__________________________________ "They appear to view Africa as only two or three centuries deep, not two or three millennia." __________________________________ A brief description of the book What is the book about? This book aims to persuade the reader with evidence that Africa is a place of early development for global Christianity as we know it today, especially the West. The book touches on the fact that ancient African thought was pivotal in impelling the early church to what it is today. The unique understanding and perspective of early African Christian theologians and interpreters of biblical scriptures has led to global consensual church practices, philosophy and general beliefs. This is barely reflected in western academic endeavors, which tend to be systematically biased and short-sighted. African contributions have been grossly neglected by western scholars, writers and interpreters of scriptures, as shown by the number of ancient African theologians and writers being referenced in their work. That means Western interpreters of biblical scriptures do not only reject an African perspective but they miss an opportunity to broaden their insights, interpretations and perspectives. In response to this neglect and short-sightedness, Oden’s ultimate goal is to question precisely how the African thought and consciousness shaped the Christian mind in the dawn of Christianity. How does the book go about answering the question above? The book bears an academic style and tone, and might certainly be unappealing for the layman and the ordinary reader who is only interested in the general essence of the book. Having said that, the contents of the book are still worth knowing and engaging with, and our hope is that this summary review will inspire the reader to start probing for themselves elsewhere. To show how African thought shaped the Christian mind, Oden dedicates his time to only giving an overview of what he considers the main points. These include summaries of how the early African church guided early Christian dogma, interpretations of scripture, and religious disciplines, as well as how it contributed to and developed intellectual discourse. As conveyed by the spirit of the book, he is careful to not steal the agency of ‘the young African scholar’, by providing directives for future work that still needs to be done. Who is the book for? The contents of this book are for Africans, especially young Africans, seeking the truth about their history in the context of Christianity. It is for the young African who is trying to forge their Christian identity despite a displacement of culture brought about by colonialism. It is for the unsettled African wanderer who has believed that Christianity is a bitter gift offered by the West in the 17th century and therefore a colonial legacy. It is for African scholars, theologians, archeologists, linguists and paleographers. It is for the pan-African Christian who is concerned about the form and future of the African church. It is for a pastor of a church who is trying to serve their multicultural congregation that includes Africans and a teacher of the word of God that values diversity of thought, as contributed by all people of God. The contents of this book can also benefit a non-believing inquisitor, interested in early-centuries’ African church development and affairs. Who is the author? Thomas C. Oden was an American theologian and religious author. His career spans 30 years where he spent most of his time studying the early church and its implications on how we do church today. He has left behind him a long resume of books, articles and essays over the years and is esteemed by his colleagues. The elephant in the room: Why is a white American man writing on this? Who should? Oden commences his discussions by briefly addressing the elephant in the room, the fact that he is a white American man telling an African story. He addresses this directly - that he happens to be among a few scholars with a reputable voice that has stumbled on this evidence. But more importantly, this sentiment is reinforced by the general tone of the book. Throughout the book, he does not miss an opportunity to emphasize that the book is just an the inception of the work that needs to be done, and that further, more in-depth analysis needs to be done by young African scholars - he passes on the baton so to say. He doesn’t strip the young African scholar of agency to take the lead in the pursuit of the truth, but rather serves as a catalyst for the work that needs to be done. Oden also shares his introspections of deciding whether to author this book or not. In his own words, Oden mindfully states that, “The only advantage to hearing it in a Western accent is that it saves African accents from the accusation that they are exaggerating” A brief history of African geography The inception of Christianity in Africa takes form in the first century in Northern Africa. In those early days, the Medjerda and Nile river systems (see map) made trade and the transmission of ideas possible via river and sea from inland Africa to European countries that included Spain, France, Italy and Greece. It is in the surrounding lands of the Medjerda and Nile rivers, that include modern-day Egypt, Libya, Algeria and Tunisia in North Africa; and modern-day Sudan down the Nile River to Uganda in sub-Saharan Africa, where pre-Western Christian ideas and practices were being developed and disseminated. It is through the necessity of trade and communication with the West that early Africans who resided in these lands spoke and wrote different languages, including Latin and Greek. This is consistent with the fact that early translations of the Hebrew bible to Greek and Latin were products of Africa. The New Testament also locates African characters, such as Simon of Cyrene (Matthew 27:32; Mark 15:21, see map for location of Cyrene) who helped Jesus carry the cross and later converted to Christianity; Libyans and Egyptians that were present among many other nationals at the day of Pentecost (Acts 2); and the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:27-39) who converted to Christianity in Jerusalem on his way home. Further, the author of the Gospel of Mark was a Libyan who also founded one of the early Christian churches in the city of Alexandria, Egypt. Notable takers 1. Africa is the seedbed of Christianity - it did not only influence religion but also scholarship, philosophy and debate Oden discusses how early African writers and interpreters of scripture influenced early Christian thinking and how the contribution of African contemplatives was not limited to the religious contributions, but it extended to the academic model. He supports this by mentioning that the Western idea of a university was conceived in Africa as modelled by the Alexandrian library in Egypt founded in 280 B.C. The library then became an important resource for philosophers, scientists, writers, artists and educators of the third century. In his own words: “...the Alexandrian library of the third century provided the essential archetype of the university for all of medieval Europe. The history of medieval universities such as Padua (Italy), Paris (France), Salamanca (Spain) and Oxford (England) followed methods of text examination, curricular patterns and philosophical imperatives...”. Furthermore, rules of engagement for academia, such as debating and philosophizing, were refined in Africa. 2. Early biblical manuscripts were written in Greek and Latin languages by Africans Of the evidence presented in the book, the linguistic evidence addresses the significance of the early manuscripts being written in Greek and Latin. There is evidence to show that there was Greek and Latin influence that existed in the Medjerda and Nile regions, consistent with the multilingualism (which was birthed as a necessity for trade) of these regions and their surrounding areas. This explains how the authors of the early Greek and Latin biblical texts were African, and not European nationals, as some scholars like to suggest. 3. Oral vs textual traditions Oden discusses how African oral traditions, notably in the sub-Saharan Africa, of passing down knowledge have not been given a fair trial against western scrutiny. He makes the point that textual tradition of knowledge transmission is undoubtedly not superior to oral traditions. This claim is made to highlight oral traditions and interpretations of the text that are valuable to the Christian faith but neglected because they are considered invaluable and/or unreliable. Ironically, the gospels in the New Testament relied on eyewitnesses and therefore the oral transmission of information. 4. The definition of traditional African religion Historical and current definitions of a traditional African religion (by both the West and unfortunately most of Africa), has excluded Christianity from the list. This is surprising according to Oden, given that Africa acted as the fertile soil of Christianity (i.e. moved immediately into Africa from Israel), and has remained there for the entire two millennia of its existence. He makes this same point by considering a different angle, how old testament Christianity has a number of parallels to traditional pre-Christian African religions. An additional angle to this same argument is made by considering the language, metaphors and style of writing in the early Christian manuscripts, and their affinity to African cultures. 5. The exclusion of early African thought by many Western theologians, included African theologians The one sobering point Oden makes is that the negligence of African wisdom and its contributions to the early church is not only perpetuated by European and American scholars, but by some African scholars and interpreters of scripture who were either also educated in the west or they ignorantly rely on Western sources. 6. The issue of who gets to be called African Oden addresses the fallacy that Northern Africa is not technically African, leaning into evidence of how interwoven Sub-Saharan Africa and North Africa is culturally, even in the early days. Oden points out how Western scholars and theologians have prejudicially neglected this fact and how they have tended to pay more detailed attention to African history for the sole purpose of re-enforcing their existing biases. For example, their discussions tend to heavily lean on elucidating the ethnicity and the educational backgrounds of those African characters who have brilliantly contributed in the early days, and even suggesting that they were just Europeans in disguise. Oden says, according to Western scholars, "the African intellectual tradition cannot even claim its own sons and daughters, especially if they happened to have been articulate, or if they were sufficiently astute to speak in the common international, academic, commercial and political languages of the day." What to keep in mind What the reader should keep in mind is that Oden does not provide extensive explanations on his main points, instead he offers directives to the ‘young African scholar’ on crucial work that is still required. He mentions that textual and archeological evidence is there but needs to be further explored and convincingly presented. As such, his book is presented as a catalyst for future research. As mentioned before, the book is heavily academic, and assumes the reader is familiar with the jargon used in theology and biblical history. For example, Oden makes reference to a number of historical figures that are considered crucial to the history of the early church and its dogma, without mentioning the reasons they are notable, and therefore assuming the reader is aware of their contribution. Lastly, Oden barely (not even broadly) refers to the southern African context. He briefly mentions the relations between the south and the north but does not discuss the scope of Christianity in the south and how those early days of the African church in the north influenced Christianity in the south. Some of his suggestions for future work Oden does not only emphasize the necessity for the story to be told, but for further research to be done as well on the unexamined texts and artifacts. He presses that the research should take into consideration the economic, sociological, political and demographic features of the evidence. Here are some of his recommendations for future research and direction:
Some criticism We imagine that the scholarly reader would appraise this book better than we can. Having said that, the only qualm we had about the book was Oden's warnings on the temptations of Afrocentrism. Oden rightly warns against “a narrow Afrocentrism” and how it can lead to “ideological bias” and thus weaken any strong evidence presented. However, his suggestions to present any evidence or argument carefully and convincingly, void of any “exuberant Afrocentrism” can be mistaken for or read as respectability politics. From one angle, he is suggesting that a young African scholar should treat any presentation of evidence as solely an academic exercise. This evades the fact that an academic endeavor of this nature is not only scholarly but deeply personal for the African scholar. Further, who is to say that a perfectly convincing presentation of those early textual and archaeological evidence is the solution to undoing hundreds of years of deliberate prejudice? Even Oden himself admits that it could be met with great reluctance. Sometimes it is not productive for the oppressed group to abide by the rules of an oppressive system to dismantle the very system, and suggesting that one does is precisely an issue of respectability politics. Moreover, for the oppressed and the neglected, warnings against temptations of chauvinism can be read as pacification, since chauvinism is what got them oppressed in the first place.
0 Comments
I am sure you have heard someone say, "This is my personal truth.", "This is my lived experience.’’ or "You do you." You probably have said these yourself. But won’t you agree that there is an objective truth external to all of us? A neutral plane and a great leveller of all our incompatible philosophies? If we all agree on this great leveller, what do we mean when we talk of personal truth and does our personal truth trump the objective reality of which we are all subjects of? To get close to answering the questions posed, we would have to establish a commonplace from which we can base our discourse. At this point, I would like to lay my cards on the table. I am not providing answers, but ramblings. And possibly more questions. The next few sentences are my own posits, vulnerable of my own biases but here goes: "Oh my ramblings" I start my rambling with a thought, that communication breeds community and it is through community that we can cooperate and thrive. As humans, we do not always effectively communicate with each other. With billions of people having different life experiences, dispositions, environments and cultures, how do we make sure we agree? Should we agree? What should we agree on? Discussion and debate is one faculty of communication. Usually at the start of a debate, the common ground of the partakers is outlined. This is to establish any groundwork from which a debate and discussion can launch. "Should we agree? What should we agree on?" The consensus between those in discussion is that reason is a tool that can used to evaluate whether arguments brought forth are weak or strong. We use reason to logically form judgements and conclusions from gathered data. On the other hand, we also use reason to justify our behaviour and choices afterwards. Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber put forth in their book The Enigma of Reason that we justify our actions for purposes of being social. That is, people retrospectively justify their behaviour and choices for social reasons. Being a rationalist gives you a good reputation in the society and reasoning enables social interactions and collaboration. Whether the reasons we provide for our actions are valid or not depends on culture. The good thing about reason holding weight in social settings is that, in interactive reasoning such as in a debate, our reasons can be challenged. This forces us to reason better. But, does providing [seemingly] weak arguments for our actions disqualify us from being heard and considered? Especially in arguing for complex social issues? And especially if the exercise of providing excellent reasons is strenuous, because it means arguing for your own existence? "We engage in retrospective reasoning (as opposed to prospective reasoning) to enable social interaction." Could we be lenient or rather open-minded that in general terms, what we really mean when we refer to our personal truth, as reasons for our behaviour and choices, is that our personal truths are the best guess we can offer? That it is the beginning of a discussion rather than the end. Just because our personal truths are subjective, they nonetheless should not be invalidated or tossed out as non-reason because they offer a place of inference in debate and discussion. By being familiar with someone else’s subjectivity, you can better convince them of the fallacies of logic in their reason or better yet, you can leave the discussion enlightened of someone else’s lived experience and having some of your own fallacies and baseless assumptions exposed. I think. References 1. Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber, The Enigma of Reason, 2017 The drift
My husband and I went kayaking with a small group of people a few weeks ago in southeastern Ireland. At some point during the escapade, we had to stop in the middle of the ocean and we so happened to stop next to some contraption used to trap lobsters. The kayaking instructor emphatically warned us to keep paddling on the spot so that we do not drift off from the group and to use the lobster traps as markers. We continued paddling while keeping our eyes on the marker but we occasionally got tired and needed breaks. With too long a break, a few of us realized we had drifted meters away from the marker and needed to pedal back. Of course, this journey back felt harder than paddling on the spot. The art of coming home This sounds and feels like my relationship with God – one minute I have my eye on the marker, I know that I just need to keep paddling, but the next minute I am drifting away because of distraction or mismanaged exhaustion. I like to think that the extent of this drift differs from person to person, that some people realize their drift later than others do. I also like to think that being familiar with God’s voice and God’s markers mitigates the extent of the drift and helps with the journey back. Let us face it, we are a distracted people. The worries of life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things can come in and choke the Good word out of us (Mark 4:19). Naturally, we do not seek God and we need a guiding light as we stumble in the dark. I think accepting the drifts as imminent, whether the drift is momentary or lasts for weeks, we can glean from them and learn the art of coming home. We should also keep in mind that the art is not self-willed, that we desperately need a redeeming, healing, forgiving and restoring God. Although we pant, longing for a present God and longing for a transforming presence, there is ‘disciplined grace’ for this art, as Richard Foster puts it. Grace because it is freely given, but disciplined because we also have work to do. Our work, itself, does not will us to come home; it only places us in a position where God can do the work. A soft voice Learning and practising the art of coming home or rather, being familiar with home and its markers, embraces being attuned to God’s voice. Most importantly, moving from treating God’s voice as not only a conceptual entity but also a reality. Coming home embraces the pursuit of a pursuing God, where the practicality of the pursuit rests on trusting that He is forever working and guiding you and that wisdom is available for anyone who asks. The terrain is troublesome and often loud with many voices – infantile, aggressive, misleading, and scheming voices. Acquainting yourself with the right voice is hard at first, and a possibly harder aspect is hearing and responding. It comes with the trust that you are being led by a good shepherd. A well-attuned sheep does not only know the voice, but it listens and follows. Your loudest voice should be the soft voice. Soft, not as a degree of its loudness, but an expression of its security. Soft because it is patient and it is kind. Soft because it is not self-imposing or self-seeking. It is a voice that garners its softness from rejoicing with the truth, always protecting and always persevering. A voice that reaches far and wide, and a voice that is high and deep. Today still, this deep voice is calling to deep (Psalm 42:7). Let your heart rise up for battle.
Prepare your shields, both large and small, and march out for battle. With shield and spear, arm yourself for battle. With the shield of faith and the sword of the spirit, arm yourself. Pick up the double-edged sword. Let your heartstrings raise a battle cry. Examine the desires that battle within you. Be watchful and alert, when the roar of the battle rises against you. If the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle? On the day of the battle, your head is shielded; the helmet of salvation is your armour. On the day of the battle, your troops will be willing. Be strong in the Lord and in His mighty power. In recalling the prophecies and promises made in your name, the battle is fought well. The Lord your God will go before you, He will fight for you before your very eyes. Do not be afraid. The Lord will grant the defeat of your enemies before you. They will come at you from one direction but flee from you in seven. The mighty will fall in battle, slain on your heights. Praise be to the Lord your Rock, who trains your hands for war, and your fingers for battle. Your hands are trained for battle and your arms bend a bow of bronze. Let your heart remember the Lord as your war club and weapon. With His help, you can advance against a troop; With God’s help, you can scale a wall. Through faith, you will conquer cultural kingdoms, administer justice, and gain what was promised; you will shut the mouths of lions of this present day, quench the fury of the cultural flames, and escape the edge of the sword; your weakness will be turned to strength; and you will become powerful in the battle for your heart. Yet He will show love to you, and will save you – not by bow, sword or battle, or by horses and horsemen, but his might and power. Scriptures referenced:
I have been sitting on the idea of being “unoffendable” – deflecting, gravitating above, overlooking, overcoming an offense and supposedly reaching a superhuman state, complete in your joy and maturity. Of course it sounds absurd written out like that, at least to me and especially when I consider the number of times I have taken offense from someone who said something or did something I deemed offensive, or even been offended by someone’s inaction. Regardless of your age, social status, common sense and spiritual maturity, you are pretty much offendable and you are probably familiar with this truth. You also probably have ideas and practices on what to do when you have taken offense. If your ideas and practices are heavily focused on how to protect yourself from offense for the purpose of proving maturity to yourself and/or other people and sustaining joy, I wonder if that is how you start relating to other people that have taken offense from you. That, if you offend someone, your response to that is that they did not do the work to protect themselves, and that they are not mature enough. If you relate to this to some extent, I would like you to imagine being on the other side of offense – offending and hurting someone. While at it, I would like you to consider a different language around it – instead of saying “someone took offense when I said this or did that”, say “I gave an offense”. When someone “took offense” from you, the language almost suggests that it is only up to that person to deal with that offense. Although it is true to some extent, the language does not help much when you find yourself on the other side of offense and when you have to extend grace and apologies. The understanding that you have “given offense” is the understanding that someone “took offense” because they felt unappreciated, insignificant, undervalued and unseen. Someone “taking offense” from you is their way of telling you that you have not loved them the way they need to be loved and you have not listened closely and intently enough. With a changed language then, you possibly move away from being offended yourself when someone felt offended by you, and you move away from defence to fostering love in your relationships, friendships and kinships. _________________________________________________________ "Whoever would foster love covers over an offense, but whoever repeats the matter separates close friends." - Proverbs 17:9 NIV _________________________________________________________ With a changed language that you have “given offense”, you are less tempted to apologize from strength (“I am sorry if you feel offended”, “I only meant it this way”) and you understand that your apology is only the beginning. The essence of your apology is in the changed behaviour, working at loving your mate the way they need to be loved. There is nothing more romantic and friendly than an apology coupled with changed behaviour. "I have a peace about it" is a platitude used in Christian circles as a meter for decision-making. You often hear a Christian express their sense of peace before a big decision such as taking up the right job, moving to a different country, dating or marrying the right person. Is this absence of conflict before decision-making indicative of our will being aligned with God's? Could we convince ourselves into thinking "God has given us a real peace about it" but we are actually preoccupied with our own will and not His?
What does the bible say about peace? Peace, as used in the Bible, appears in four different contexts - peace between God and us, peace between ourselves (as in treaties), peace within ourselves and counterfeits of peace or false promises of peace. First described in the Old Testament, peace addresses the enmity between God and men and enmity between men and each other. Hence, the good news, also referred to as the Gospel of peace by Paul, is concerned with redressing consequences of the fall. There is also a peace for our perpetual internal enmity, promised by Jesus in John 14:27, as a parting gift - the gift of rest and tranquility. _________________________________________________________ Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid. - John 14:27 NIV _________________________________________________________ Lastly, false teachers or deceitful people proclaim a counterfeit peace over God's people. I also think there is a counterfeit peace we can get when we choose to have our own way and our own will. We can get a sense of ‘peace’ even when we have short-circuited the Holy Spirit in us. We should be careful not to trick ourselves that we are spiritually fulfilled. Our prayer should be to discern the difference between the peace Jesus gifts and the counterfeit peace that deceives us. Esther and Paul Sometimes, when faced with a difficult situation or a decision to make, the heart of the matter is in trusting God rather than the decision itself. Then, our personal convictions can still give us a sense of peace or courage to do what needs to be done. Esther’s personal conviction to put her life in danger for the saving of the Jews and Paul’s conviction to accept the possibility of death if he preached the Gospel in Jerusalem are good examples of this. _________________________________________________________ "Go, gather together all the Jews who are in Susa, and fast for me. Do not eat or drink for three days, night or day. I and my attendants will fast as you do. When this is done, I will go to the king, even though it is against the law. And if I perish, I perish.– Esther 4:16 Then Paul answered, Why are you weeping and breaking my heart? I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus." - Acts 21:13 _________________________________________________________ Esther and Paul were both aware of the possibility of suffering and even the possibility of death but their personal convictions were for a bigger purpose. In their case, peace is not used as some kind of gauge to go ahead with a decision. I imagine their resolution is that they will do it scared, despite the reality of danger and despite the internal enmity. In fact, Paul personally knew the kind of peace that cannot be lessened by trouble or opposition. He understood that the presence of peace is not the absence of trouble. His letter to the Philippians, written while he was in a Roman prison, addresses how to cultivate joy in times of trouble. Only after he is arrested as he foresaw, does he talk about the gift of peace that transcends all human understanding (Philippians 4:7). The garden of Gethsemane What transpired in the garden of Gethsemane is a perfect model of how our decision-making can be. Jesus had retreated into deep prayer and agony, before the most important decision of his life. The bible recounts that he retreated from the disciples three times and only after the third time, was he resolute about what was to come next – his arrest and crucifixion. Hebrews 12:2 gives an account of Jesus’s resolution, “For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God”. I guess the trick is to lead a spirit-led life. Peace, being a fruit of the spirit, is then accessible to us even in times of making tough decisions. I guess the gist is for us not to trick ourselves that we are spiritually fulfilled, to think we are hearing from God whereas we might be hearing from our earthly desires. I'm walking to campus and an Irish gust is blowing autumn leaves off, as if to make sure you got the message, "you are in the fall!" This fall is unique in so many ways. I have had a grueling year of adjustment in a new country, I am going into the second year of my PhD and I have witnessed an internal growth spurt. If I had to give a report of the past academic year, it would be this:
"My favourite thing lately is the discipline of prayer" More true, my favourite thing lately is the discovery of new insights about the discipline of prayer. Prayer as a pivotal tool for spiritual success. Prayer as a desire to be more Christlike. Prayer as a channel to re-positioned passions. Prayer as a spirit-enabled work. Prayer as a journey to a more sound theology revealed through the Holy Spirit. Prayer as a ramble. Prayer as a centring exercise. Prayer as a solitary place. Most importantly, prayer as a learning process. To recap the past year, I have written a prayer for the next few years of my PhD. I understand that although God does not need me to pray, it is necessary for me to be disciplined in prayer because to pray is to change. "Lord, thank you for the gift of education. Thank you for my gift of higher education. I get to do what I love and I get to grow in it. Thank you Lord for being present in the seemingly mundane and repetitive nature of it. Thank you for carrying me through the challenging and often sustained periods of solitariness and frustration. I now understand that you are after my heart more than you are focused on my circumstances. I now know that you are transforming my passions and my focus. Lord you are a good Sheppard. I need your continued guidance. In moments or seasons when my work tempts me to be isolated from your community, I pray you will remind me that I thrive in community. In my weak moments of wanting to chase prestige, sense of ambition and sense of importance, I pray I will always find my way to you, where all these are readily given in accordance of your will through Christ. Lord, help me desecrate my idols tied to academia. May I have the will and courage to throw them away like a menstrual cloth." Peter Taylor is an Assistant Professor at the Centre for Astrophysics and Relativity at Dublin City University. When he is not geeking over black holes, he is a husband, and a father to three beautiful girls. I sent Peter a rambling email about my intellectual forks that are rooted in my doubts and insecurities. As someone with a scientific background, I am preoccupied with reconciling my faith with my science; the way I think and solve problems is owed to both. Peter kindly and mindfully responded to my email and I would like to share the response. He touches on linguistic inflation (the devaluation in meaning of our spiritual experience as a result of spiritual exaggeration in our speech), objective assessment vs subjective conjecture, and intellectual idolatry. Personally, the responses charged and enlightened me. One of my thorns of doubt in my faith is when Christians (including myself) invoke God to explain things that are not yet understood. I cringe at statements such as "it was definitely God" or "God said to me" or any similar flippant God-invoking statement. I too can find these statements unpalatable. It has, unfortunately, become customary to be "loose" with our language when referring to spiritual encounters in particular. I call this linguistic inflation. It is rampant. I am as guilty as anyone else. I do, however, consciously try to use language that is accurate. For me, this is not a matter of skepticism about another's encounter, nor is it a merely academic matter, I believe language matters. For example, if we continue to innocently exaggerate spiritual experience by linguistic inflation, then we will settle in our unconscious minds that we are satisfied spiritually and ultimately stop hungering for deeper relationship. I cringe because, on my part, I don't feel I am being careful enough and I am guilty of spiritualizing my conversations. I feel that in our little minds as we try to understand God, we can innocently invoke this "god of the gaps" in conversations for issues we haven't carefully considered. I think this feeling is owed to the fact that I believe that our belief and God-things can also be derived from an objective assessment, and the invocation of God I previously spoke of, can be grossly based on subjective conjecture. You are raising an interesting point here about the nature of knowing anything. My first teaching on apologetics would always be to address this subject, part of it is understanding that all knowledge stands on unprovable assumptions. In essence, the only logically satisfactory objectivity must come from without not within. This already introduces a coupling between what you call objective assessment and something transcendental. But there are aspects of the world we live in that are more amenable to what you refer to as objective assessment than others. The scientific method, for example, is an attempt to gain an understanding of our world that is (in some sense) objective. It is successful (in explanatory and predictive power) at this for certain types of systems. It is less reliable for explaining and predicting relational interactions. Or more fundamental questions about purpose, meaning, love etc. So if we believe that Jesus' claims about who He is are true and that this requires a relational response, then there will inevitably be a complicated interaction between how we frame this interaction intellectually and how we respond emotionally/spiritually etc. And depending on any individual's make-up, we will all react differently. It may seem that things are hopelessly subjective then, and we are all making it up, but the point of the Scriptures is to not only reveal God, but also to place constraints on what we can claim is representative of Him. So there are objective constraints that bound this subjective freedom. You can think of this like a consistency condition. BUT, this skepticism can be rooted in unbelief (call me out if you will), or rooted in my scientific background - where the invocation of the god of the gaps is an unforgivable act and where unanswered questions are a discomfort. I feel this insecurity can sometimes lead me to value objective assessments and shrug off the supernatural. I can be deceived into thinking scriptures can thrive through brain power or a well-formed argument, especially when I want to relay the gospel to my unbelieving friends. Hence the intellectual idolatry. This may be rooted in many things. Unbelief, intellectual idolatry, intellectual snobbery (arrogance), misunderstanding of the nature of scientific/objective knowledge. I have no doubt at various levels indulged in all of these. I think in developing our apologetics, calling out the dangers in conjecture and justifying our belief in God with our minds, we should also address the danger of falling into intellectual idolatry and therefore, missing the whole point. Agreed. I like to think of Truth, Power and Grace as being essentially coupled for a healthy faith. Divorce Truth from Power and you get a religion based on intellectual idolatry, as you point out. Divorce Truth from Grace and you get a religion based on self-righteousness (or idolatry of self). Either way, you got yourself a form of ugly idolatry. I pray I don't fall short on this. One final note. I don't necessarily think that apologetics (in this intellectual sense) is primarily an offensive tool, though it may be. But it may be primarily a defensive tool. Keep in mind that the word apologia means "reasoned defense". It may be that the real value is that we are a body who understands the implications of our faith in various arenas of life and that we are able to articulate these implications to those who challenge our perspective. Those who have no intellectual framework for understanding their faith may be rocked to unbelief when challenged with purported evidence to the contrary. This happens all the time by the way, an estimated 51% of US undergraduate students who claimed to be Christians in Freshman year have denounced their faith by the time they graduate. I am a self-help junkie. I get a high from personal revelations and self-improvement. From unintentionally and innocently getting a revelation from a life-changing book or a helpful bible plan, my self-help tendencies have matured into rashly and hysterically reading 7-day bible plans in a day or seeking bulleted fast reads on issues I do not have the courage or patience to chew cud on. What was meant to be a prudent and worthwhile exercise of self-improvement has turned into chasing highs, seeking instant gratification and altogether missing the point. Over-watering
Over-watering a plant results in root rot and stunted growth. One-way of saving an over-watered plant is removing all the flowers and fruit because the rotting roots are not able to support the growth of its leaves, flowers and fruit. Self-help junkies over-water themselves. In their impatient hastiness of gleaning knowledge and acquiring wisdom, they can miss the point of acquiring and applying wisdom. In desiring, seeking and acquiring wisdom, we should keep in mind that wisdom is always for a greater goal. Greater goals require diligence, prudence and discipline. To expand on this further, I will focus on two verses from the book of Proverbs that comment on the love of wisdom, and warns us about hastiness. “If you love learning, you love the discipline that goes with it – how short-sighted to refuse correction” – Proverbs 12:1 MSG Wisdom is a good means to a good goal. We are to desire it and seek it. But here is a catch, if we love wisdom, we are to love the means to it. We are to tolerate and expect prods of the Sheppard. In our frustrations from uncertainties and unanswered questions, we are to have a patient and diligent disposition. I use the word disposition to emphasize that wisdom is a quality of the mind that feeds into the character. It is not only a mental capacity but also an attitudinal capacity to a goal. The diligence comes about from the understanding that wisdom is not merely collecting factual knowledge but it is also developing experiential insight and reaching resolves. Experiential insight requires experiences and situations, while resolves require careful consideration and time. “Careful planning puts you ahead in the long run; hurry and scurry put you further behind” – Proverbs 21:5 MSG Self-help junkies can be deceived into thinking that self-improvement and acquiring wisdom is a book, blog-post, personality test, TED talk or a Google-click away. In this verse, the bible contrasts diligence with hastiness (and not necessarily sluggishness). The bible warns us of hastily rushing through work, because like undue procrastination, undue scurry slows us down. The NIV and KJV versions both refer to hurry and scurry leading to want or poverty. In the hysteria and the rash to get answers, we can end up without wisdom and therefore, without resolve. How do we acquire wisdom? The book of Proverbs presents a series of instructions and exhortations on how to obtain wisdom and discern its fruit. It would be worthwhile to study the whole book by extracting relevant verses that speak on wisdom and mulling over them. We get wisdom by:
However, wisdom is found not only in the word of God (or in factual knowledge), but also in the world. Wisdom is not only factual, but it is experiential, situational, attitudinal and resolute. A good friend recently shared a convicting word on how Christians can thrive in one area of their lives, while other areas are depraved and ‘vestigial’ – just like a plant that has been getting sunshine on only one side, the leaves on the unexposed part die. Spiritual death and spiritual depression in certain parts of life has been my reality. For example, I had not known beauty in a holistic and complete sense. When I learnt of prominent collarbones as a sought-after beauty feature and the absence of hip dips as preferable, I was unsettled. Mainly because, it was an immaculate reflection of how wrong I was getting it myself. I believe my own minute-to-minute measurement and examination of self have sometimes fuelled spiritual slumps in my life. Simply put, I am self-absorbed. More so, I spiritualize my self-absorption in the name of self-awareness. Pride and fear often inspires and impels my introspection. As a result, I invest in fighting sins that affect how others view me and often do well in areas of holiness that have high visible accountability, while I am more lax with sins and disciplines that occur in secret. Hyper-introspection - Ingrowth The type of self-examination I employ leads to no real growth; instead, it leads to encysted ingrowth. It is the unproductive and harmful kind. It often leads to guilt, self-mutilation and despair. It promises clarification and purification but it is deceitful and morbid. I have been holding a mirror up to myself in a dark room, perverting thoughts of myself. I have not allowed God’s divine light to be the one hitting my mirror. Self-examination as a duty The bible reminds us in Lamentations 3:40 that we have a duty of introspection – we ought to examine our ways and test them. However, by employing the spirit and the word of God, the process of self-examination should help us return to the Lord. It should be founded on the knowledge that we are depraved creatures, who are granted Christ’s perfect righteousness. Otherwise, our self-assessment is perverted and harmful. Otherwise, we run the risk of detracting our faith. Self-examination as a true measure and a renewal We should relate to self-assessment as a measure of not only our compliance to Christ’s teachings but also as a measure of internal transformation and restoration, we constantly undergo. Should we discover inadequacy, apathy or complacency, healthy introspection should lead us to repentance, gratitude for God’s abounding grace and worship. With one look at ourselves, we should take many more looks to Christ because the sight of Christ brings renewal. |
Rea Zwane"I am just trying to live it up with a big God" Archives
April 2022
Categories |