through a glass darkly
Posted by Paul | Filed under photos
Tags: photos
living proof
Posted by Paul | Filed under uncategorised
The belief policy of the Christian … is not “believe whatever you are told no matter how seemingly ridiculous” but rather “believe what you are told about God by those who have it on good authority and whose testimony — which includes their lives (and deaths — are reliable indicators of practical wisdom.” …
No special privileges or perogatives should be allowed to insulate theological truth claims from the crucible of testing. To pour onelsefl out for the sake of the evangelical truth claim mean making the way of Christ intelligible, both theoretically and practically. It means living a life that embodies the Word in the power of the Spirit in a way that is able to meet, an pass, the critical tests of human reflecting and human existence.
Kevin J. Vanhoozer in First Theology
I want to suggest that scientific proof, philosophical proof and riligeous proof follow the same rules…After a question has been defined … We must be able to live consistently with our theory.
Francis Schaeffer in The God Who is There
For the human makers of things, the incompletenesses and inconsistencies of our ideas become clear only during implementation. Thus it is that writing, experimentation, “working out” are essential disciplines for the theoretician.
Frederick P. Brooks Jr in The Mythical Man Month
Tags: apologetics, theology, worldview
Memory of Eden
Posted by Paul | Filed under photos
This one is for Jonny, who somehow failed to make it to the Eden Project this summer…
Tags: photos
Powerpoint theology
Posted by Paul | Filed under uncategorised
While on holiday recently, my thoughts turned to propositional truth. As they do…
It’s not always clear to me what people mean by this term — it seems to expand and contract depending on the individual’s views. I’m going to take it roughly to mean things that could be expressed in a Powerpoint bullet.
The existence, importance, etc. of propositional truth seems to be lurking a lot in post-modern/emergent discussions. I think you have to start by saying that of course propositional truth has value. Even the oft-quoted Uncertainty Principle and Godel’s incompleteness theorems are expressed propositionally and in a very precise way. So, we have to take propositions seriously.
On the other had, I wonder if, in many cases, propositions just doesn’t get us as far as we think they do. Let’s take an example: the statement ‘God exists’. Seems like a simple proposition, either true or not. But immediately we are lead to the question ‘What do you mean by God?’ OK, that’s not the end of the world — we could start to flesh things out with other propositions, like ‘God is love’. But, then I have to ask how good a grasp I, as a less-than-perfect human, have on love. And so on. And so on. Before you know it, I think I’m going to end up at ‘In the beginning …’ and find myself having to tell the whole story.
I think we have to be careful thinking that we can abstract propositions out of the Bible, without retaining the whole of the story. Otherwise, you have the danger of ending up with something that doesn’t match the source any longer, if not in our minds, then in the minds of those listening. And we have to realise that you can’t pick up a phrase or two on their own without the entire text coming with them. Like a bowl of spaghetti — you might try to pick out one piece, but you soon find that you have no choice but to go for the entire tangled mass.
I guess it was easier when we lived in a society that had an essentially common background. When you said ‘God exists’, etc. you could be reasonably sure that the people listen had something approximately similar in mind. But when the culture starts to fracture, it becomes less easy. Suddenly, you can’t rely on the assumed common ground and the propositions have to give way to other expressions, like re-telling stories.
You also have to be sure you listen carefully to make sure you have the common ground right. But that is a post for another day…
Tags: apologetics, postmodernism, provocations, story, theology
giving and justice
Posted by Paul | Filed under uncategorised
An interesting quote from Francis Schaeffer (The Great Evangelical Disaster)
… there is the question of the compassionate use of wealth … this means two things: first, making it with justice; and then using it with real compassion. As a matter of fact, I have said a number of times and places where I hope it counted that I think when Christians get to heaven and they speak of how much they gave to missions, to build schools, and so on, that the Lord is going to tell them it would have been better if they had had less money to give and had made their money with justice.
I’m pretty sure that we can extend this principle to ensuring that there is justice when we spend money. That having a little less money because we ensured justice in our purchasing is more important than maximising what we have to give.
For me it seems that it is sometimes easier to give money than to spend a little more on something that is traded fairly. Perhaps it is a learnt inclination to maximise what I have and look out for the good deal. I presume this isn’t the same for everyone, but perhaps we have our own reasons that hold us back.
I don’t think it is much of a stretch to imagine that, when Paul encourages giving in his letters, he would have been unimpressed if the people the giving is aimed at were simultaneously being exploited. Or if the exploitation was of others. If you don’t agree then a quick glance at Proverbs or the prophets may make you think again.
It really doesn’t make sense to help people with our giving and then exploit them, or others, with our spending.
I know fair trade isn’t a new thing, but we don’t often set it in the context of giving. At least in our culture, they are two side of the same issue.
Perhaps one approach is to set aside money that is specifically there to allow us to buy fairly traded goods, as well as setting aside money to give. Perhaps making a conscious choice in this way will allow us to give things the proper priority.
Tags: justice
On choosing the right story…
Posted by Paul | Filed under uncategorised
OK, let’s try this…
(I know, history is never so simple, but what’s the point of a blog without some overly-simplistic speculation? Oh, and I’ve borrowed some of Curtis Chang’s spin from ‘Engaging Unbelief’.)
Circa AD400 – Christian culture finds itself wedded to Roman culture.
The sack of Rome brings a questioning of the dominant view and consequently threatens Christian culture, bringing a pagan resurgence (including Platonism)
Augustine constructs an apologetic in conversation with Platonism.
…years pass…
Christian culture finds itself wedded to Platonism.
Islam brings a re-discovery of Aristole, challenging the dominance of Platonism and consequently threatens Christian culture.
Aquinus constructs an apologetic in conversation with Aristotle.
…years pass…
Christain culture finds itself wedded to Aristotle.
Galileo challenges the the Aristotlian view and consequently threatens Christian culture, bringing in the era of modern science, etc.
The church develops apologetics in conversation with modern/scientific rationalism.
…years pass…
Christian culture finds itself wedded to modernism.
…
History repeats itself.
It has to.
Nobody listens- Steve Turner
A random walk over culture, art, christianity, etc. with occasional photographs...