The Person and The Work

[SGO]

I have always been taught that one must separate a leader, author, or scholar's personal life from their work.

In my later years it is more evident that there has been a real blur between the two; that is, life and work,
especially when it comes to politicians.

We all can recall what happens to pastors or movement leaders when some sin becomes public:
the person AND their work is seen as one thing and they are given whatever punishment the group deems necessary.

My concern specifically for creating this thread is with authors, editors, translators, and other academically oriented people.

When searching for a specific kind of bible recently, I was researching it and had a chance to see personal life details of the lauded editor of an edition that was recommended. This editor did not even mention Jesus Christ in his testimony. I thought, how can he do proper diligence to his work? When voicing my concerns to the person who had recommended the work, he told me ad hominem attacks have no place in the Church and to just consider the work.

How about it? I know my personal life has plenty of problems but the editor of a bible?

Is it correct to separate the personal life from the work that person does?

 

[SGO]

So I suppose some of you that clicked on this were thinking that this thread was about The Person and the Work of Christ and were quickly disillusioned.

The others who read it all don't seem to have a problem compartmentalizing a person's character from the work he produces.

After all we all are sinners. Who would get hired if prospective employers dove into an applicant's character?
And Christ's personal life was perfect even though He had to deal with temptation just like we do but He was without sin.

So when someone talks about John Calvin's over zealousness which may have led to a murder (committed by his follower(s)) we just forget about that because his work is so overwhelming.

Or Spurgeon puffing on cigars, which of course, is very minor. They only knew it as a filthy habit not as a cause of cancer.

So then looking at a "respected person's" character is a no-no in which doing so probably stems from a weak conscience and eventually leads to legalism.

I guess you all figured it out or decided not to deal with this issue.

 

[Scott Downey]

There is this 'code of silence' often today among Christians. Christians tolerate certain amounts of false doctrines, money improprieties, big differences in interpretations, abusive situations, but once you add in sexual immorality, that is a bridge too far, a straw that broke the camel's back. Only then does the church act in meaningful ways against the individual. All the previous signs are worrisome but somewhat hushed up and not openly talked about. And if anyone else speaks out about those worrisome signs, they tend to be marginalized or condemned.

One noticeable thing, the worrisome people who exhibit bad fruit, usually start showing more and more bad fruit over time.

Just because someone is an issue, does not mean his work is necessarily evil, usually the Christian works being done involve many more people than just the worrisome person. God uses evil things to bring about His good purposes, like what happens with Jacob's son and Joseph.

 

[rlvaughn]

I have always been taught that one must separate a leader, author, or scholar's personal life from their work.
...
Is it correct to separate the personal life from the work that person does?

I would say yes and no. Yes, if we are evaluating their work. No, if we are trying to give them a pass.

To explain a bit further what I mean:

For example, a preacher ought to be (that is try to be) what he claims to be. Now most of us know we are all sinners (and if you don't know it, just ask your spouse, parent, sibling, child, co-worker, etc.). If one preaches against drinking, extra-marital sex, homosexuality, lying, stealing, etc., then that person ought not sneak around in the dark and do those things. On the other hand, if that person doing those things is preaching the truth, the actions of the person does not invalidate the truth. The truth is still the truth. If a homosexual writes a truly great song (on its on merits), the song does not cease to be truly great because of the proclivities of the author. However, I can also see how that can dull the edge of the song for those who find out what was going on behind the scenes.

So, in judging the work of a person, the work could and should be judged on its on merits -- as to whether the work is true, correct, valid, good, or whatever.

Nevertheless, there is the secondary issue of whether one wants to be associated with that work. For example, using the topic of the Ravi Zacharias thread, someone who thinks Ravi Zacharias did a truly good or great work in his defense of the Christian faith still might decide not to recommend his books, sermons, etc.

 

[rlvaughn]

Oh...

and God spoke through both Balaam and his ass.

 

[SGO]

Thanks to you both for the explanations and the illustration.

So then it's case by case?

 

[SGO]

Just as an example without names:

A high regarded literary scholar is given the job of editing a bible to make it up-to-date and have the the text look pleasing to the reader.

The publisher touts his editing skills and his spirituality.

However, the editor, if he is a Christian, does not specifically say he has faith in Christ for his salvation.
Research (mine) shows his spirituality is based on the work of a literary giant who was most likely not a Christian, and the fact his mother had a bible.

Personally, I don't buy the work based on what I know, not about his skills (which are still applauded in the press) but about his lack of personal testimony. This is an editor of a bible translation which I would have been reading daily.

So case by case up to the individual.

 

[rlvaughn]

So then it's case by case?

I think it would be for me. If Hitler wrote the most beautiful song ever written, I believe I would have to steer clear of it.

However, I think sometimes we struggle with things we really love -- such as a song. If we already love it long before we learn "Hitler" wrote it, it is harder to give up than if we already knew "Hitler" wrote it before we heard it.

 

[rlvaughn]

This article I read this afternoon has some things related to the topic, though it is more specifically a politics-related post.
WHAT IS TRUTH: Questioning Christianity Because Of What One Sees Occurring In the World or From People Who Call Themselves Christians

My Christianity isn't tethered to what other people are doing or have done. Christianity is the truth. If I were one of eight remaining believers on earth, it would still be true. I don't doubt it when people don't live it. I feel sorry for them, but they haven't affected what I think about Christianity itself. My Christianity is tethered to the Bible, God's Word.