open source theology - Posts

Private messaging is back!

Andrew — Fri, 09 May 2008 07:12:01 -0500

I shut down the private message function a while back because it was sending out false notifications to people. The module has been upgraded so, at John Clements’ prompting, I have reinstalled it. You will find a link to send a message to the author of posts and comments. You can also access it via the ‘My Inbox’ link at the top.

History and narrative

Ryan SA — Mon, 05 May 2008 08:26:13 -0500

Hi there. I am busy reading an Archaeology book on the bible by Richard Horsley and others and it raises some important questions regarding history and narrative. Specifically theories about Israel’s origin. So bear with me here.

Knowledge and Truth in the Bible and in the Present

Jacob — Sat, 03 May 2008 16:47:37 -0500

In critiquing D. A. Carson’s Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church, James K. A. Smith makes a wonderful point. Smith says that Carson interprets the mentionings of “truth” and “knowledge” in the Bible as clear evidence that the Bible “also advocates the modern epistemological notion of objectivity.” Smith then goes on to argue that the Scriptures “give us good reasons to reject the very notion of objectivity, while at the same time affirming the reality of truth and knowledge.” In other words, Smith is arguing that on theological and philosophical grounds that the presumed connection that Carson makes between “truth” and “knowledge” in the Bible and in the present just doesn’t hold up.

Foucault, 'the Gang of Four', and the postmoderns

peter wilkinson — Fri, 02 May 2008 03:28:12 -0500

This was originally part of the thread introduced by Jacob on Foucault: The Shepherd’s Power. However, it took up wider themes, and I would like to invite participants on the site to make their own contributions.

New creation, Spirit, blessing and kingdom: a clarification of terminology

Andrew — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 11:34:51 -0500

I have been rather bothered recently by the way in which the emerging church - though not only the emerging church - makes use of the concept of the ‘kingdom of God’ to define its mission, the idea being that the task of the church is to extend or build the kingdom of God on earth. Very often there is an implicit polemical aspect to the usage: we build the kingdom of God rather than merely convert people; or we are more concerned about the concrete social dimension of the kingdom on earth than the rarefied - if not mind-numbing - prospect of an eternity in heaven. The phrase ‘kingdom of God’ appears to capture for us something of the down-to-earth political and moral relevance of the gospel that we are so anxious to reintroduce into Christian discourse; and it gives substantial theological justification for this shift in missional focus. But I am not at all sure that this is how the term works biblically.

Final judgment and double-sense theory

plymouthrock — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:08:39 -0500

If we agree that the Scripture texts regarding the day of the Lord have an imminent, first century historical fulfillment and character (or some other local, historical fulfillment), from where do you arrive at the notion that there is more? i.e, a universal, final judgment.

College professors host viewing of Expelled

SteveCornell — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 17:34:08 -0500

The academy launches irrational hostility toward reputable scientists who dare to attribute intelligent design to biological structures.

The Shepherd's Power

Jacob — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 14:36:19 -0500

A set of lectures that Michel Foucault gave at the College de France during the late 1970s was recently published under the title, Security, Territory and Population. They trace out the genealogy of what Foucault calles “governmentality,” which is a snazzy way of talking about the development of the practice of governing men. An important part of that genealogy is what I’m writing about in this essay: the pastorate.

Frustrated by N. T. Wright

SteveCornell — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 06:26:04 -0500

I’ve been reading N. T. Wright’s, Surprised by Hope and I’ve found myself frustrated by N. T. Wright. As one example, in part 13 ‘Building for the Kingdom’, Wright engages rhetoric that is overly reactionary and I think it mitigates the points he wants to make. Under redemption, Jesus’ resurrection and the new creation of salvation, Wright places the work of garden keeping in the world of space, time and matter. Fair enough (carefully understood). Evidently, however, he wants to build his case for ”garden keeping” on God’s ultimate intention to redeem even creation itself (something that God will do in the end). Because of God’s ultimate intention, he insists that we cannot picture God looking at the fallen world (and we might add, groaning world, Romans eight) and saying, “Oh, well, nice try, good while it lasted but obviously gone bad, so let’s drop it and go for a non-spatiotemporal, nonmaterial world instead.” He then argues that since God intends to redeem rather than reject His created world (would ”rejecting” be the worng word for what the apostle desribes God doing in II Peter 3), we should celebrate that redemption (what he calls healing and transformation) in the present as a means of anticipating what is to come. Along these lines, he pictures the Church as called to “implementing Jesus resurrection and thereby anticipating the final new creation.”

Christ and Eschatology (5.)

peter wilkinson — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:48:19 -0500

Anyone reading these on-line articles might wonder how the author has time and leisure to put them together. If they show signs of haste in their composition - that is entirely accurate! They have been pieced together at odd moments between other more pressing claims on my time. This particular conclusion to the series is hastily rattled out as my long-suffering wife prepares a meal in the kitchen, and before I must dash out to my evening, and she to hers.

Christ and Eschatology (4.)

peter wilkinson — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 04:21:43 -0500

In my previous post, I tried to show that a radical and absolute eschatological character was given to each stage of the entire history of Jesus - not just to part of it, or even to one event within it. His birth, earthly life, death, resurrection, outpoured Spirit and return are all described in equally final terms - and each in some way reflecting the idea of a fulfilled and complete eschatological event in itself.

Christ and Eschatology (3.)

peter wilkinson — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:31:23 -0500

Having painted a picture against which we can view the significance of eschatology in relation to Christ, I continue by asking what “the end” was which is pointed to in phrases such as “the end”, “the end of the age”, and obliquely suggested in “the last days”, “the last times”, “the last hour”; also “the last day”, and references to “the day”, “that day”, “the day of the Lord”, “the day of God”, “the great day”, “the day of wrath”, “the day of judgement”, “the day of redemption”, and so on.

Christ and Eschatology (2.)

peter wilkinson — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:57:25 -0500

In the previous post, I proposed that eschatology has developed two equal and opposite tendencies: either to consign an understanding of ‘the end times’ to events occurring in the far distant or yet to be fulfilled future, or strictly to consign that understanding to events which occurred in the distant past.

Christ and Eschatology

peter wilkinson — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 07:25:15 -0500

Eschatology is usually understood in theology to be the interpretation of things that happen at the end of time, and tends to occupy a separate section, somewhat detached from other theological concerns, at the end of systematic theologies. This divorce of ‘the end of time’ from the rest of theological history is a striking feature of theology, for which I wish to propose an alternative not so far offered on this site.

Skepticism and hope

samlcarr — Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:06:36 -0500

(This was originally a comment attached to the ‘Why the historical Jesus matters’ post.)

OST - What is the current paradigm, or

sk1bum73 — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 14:22:38 -0500

Is there an identity crisis for this website? Can’t waste any time here if there is…

Shane Claiborne and the rich young ruler

Andrew — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 04:47:32 -0500

I don’t think I’m grossly misrepresenting the book if I say that Shane Claiborne’s The Irresistible Revolution is basically an impassioned, iconoclastic, mischievous challenge to the modern church to do what the rich young ruler (Luke 18:18-30) so famously failed to do - sell everything it has, give the money to the poor, and follow Jesus into life-changing solidarity with the disenfranchised and destitute. So Claiborne’s is another powerful and increasngly fashionable voice calling the church to be a radical Jesus movement again (see also ‘Being a disciple of Jesus is not enough’). But it still seems to me that this desire to revert to the pattern of Jesus-discipleship arises essentially as a reaction against the excesses, hypocrisy, idolatry or ineffectiveness of the modern American church; it is of only limited value for the larger task of reconstituting the people of God following the collapse of the Christendom paradigm.

The Resourceful-Reacting Statistician

Woody Anderson — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:13:31 -0500

I have just gotten into Fretheim’s “The Suffering God”. I confess it’s like reading another language. But my question at this point is; if we take away God’s omniscience; haven’t we reduced Him to an exceptionally good statistician who’s really quick on His feet?

Also, what are the implications for prophecy?

Why the historical Jesus matters

Andrew — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 06:18:54 -0500

The question of whether by historically contextualizing the Gospel story we make Jesus largely irrelevant to the church and the world today has been a recurrent one - indeed, for me something of a thorn in the flesh. It was recently posed rather articulately and forcefully by samlcarr and shiert on the ‘New creation and the kingdom of God’ thread. I realize that I appear to belabour the point far too much, and the impression is easily given that I think that Jesus is of no more than antiquarian interest to us today. That is not the case, and I will try again to explain, too briefly, what I’m getting at and why, because I think we have a lot more to gain than lose by learning to trust the narrative shape of our theology.

Being a disciple of Jesus is not enough

Andrew — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 12:53:23 -0500

I have voiced some reservations in a couple of recent posts about the appropriateness of modelling the life and mission of the church on the form of discipleship found in the Gospels (see ‘Alan Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways, and the future of the church in Europe’ and ‘We have to go back, but not to square one’).

There is a fully understandable desire abroad - as a reaction against big church, as a reaction to the distintegation of the Christendom mentality - to recover the immediacy and humanity manifested in the community of followers that Jesus gathered around himself. Sometimes this is expressed as a strong preference for this model of radical, itinerant, liminal community against the seemingly more institutional form of the Pauline churches.

The Passion

peter wilkinson — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 16:18:30 -0500

Tonight was the last instalment of four of BBC’s The Passion, showing on television over holy week. It was an unusual departure for the normally resolutely secular BBC, and much talked up by faith communities. I had decided to give it a miss, having been disappointed by previous efforts to represent Jesus on screen or in drama. But I got drawn in – mainly because I wanted to know what people would be talking about.

Good Friday

Andrew — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:50:43 -0500

The suffering servant poem of Isaiah 52:13-53:12 is set in the middle of prophecies about the restoration of oppressed and disgraced Israel. Immediately preceding it is the announcement to Zion that ‘your God reigns’, that the wretched exiles will be brought back, that God has acted to redeem Jerusalem ‘before the eyes of all the nations’, that there will be singing and rejoicing because God has comforted his people (52:7-10). Immediately after is the exultant address to the barren, desolate wife: the time of suffering, shame, reproach, when God in his anger hid his face from her, is over, and her many children ‘will possess the nations and will people the desolate cities’ (54:3). In both instances the promise is that desolate, humiliated Israel will be restored and will prosper.

We have to go back, but not to square one

Andrew — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 15:08:56 -0500

I suggested in my review of Alan Hirsch’s book The Forgotten Ways that, in our search for a new paradigm to replace the now more or less defunct Christendom worldview, the historical moment which we should revisit for inspiration is not the beginning of the narrow path of suffering that the radical Jesus movement took in pursuit of its Lord but the end, when the faithful community, having finally overcome the opposition of Greek-Roman paganism, was in a position to ask far-reaching questions about how it should organize and define itself as God’s ‘new creation’.

“Proper” and “Rightly”: How Conservative Evangelicals Creatively Manage the Scriptures

Jacob — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:58:44 -0500

To rehash the three points I’ve made about using “rightly” and “proper” to manage interpretations of Scripture:

1. Using “rightly” and “proper” effectively split’s the community of believers into two camps—insiders and outsiders. 2. “Rightly” and “proper” are extra biblical means of defining belief in Jesus and Paul‘s letters. 3. Using “rightly” and “proper” are usually practices carried out by insiders and it privileges the insider’s camp over the outsider‘s camp.

So, in short, talking about “rightly” understanding some piece of Scripture or having a “proper interpretation” is a way that some conservative evangelicals manage the abundant possibilities opened up by the Holy Bible and a way that they sustain their particular visions of faith.

Wandering from the forgotten ways

peter wilkinson — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:25:37 -0500

Andrew - I hope this won’t seem obsessive, but I do find your perspectives interesting, even when I don’t totally share them, and I am always interested in teasing out the practical implications of your radical revision or re-imagining of the Christian faith. I sometimes feel I hear more clearly what you are not saying when it comes to your ideas on the practical expression of church and mission, than what you are saying.

How is faith in Jesus done? A Closer Look at the Interview between Tony Jones and John Chisham

Jacob — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:18:50 -0500

At first blush, asking how faith in Jesus is done might seem like an odd question to ask. Grammatically, it’s kind of odd. But it’s also odd because we often focus on what believers believe. How believers believe is usually of little concern. So, much energy is spent parsing out the differences between what this group believes versus what that group believes, what Catholics believe versus what Protestants believe or what conservative evangelicals believe versus what mainliners believe or what emergent followers of Christ believe versus what non-emergents believe and so on. Asking how faith in Jesus is done, as I’m asking in this essay, draws our attention away from the content of our beliefs and pulls it toward the different ways believers follow Jesus. The shift from what to how is analogous to the shift from content to form.

Alan Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways, and the future of the church in Europe

Andrew — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 07:03:07 -0500

The ebullient Alan Hirsch was in Portugal recently with the Christian Associates leadership community, talking about what makes a missional church-planting movement, in his words, go ‘Kaboom!’ In his book The Forgotten Ways he faces squarely the fact that the church in the West is experiencing ‘massive, long-trended decline’ (16). For the most part, the techniques and strategies that are currently being proposed as remedies for this dilemma are no more than revisions of techniques and strategies that have already proved themselves ineffective. ‘As we anxiously gaze into the future and delve back into our history and traditions to retrieve missiological tools from the Christendom toolbox, many of us are left with the sinking feeling that this is simply not going to work’ (17). What is needed is a new paradigm: ‘a fundamental change in our thoughts, perceptions, and values, especially as they relate to our view of church and mission’.

Which “Context is King”?

Jacob — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:42:15 -0500

To be clear, I’m not claiming that trying to understand the context in which Jesus lived is incorrect or somehow misguided. On the contrary, I think that any good student of Jesus would attempt to understand the historical contexts surrounding Jesus and the Scriptures.

The meat of the point that I wish to make is this: to frame “context” as only or even primarily historical in nature has a powerful blinding effect on the reader/writer/follower of Jesus. Even more important than historical context is present context.

My argument is straightforward. On logical and empirical grounds, whatever present contexts we find ourselves in are more significant for understanding our relationship with Jesus and the kingdom of heaven than are the historical contexts in which the words were originally spoken.

"Set upon a golden bough to sing - Of what is past, or passing, or to come." - Matthew 24

peter wilkinson — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 09:25:25 -0500

A commentary on Matthew 24 - in which a future parousia of Jesus is confirmed, false parousia refuted, and overlapping ages introduced by unexpected developments in Jesus’s coming as messiah are established.

Is reality man’s master?

DPMartin — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 19:24:02 -0600

The will of man is to master his reality proves that there is a Master of reality and that will is truly not man’s to have, otherwise man would be able to control reality at man’s choice and free will.