Introduction
Gordon H. Clark (1902–1985), philosopher, theologian, and controversial figure within American Reformed thought, developed one of the most rigorously rationalist systems of Christian philosophy in the twentieth century. His epistemology, centered on the conviction that truth is propositional and logic the very structure of God’s thought, shaped his anthropology in profound ways. According to Clark, the essential faculties of man are intellect and will, while emotions are not only unnecessary but positively the product of the Fall.
This paper examines Clark’s suspicion—even hatred—of emotion, especially as expressed in his writings and lectures, and evaluates it against the biblical record of Christ’s emotional life. It argues that Clark’s framework fails both biblically and philosophically, and offers instead a definition of emotion that sees it as the physiological and psychological response of embodied rational beings. Drawing on scientific research into the health effects of emotion, as well as theological reflection on the incarnation, the essay concludes that emotions are not irrational addenda but integral to the imago Dei.
Clark’s Hatred of Emotion
Clark’s antipathy toward emotion was not casual but deeply principled. In Faith and Saving Faith, he wrote:
“God has no emotions, and his image, man, in his unfallen state, may have been analyzed into intellect and will, knowledge and righteousness. Emotion and disease came in with the Fall.”(1)
This statement is not an isolated remark but represents his consistent position. In a lecture delivered at the Reformed Theological Seminary (Jackson, Mississippi, 1976), Clark defined emotion as follows:
“I should offer perhaps not a complete definition, but at least an element of the definition. An emotion seems to me to be a sudden upheaval, disturbance in our ordinary calm state of mind. And I don’t see that this is part of the image of God, I think this is part of original sin.”(2)
For Clark, then, emotions are irrational upheavals. They disturb the rational calm of the mind and therefore cannot belong to the imago Dei. In Religion, Reason, and Revelation, he warns that “religious experience without rational content is not Christianity but mysticism.”(3) The implication is clear: to elevate emotion in religion is to abandon truth for irrationality.
In this light, Clark redefines the theological virtues. Love is a volitional commitment to obey God’s commands, not a feeling. Faith is intellectual assent to revealed propositions, not trust in the sense of subjective confidence. Hope is an expectation grounded in logic, not an emotional state of optimism.
The Christological Problem: “Jesus Wept”
This rationalist anthropology collides with the New Testament portrayal of Christ. John 11:35, the shortest verse in Scripture, simply states: “Jesus wept.” For Clark’s framework, this is problematic. If emotions are products of the Fall, how can the sinless Son of God exhibit them?
Nor is this an isolated case. The Gospels consistently portray Christ as moved by compassion (Mark 6:34), angered by hardness of heart (Mark 3:5), sorrowful to the point of death (Matt. 26:38), and even “troubled in spirit” (John 13:21). These are not signs of fallenness but of true humanity. To deny this is to risk a docetic Christology in which Jesus appears human but lacks genuine human affectivity.
Theologically, Christ’s emotions reveal that emotion is not inherently irrational or sinful. His grief at Lazarus’s tomb was rational: He knew death’s reality, chose to identify with His friends’ sorrow, and His body responded with tears. Far from undermining His perfection, these responses manifest the integrity of His incarnate humanity.
Rethinking Emotion: Intellect, Will, and Body
Clark’s error lies in treating emotions as irrational, disconnected faculties. A more adequate definition recognizes that emotions are physiological and psychological responses to intellectual judgments and volitional acts.
-
Fear arises when the intellect perceives danger and the will directs toward self-preservation.
-
Grief results when the intellect acknowledges loss and the will accepts its reality.
-
Joy emerges when the intellect perceives the good and the will embraces it.
In this model, emotions are not irrational intrusions but the embodied consequences of intellect and will. They may be subconscious, but they remain tethered to rational cognition. Clark’s dichotomy—intellect and will versus irrational emotion—is a false one.
The Physiological Dimension of Emotion
Modern science underscores the embodied nature of emotion. Tears, for example, are not irrational eruptions but complex physiological products. Research has shown that emotional tears contain stress hormones and natural painkillers such as leucine enkephalin, which are absent in basal tears (the tears that keep the eye lubricated).(4) William Frey’s pioneering studies in the 1980s demonstrated that crying helps expel toxins and reduces stress.
Similarly, psychosomatic medicine has shown that emotions directly impact physical health. Chronic stress and anxiety elevate cortisol and adrenaline, leading to hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and weakened immune response.(5) Conversely, positive emotions such as joy and gratitude promote healing by lowering stress hormones and boosting immune function.(6) In extreme cases, negative emotions can even cause death: “broken heart syndrome” (stress-induced cardiomyopathy) occurs when emotional trauma triggers lethal cardiac failure.
This evidence highlights the deep unity of spirit and body. Emotional states arise from rational perceptions and volitional stances but manifest physiologically. To deny their place in human nature, as Clark did, is to sever the unity of the human person.
Psychological Insight: Wayne Dyer
Wayne Dyer, in Your Erroneous Zones, observed that “Your emotions are the result of your thinking; if you control your thoughts, you control your feelings.”(7) Dyer, though not writing as a Christian theologian, captures an important truth: emotions are not independent forces but the product of intellectual frameworks. Even subconscious feelings are traceable to patterns of thought.
This insight aligns with biblical teaching. Proverbs 23:7 affirms, “As a man thinks in his heart, so is he.” Here, the heart includes thought, will, and feeling. Emotions flow from cognition and volition. They are not irrational disruptions but rationally grounded expressions of the whole person.
The Spirit–Body Connection
The physiological evidence demonstrates the profound unity of man as body and soul. Emotions bridge the spiritual and physical aspects of human existence. The tears of Jesus exemplify this: a physical manifestation of a rational, volitional, and spiritual reality.
In theological terms, the imago Dei includes not only intellect and will but the capacity for ordered emotion. The Fall did not create emotions but disordered them, turning fear into terror, love into lust, and grief into despair. Redemption in Christ does not abolish emotion but reorders it, directing it toward its proper ends: grief over sin, joy in salvation, compassion for suffering.
Conclusion
Gordon Clark’s rejection of emotion as part of the imago Dei reflects his zeal for rational clarity but ultimately truncates the biblical picture of man. By treating emotions as irrational upheavals, he ignored their rootedness in intellect and will, their physiological basis, and their theological role in Christ’s incarnate life. Scripture, psychology, and physiology converge to show that emotions are essential to human nature. Jesus’ tears at Lazarus’s tomb are not evidence of fallenness but of the perfection of His humanity.
Clark’s rationalism rightly warned against sentimentality and mysticism, but in dismissing emotion altogether, he separated what God has joined: the rational spirit and the responsive body. A more holistic anthropology recognizes emotion as a rationally grounded, bodily mediated, spiritually significant aspect of man. Far from irrational intrusions, emotions are indispensable expressions of intellect and will in the embodied life of redeemed humanity.
Notes
-
Gordon H. Clark, Faith and Saving Faith (Jefferson, MD: Trinity Foundation, 1990), 116.
-
Gordon H. Clark, “Questions and Answers,” audio recording, Winter Theological Institute, Reformed Theological Seminary, Jackson, MS, Feb. 2–4, 1976.
-
Gordon H. Clark, Religion, Reason, and Revelation (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1961), 127.
-
William H. Frey II, Crying: The Mystery of Tears (Minneapolis: Winston Press, 1985), 54–57.
-
Bruce S. McEwen, “Protective and Damaging Effects of Stress Mediators,” New England Journal of Medicine 338, no. 3 (1998): 171–79.
-
Sheldon Cohen and Denise Janicki-Deverts, “Stress, Social Support, and Resilience: Health Implications,” Current Opinion in Psychology 5 (2015): 77–82.
-
Wayne W. Dyer, Your Erroneous Zones (New York: Avon Books, 1976), 54.
No comments:
Post a Comment