D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones once observed that the biggest problems in life are due to the fact that we listen to ourselves far more than we talk to ourselves. Since I heard that insight, I've practiced his suggestion with increasing conviction of its truth. Doubtless it is something that we need to advocate in place of the rubbish about "listening to your heart," which most commonly means, "Pay close attention to how x makes you feel, and from there decide what is right/what you should do." Perhaps especially for women, emotions are far more unstable and unintelligible than our thoughts are - so what gives? What is it about emotions that makes people treat them as reliable for making decisions and discerning motives?
I don't have an answer, but I've learned from the past that I'd better be quick to qualify these thoughts. I am *not* proposing that we completely ignore emotions. Even if they are unreliable for informing our decisions, emotions are an essential part of the soul, both masculine and feminine. However, it seems that especially in evangelical circles, striving to master (not suppress) one's emotions is tantamount to embracing Stoicism itself, and it is much preferred to speak vaguely about not merely giving intellectual assent to (for example) the truths of Christianity, but "really believing." The problem is, most people don't know what they mean when they say this, and so it seems that there exists this misleading dichotomy between the intellect and the heart. But what is the "heart?"
To keep this short, I'll take the definition that another has taken elsewhere and assert that in Scripture, "heart" almost always means something like "the total personality; one's deepest self." If you try to substitute "feelings" or "emotional life" for the places in Scripture where the heart is referenced, utter confusion results. For example:
"The Lord said in his heart..." (Gen. 8:21)
"...ponder in your own hearts..." (Psalm 4:4)
"But he does not so intend,
and his heart does not so think;
but it is in his heart to destroy..." (Is. 10:7)
"They know not, nor do they discern, for he has shut their eyes, so that they cannot see, and their hearts, so that they cannot understand." (Is. 44:18)
The actual dichotomy, over and against this idea that emphasis on the intellect undermines true "heart-belief," is the one between heart and lips. Jesus quotes Isaiah in Mark 7:6:
“‘This people honors me with their lips,
but their heart is far from me;
in vain do they worship me...'"
In light of the definition just offered, it isn't plausible to say that someone's faith can be certified by how much emotion they show in worship, much less by the fact that they participate in worship at all. On the contrary, the biblical use of "heart" has strong inward connotations. I wonder just how much our obsession with appearance has to do with the way our culture prioritizes emotions in discerning whether one's motives are true.
As always, I'm welcoming dialogue on this, as I know faculty psychology is a point of interest for a couple of you especially. I was tempted to go on a different tangent with experientalism, which seems closely related, but I need to do some more research first. Am I perhaps overestimating this phenomenon, or is it also your experience (in society at large and/or in the Church) that there is an overemphasis on feelings, and both subtle and overt disdain for most intellectual pursuits?
