to know in order to understand man. Why is he so wonderful and yet so flawed? Who is man? Why can man do these things that make him so unique, and yet why is man so horrible?

The Bible says that you are wonderful because you are made in the image of God, but that you are flawed because, at a space-time point of history, man fell into sin. The Reformation man knew that man was condemned because of his revolt against God. However, the Reformation man and the people who followed the Reformation knew that while man is morally guilty before God, he is not nothing.

Modern man tends to think that he is nothing. The people in the Reformation culture of Northern Europe knew that they were the very opposite of nothing because they had an understanding of who they were as image bearers of the living God. Even though they were fallen and outside the redemption of Christ would face eternal punishment, this still did not mean that they were nothing. When the Bible was consistently followed the Reformation had tremendous results in transforming the lives of individual men and thereby the culture in general.

What the Reformation tells us, therefore, is that God has spoken to man in the Scriptures concerning both the ‘upstairs’ and the ‘downstairs’. He spoke in a true revelation concerning Himself: the heavenly things, and He spoke in a true revelation concerning nature: the cosmos and man. Therefore, man had a real unity of knowledge.

The Reformation simply did not have the Renaissance problem of nature and grace. They had a real unity, not because they were clever, but because they had a unity on the basis of what God had revealed in both areas. In contrast to the Humanism that had been set free by Aquinas, and the Roman Catholic form of Humanism in salvation, there was for the Reformation, no autonomous portion.

This did not mean that there was no freedom for art or science. It was quite the opposite; there was now possible true freedom within the revealed form. Though art and science have freedom, they are not autonomous. The artist and the scientist are also under the revelation of the Scriptures. When art or science has tried to be autonomous, a certain principle has always manifested itself. Nature begins to ‘eat up’ grace, and thus art and science themselves soon become meaningless.

Reformation thought presents us with man who is somebody, but who is also in revolt. Because of his revolt, man has true moral guilt and is under condemnation. The Reformers had a Biblical understanding of the work of Christ on the cross. Christ’s death was a substitutionary atonement to save men from their true guilt. When we begin to tamper with the scriptural concept of true, moral guilt, whether it be psychological tampering, theological tampering or any other kind of tampering, our view of what Jesus did will no longer be according to the Scriptures. Christ died for a man who had true moral guilt because he had made a real and true choice.

In the Catholic position there is a divided work of salvation. Christ died for our salvation, but man must merit the merit of Christ. Thus there is a humanistic element involved. The Reformers rejected this idea and said that there is nothing man can do; no autonomous or humanistic, religious or moral effort of man can help. One is saved only on the basis of the finished work of Christ alone as He died in space and time in history. The only way to be saved is to raise the empty hands of faith and, enabled by God’s Grace alone, to accept the free gift of salvation by Faith alone. [from Schaeffer’s Escape from Reason]

In this forum there are those who will cause a division between Paul and James in an effort to support their position. Here again is a great difference between the two sides. We see no concern or effort from them to reconcile the teaching of the two apostles. What is the point of appealing to Scriptural authority when you deny its unity?

To love the Scriptures is to search for its unity. Because Christ testified that the Scriptures cannot be broken, we submit our thinking to what is written. Those who use James to deny Paul testify that their view of Scripture is less than the view held by Christ.

Consider the following quote from Paul after he had concluded that all men by nature are children of wrath: [Ephesians 2:4-9]

“But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our sin, made us alive together with Christ…For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast.”

Deadness in sin refers to our fallen state in Adam. Paul is very clear that all men are in a hopeless condition; dead men have no ability to commend themselves to God. It takes an act of God to bring the dead to life. Good works are contrasted with grace. Grace is not grace, if it is accompanied by works.

Now the question before us is what is the role of works? What does James mean that faith without works is dead? Paul answers that question in verse 10:

“We [believers] are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”

It is deception to use James to deny Paul. Paul labors with the doctrine of justification. James labors to distinguish real faith from a spurious faith. They each look at works as a necessary result of conversion, not its cause. The converted man will walk in good works because he is a changed man. The good works testify to his transformation. Therefore, as James says, faith will produce good works or the faith is not real.

They both agree with Christ. From the parable of the sower, the believer is identified with the good soil that produces fruit. The Christian will be marked by the fruits of the Spirit. Some more than others according to his gifts, but fruit to some extent will be evident in his life.

If you are working your way to heaven, then repent and believe the gospel. What work will you bring before Christ to merit His grace? Martin Luther rediscovered the truth that, “The righteous shall live by faith.”

A unity of nature and grace - the Reformation answer
The Reformation and man
More about man
Reformation, Renaissance and morals
The whole man

A unity of nature and grace - the Reformation answer

At this point it is important to note a historical relationship. Calvin was born in 1509. His Institutes were written in 1536. Leonardo died in 1519, the same year that Dr. Eck debated Luther over his condemnation of the sale of indulgences, and his challenge to the doctrinal authority of the Pope and Church Councils. The king who took Leonardo to France at the close of his life was Francis I, the same king to whom Calvin addressed his Institutes. We come therefore to an overlapping of the Renaissance with the Reformation.

To the problem of unity the Reformation gave an entirely opposite answer from that of the Renaissance. It repudiated both the Aristotelian and the Neo-platonic presentation. What was the Reformation answer? It said that the root of the trouble sprang from the old and growing Humanism in the Roman Catholic Church, and the incomplete Fall in Aquinas’s theology which set loose an autonomous man. The Reformation accepted the Biblical picture of a total Fall. The whole man had been made by God, but now the whole man is fallen, including his intellect and will. In contrast to Aquinas, only God was autonomous.

For the Reformation, final and sufficient knowledge rested in the Bible; that is, Scripture Alone, in contrast to Scripture plus anything else parallel to the Scriptures, whether it be the church or a natural theology. Also, there was no idea of man being autonomous in the area of salvation. In the Roman Catholic position there was a divided work of salvation. Christ died for our salvation, but man had to merit the merit of Christ. Thus there was a humanistic element involved. The Reformers said that there is nothing man can do; no autonomous or humanistic, religious or moral effort of man can help. One is saved only on the basis of the finished work of Christ Alone as He died in space and time in history. The only way to be saved is to raise the empty hands of faith and, by God’s Grace Alone, to accept God’s free gift by Faith Alone.

The Reformation followed the teaching of Christ Himself in linking the revelation Christ gave of God to the revelation of the written Scriptures. The Scriptures give the key to two kinds of essential knowledge; the knowledge of God, and the knowledge of men and nature. There could have been no Reformation and no Reformation culture in Northern Europe without the realization that God had spoken to man in the Scriptures and that, therefore, we know truth about God and man, because God has revealed it to man. Thus on the basis of the Bible, while we do not have exhaustive knowledge, we have true and unified knowledge.

Leonardo da Vinci and Raphael – the search for unity

Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) comes closer to being a modern man than any before him. He is very much a part of a significant shift in philosophic thinking, and brings a new factor into the flow of history. His dates are important because they overlap with the beginning of the Reformation.

By the time of Leonardo, Neo-platonism was a dominant force in Florence. It became a dominant force for the simple reason that they needed to find some way to put something above the dividing line in the “upper storey” that had contained the heavenly things.

Thomas Aquinas had introduced Aristotelian thinking, and the result was the rise of autonomous nature that began to dominate grace. Neo-platonism was introduced in an attempt to reinstate ideas and ideals; that is, universals were associated with grace in the upper storey and the particulars were associated with nature in the lower.

A painting that illustrates this is The School of Athens by Raphael (1483-1520). In the room in the Vatican where this picture is located, on one wall a mural by Raphael represents the Roman Catholic Church, and this he balances with The School of Athens, representing classical pagan thought, on the opposite wall.

In The School of Athens itself, Raphael portrays the difference between the Aristotelian element and the Platonic. The two men stand in the centre of the picture and Aristotle is spreading his hands downwards while Plato is pointing upwards.

This problem can be put in another way. Where do you find unity when you set diversity free? Once the particulars are set free how do you hold them together? Leonardo grappled with this problem. He was a Neo-platonist painter and the first modern mathematician. He saw that if you begin with an autonomous rationality, what you come to is mathematics (that which can be measured), and mathematics only deals with particulars, not universals. Therefore you never get beyond mechanics. For a man who realized the need of a unity, he understood that this would not do. So he tried to paint the universal. Needless to say, he never succeeded.

Giovanni Gentile, one of the greatest of Italian philosophers, said that Leonardo died in despondency because he would not let go of the hope of a rational unity between the particulars and the universal. To have escaped this despondency Leonardo would have had to be a different man. He would have had to let go his hope of a unity above and below the line. Not being a modern man, he never gave up the hope of a unified field of knowledge. He would not give up the hope of educated man, who had been marked by the insistence on a unified field of knowledge.

Next Post: Chapter 2 – The Reformation of Biblical Christianity

“For behold, the days are coming,” says the LORD, “that I will bring back from captivity My people Israel and Judah,” says the LORD. “And I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it.” [Jeremiah 30:3]

“Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah…” [Jeremiah 31:31]

Jeremiah used the phrase “days are coming” in his prophesy to bring together critically important threads of thought. A king from the seed of David will come; his authority will extend throughout the world; a new covenant will be established that will unite the people of God.

Jeremiah gives information to indicate when to expect these things to take place. He identifies the time as after the return from the captivity. The captivity he is referring to is the Babylonian captivity.

Jeremiah comforts the captives by telling them that days are coming when they will return to the Promised Land and God will fulfill the long awaited promises.

Since Jeremiah is a prophet we expect his prophecy to be fulfilled…

The new covenant prophesy given in Jeremiah 31 is quoted in the New Testament in Hebrews 8. These words are added to the end of the quote, “In that He says, ‘A new covenant,’ He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”

Then in Hebrews 10 the great promises of redemption in Jeremiah’s new covenant are repeated and applied to the New Testament church through the person and work of the promised prophet, priest and king. The bloody sacrifices are gone forever and once and for all fulfilled by the acceptable sacrifice.

The gospel does away with any difference between Jew and Gentile. This is why the New Testament refers to all believers as sons of Abraham.

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, heirs according to the promise.” [Galatians 3:28-29]

The point of this is that the Scriptures are clear that the old covenant has long ago passed away. It was but a foreshadowing of the better things to come. The “days are coming” of Jeremiah have come and gone. The new covenant has come bringing salvation to all men in every nation. Its greatest promise is given by the Holy One of Israel:

“the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. [John 4:23]

Continuation of chapter 1

Nature versus Grace - culture reflects autonomous nature

With Aquinas’ incomplete view of the Fall, he had opened the way to an autonomous Humanism, an autonomous philosophy, and once the movement gained momentum, there was a flood.

According to Schaeffer the vital principle to notice is that, as nature was made autonomous, nature began to “eat up” grace. Through the Renaissance nature became more and more autonomous. It was set free from God as the humanistic philosophers began to operate more freely. By the time the Renaissance reached its climax, nature had eaten up grace.

This can be demonstrated in various ways. The influence of Aquinas was first seen in art. Instead of grace being overwhelmingly important, and nature having little place, there was a shift because nature began to be important. Instead of all the subjects of art being above the dividing line between nature and grace in the symbolic manner of the Byzantine, the things of nature began to be painted as nature.

In Northern Europe, Van Eyck (1380-1441) opened the door for nature in a new way. He began to paint real nature. He painted the first landscape in 1410. It gave birth to every background that came later during the Renaissance.

At this time Masaccio (1401-1428) introduced true perspective and true space. For the first time, light comes from the right direction. Shadows in his paintings fall properly in relation to the light source. Masaccio was painting true nature.

Soon came the next stage. In 1435 Van Eyck painted the Madonna of the Chancellor Rolin. The significant feature is that Chancellor Rolin is the same size as Mary. She is no longer remote, the Chancellor no longer a small figure. Though he faces Mary holding his hands in an attitude of prayer, he has become equal with Mary.

Coming to Filippo Lippi (1406-1469), it is apparent that nature begins to “eat up” grace in a more serious way. It was only a few years before that artists would never have considered painting Mary in a natural way at all; they would paint only a symbol of her. In Lippi’s Madonna painted in 1465 there is a startling change. He has depicted a very beautiful girl holding a baby in her arms, with a landscape that was influenced no doubt by Van Eyck. This Madonna is no longer a far-off symbol; she is a pretty girl with a baby. There is something more to know about this painting. The girl he painted as Mary was his mistress. All Florence knew it was his mistress. Nobody would have dared to do this a few years before. Nature was killing grace.

In France, Fouquet (1416-1480) painted the king’s mistress as Mary. Everyone knowing the court who saw it knew that this was the king’s mistress. Fouquet painted her with one breast exposed. Whereas before it would have been Mary feeding the baby Jesus, now it is the king’s mistress with one breast exposed. Grace is dead.

The point to be stressed is that, when nature is made autonomous, it is destructive. As soon as an autonomous realm is allowed, the lower element begins to eat up the higher.

In our day we have an autonomous science that operates as if there is no God. Nature is investigated in hope of discovering “scientific laws” that explain the observed order in a universe said to be characterized by blind randomness. Reason alone that has become independent of revelation becomes more and more absurd. Modern man thinks his science will answer the questions of his origin and somehow give meaning to his life. Autonomous science has taken the place of the higher things. It has destroyed grace.

Next Post: Leonardo da Vinci and Raphael search for unity

Schaeffer’s outline of chapter 1

Nature and Grace – the birth of Renaissance thought

Aquinas and the Autonomous – philosophy separated from revelation

Nature versus Grace – culture reflects autonomous nature

Leonardo da Vinci and Raphael – the search for unity

Nature and Grace

Schaeffer traces the origin of modern man back to the teaching of Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). He marks the birth of the humanistic Renaissance by opening the discussion of what is called “nature and grace”.

Grace is defined as the higher things such as God the Creator; heaven and heavenly things; the unseen and its influence on the earth; man’s soul; unity.

Nature is defined as the lower things such as the created; earth and earthly things; the visible and what nature and man do on earth; man’s body; diversity.

Prior to Aquinas there was an overwhelming emphasis on the heavenly things, very far off and very holy, pictured only as symbols, with little interest in nature itself. For example, Mary and Christ were never portrayed realistically. They were symbolized as with halos or super-sized with respect to their surroundings, not real people.

There were good things that resulted from the birth of Renaissance thought. Nature received a more proper place. From a Biblical viewpoint nature is important because it has been created by God, and is not to be despised. The things of the body are not to be despised when compared with the soul. The things of beauty are important. Sexual things are not evil of themselves. All these things are involved in the fact that in nature God has given us a good gift, and the man who regards them with contempt is really despising God’s creation and in a sense God Himself.

Aquinas and the Autonomous

While there were some good results from giving nature a better place, it also opened the way for much that was destructive. In Aquinas’s view the will of man was fallen, but the intellect was not. From this incomplete view of the Biblical Fall flowed all the subsequent difficulties. Man’s intellect became autonomous. In one realm man was now thought to be independent.

Aquinas pursued a natural theology independent from the Scriptures. He hoped for unity and said that there was a correlation between natural theology and the Scriptures. From the basis of this autonomous principle, philosophy also became free and was separated from revelation. From his day on until modern man there was a struggle for a unity of nature and grace and a hope that rationality would say something about both.

The post-modern man has admitted that there is no unity of thought beginning with autonomous man. He has given up on the search for truth, saying that there are no absolutes. Starting with a search for rationality man now chooses to believe the irrational and to live in despair. Moral relativism is his truth. He has rejected the revelation that connects him with his infinite and personal creator. Autonomous man is lost.

Today we have a weakness in our educational process in failing to understand the natural associations between the disciplines. We tend to study all our disciples in unrelated parallel lines. We study theology, philosophy, art and music without understanding that these are the things of man, and the things of man are not unrelated. There are several ways this association emerged following Aquinas.

Next Post: Continue with chapter 1

Biblical Christianity has as its foundation the apostolic doctrine of which Christ’s doctrine is the chief cornerstone. That means that the writing of the apostles should be viewed as divine commentary on the gospels. Those who seek to divide Christ and Paul are enemies of the cross. Christ promised to build His church on this foundation in every generation. He promised that the Holy Spirit would come and give the doctrine through holy men, which is now called the New Testament (NT).

The ministry of the Spirit in giving the Scriptures is overlooked by those who say that the Bible is the product of men acting alone. We believe the words of Christ to the apostles, "The Spirit of Truth...will guide you into all Truth." [John 16:13] Will He that gave the Scriptures not oversee its preservation? Will He not oversee its translation into the common tongues of all His people?

Therefore, we would expect to find in church history a thread of truth among Christians where the Bible has demonstrated life changing power consistent with NT doctrine. This thread is evident and can be seen in great men of faith such as Augustine, Hus, Wycliffe, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin, Knox, Bunyan, Edwards, Brainerd, Whitefield, Fuller, Carey, Spurgeon, and Lloyd-Jones to name a few.

Historical and Biblical Christianity is characterized by adherence to the doctrines of the Bible that are consistent from generation to generation. The writer to the Hebrews said 2000 years ago that in these last days God has spoken through His Son. The wise man warns us, "There is nothing new under the sun." This certainly applies to Biblical theology.

The goal of Reformation Man is to address the issues of interest from a Biblical perspective. Why is that relevant today? We maintain that the degree of freedom and prosperity in the world today correlate to the amount of Reformation influence experienced in the particular cultures. The history of freedom forever links the Protestant Reformation with American. We see the Reformation as a great revival of Biblical Christianity where men rediscovered the truth and where consistently applied, men lived in freedom, peace and prosperity. Political reforms were the outworking of men who were made free spiritually, and were seeking freedom also in the physical realm.

Christians understand the worth of other men since every man bears the image of the Creator. They know that God has spoken truth to the world through Jesus Christ. They know love and mercy toward other men through Christ’s work of redemption applied to them. They know that societies are reformed by the power of the gospel acting on men. They believe that that which brought us liberty is the remedy to restore us to liberty.

The culture defines Christian as anything that professes to be Christian. We make a distinction between Biblical Christianity and all other forms. There are many flavors with many doctrines. Our concern here will be to follow the definition of Christian as given in the Scriptures. Christ said that many will profess His name, but that He will say unto them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness." [Matthew 7:23] Christians are who Christ says they are. All other definitions are irrelevant and destructive.

We still enjoy Reformation fruits; many of which are assumed or wrongly attributed to human reason rather than Biblical revelation. We will attempt to set the record straight.

Because we share in a common faith once delivered to the saints, we intend to post views that are consistent with the teachings that the church has always held as truth. We will expose the errors in modern evangelical theology from arminianism to dispensationalism to accommodation to darwinism. We will advocate and defend the five Solas of the Reformation.

"Narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it." [Matthew 7:14]

Next Post: Opening the issue of faith and reason…

The history of American freedom traces back to the Reformation from which flowed the rule of law. To the Reformation man the Bible was believed to be the revelation of the Infinite God to His image bearers. It gave men truth about God and truth about man and his world. It was most important because it gave him a reference to the absolute on which to base law. With an open Bible the people had an authority that was above the king. So the Law of God took the place of the king. The doctrine of divine right of kings was dead.

America was founded as a republic under the rule of laws derived from the Bible. The principle of limited government was adopted to promote individual liberty among a self-governing people. In order to restrict the tendency of men to abuse power the government was divided into three branches with checks and balances. These are principles derived from revelation, not reason.

Renaissance thinking came to fruition in the Enlightenment. Autonomous reason led to arbitrary law, the terror of the guillotine and ultimately to an authoritarian rule under Napoleon. Government based on reason alone failed because there was no sufficient base for law and morality.

The Reformation and the Renaissance/Enlightenment are a good object lesson for us engaged in the war of authority raging today in America. We can determine in each case the outworking of the two different authorities.

The Reformation model with a Biblical base of limited government under the rule of law with checks and balances on the fallen nature of man has examples in England and America. When consistently applied this model resulted in personal freedoms, prosperity and order unsurpassed in history.

The Renaissance model guided by finite human reason ended with a massacre and oppression by dictator in France and by the elite in the case of communist Russia. Forced submission replaces liberty because there is no basis for self-government.

As we celebrate American Independence this year let’s remember that the very foundation of our freedom is under attack. Our greatest enemy is not the islamic fascists. They are an enemy with an ideology that is repugnant to most Americans. The enemy that poses the real threat to our way of life is the resurgence of autonomous human reason. Societies built under this authority are proven to lead to more and more oppression.

This enemy is within the gates. We find it at the highest levels of government sitting on the courts and in the legislative bodies. It has taken over academia and the institutions of science. Most Americans still hold to some belief in the Bible, but the enemy has weakened its authority.

For conservatives the question is do we have a sufficient base to support our conservatism? Do we know why we are conservative? Pragmatism is not a sufficient answer.

For believers we should understand that an oppressive authority will not tolerate any other authority. If we continue to throw away our heritage, do not think that physical persecution cannot happen in American.

“Cursed be the man that trusts in man…and whose heart departs from the Lord…Blessed is the man that trusts in the Lord, and whose hope is in the Lord.” --Jeremiah