“At the very time when ecumenical Protestants are drawing closer to Roman Catholics, the rift within Protestantism is growing wider.” This seems to me to be a valid statement - but it isn’t very new. It was written in the “Christian Century”, April 9, 1980 and really only emphasises positions that go back into the beginning of the 20th Century. One of them was Machen, a professor and an author in the 1920’s. Shotgun suggested I read him "I could suggest to you Mr. Machens book, “What is Faith.” ", but we essentially know what these thoughts express.
Is there any future for conservative Theology in a modern world, or, is there any future for the world, if conservative Theology has a large influence on the major powers in the world?
I haven’t really got the inclination to buy the book, since I find it is somewhat dated. I found this review at Amazon, which seems to be in line with what you are saying.
I have also read the introduction to Christianity and Liberalism (1923) which is in the same frame of mind. What my main contention with such authors is, is that they seem to forget that religious systems are really constructions to assist the human mind to grasp the Holy. In their writings these constructions become something existing or occurring as fact; something actual rather than metaphorical, theoretical, or allegorical. The patriarchal or monarchal terminologies in the Bible become examples of a real divine hierarchy, rather than attempts to express with awe and reverence a religious experience.
In attempting to make the Bible an absolute authority, they forget that it was part of a process, just as all other Theology is. The biggest problem I have with such an attitude is that it undermines real religious inspiration and assists hypocrisy. I have known people who were for years obedient members of their church until they had a personal “religious experience†and were then pressed to keep it quiet. People are bulldozed by such authors, which leads to what I have said elsewhere:
“The need to know things, to know facts, to know view points, before someone can think†is undoubted, but what about the fact that we know more and more as time goes on? This seems to be the exact problem between modern Theology and those who are against a development of knowledge and the understanding of scripture in the context of the age in which it was written. The attempts to academically address the “nature†of God adequately seem spurious at the least. We still remain on “this side†looking as though in a dim mirror, trying to ascertain what is on the “other sideâ€.
It’s inevitable that conservative Theology will decline with gradual desensitization of a moral base. If Christians believe in the Book of Revelations and the cryptic visions that are described in it, then this will be the course of events. The best thing to do is adhere to it’s teachings and hold a firm belief to God. It seems things will just keep getting rougher for the faithful from here.
I’m sure that you’ll be willing to forgive me if I maintain my high regard for Mr. Machen and acknowledge the validity of his views as expressed in most of his writings, despite this wonderful and thorough critique you’ve just done.
It’s never too interesting to me to point out how an individual has mis-represented a given position. I prefer instead to point out the inconsistencies of the position proposed by the critic! That being the case however, I would (before I ask a few questions about your post,) like a clarification on an issue. In Mr. Icthus’ thread, you say this:
There is a phenomenal difference between the amount you quote to what you actually have to say.
Would you care to justify your amount of quoting in this particular situation? Please, don’t get me wrong, I am all “for” people quoting intellectuals, or experts in the proposed topic. I think it adds legitimacy, not just to the persons post, but to the person, and to all of the “I love philosophy” forums as well. I’m no doubt wrong on this, but it just seems (from an outsiders view) that Icthus has stepped on some of your religious views, and instead of approaching the subject of his thread, you instead chose to nit-pick about the amount of quotes he used.
Now that THAT is out of the way, perhaps I could ask a question about what you’ve said above?
You say this:
“…religious systems are really constructions to assist the human mind to grasp the Holy…”
and then later you say this:
“…[The Bible] was part of a process, just as all other Theology is…”
How do you KNOW these things Mr. Bob?
I also was wondering about your comment regarding the individuals who had religious experiences, and then were “bulldozed” into keeping quiet about them. You claim that this happens all the time, and allude to your own personal experience of it. I for one have never actually seen or heard of any such thing happening, and given that, it seems fair for me to ask for some sort of outside and unbiased observer to validate these claims of yours. Would you happen to know of any links, or news articles that would describe these events for me? If not, I’m afraid that I cannot concede to you the truth of the conclusions you’ve drawn about these things that you’ve experienced.
I don’t think there is a solution, and it makes little difference what religion we talk about. We are caught in the dilemma of needing the symbols to form a perspective, but for most, the words become the perspective and not the understanding. It is the old eat the menu instead of the meal perspective. Part of it is entrenched tradition, and part is a fear of uncertainty which was the impetus behind so many who claim religious belief: The need for certainty. The wisdom will never be obliterated, but much of the dogma and literalism will be. And as always, the wisdom will be carried by the few whose voices are but whispers that only those who truly search will hear.
Shotgun,
I’ll be happy to confirm Bob’s observation of religious experience. You have as well because it may be rare but not uncommon. The religious (or spiritual experience in my way of thinking) experience is largely an understanding not easily put into words. In fact, there may be no words for it. Those who have such experiences can find no way to express their experience in the convoluted words of traditional religion, and so remain “silenced”. What is an inner experience remains that way. This is particularly true when there is no way to convey such experience in 2000 year old words and perspective.
Thorough is something else, but I respect your opinion and have some considerable experience in the area, so forgive my superficial look at Mr. Machen. I am not someone who is out on a spree of criticism, but someone who has spent 30 years intensively following the whisper of divine inspiration. I am familiar with a number of positions and have chosen mine. The comical thing about it is that I still have all of these positions in mind, use certain arguments of theirs in different contexts and I have a number of friends who maintain their conservative ideas, so I have a frequent meeting with them. I just don’t see them really leading anywhere.
It is quite simple really. The people I have mentioned above and Ichthus very often quote (sometimes reams of quotes) to press their point but when we sit down to talk, face to face with no books between us, we find that our differences were only minor. The differences were primarily in the quotes. The words we speak to each other become softer and friendlier when we are not quoting someone, our prayers become more compassionate.
If I want to illustrate something, I quote the way someone else has put a point. If I want to underline a point I can quote someone else too. But at some point, it is me that has to answer questions, give explanations for why I choose to act in a certain way, do certain things, speak certain words etc. This is the point where we come into conversation and where we can learn from each other. Ichthus does what the afore mentioned people also do, they build walls of quotes.
No, Ichthus has not done that, but he/she does displease me when he/she enters a discussion forum and excludes people who are not “correct†in his/her mind. However, we are now talking about another thread which I purposely left so that we don’t derail it with this subject.
This is quite easy to answer too. If it were not so, we would never of had Jesus, who completely confounded the religious of his age or the Prophets, who had the courage to speak up against the theology of the time, or Paul, who brought a completely new theological concept into being. The numbers of Church Fathers and “great†Theologians only underline this fact.
The second thing is that a look at spiritual development using historical, philological, archeological etc. authorities presents a very plausible and even inspirational explanation for the development of our understanding of the Holy. You see, I’m not trashing Religion, but I’m trying to understand it as a human attempt to appreciate what the Holy is, the Ineffable. If you read Genesis from this point of view, your eyes pop out at the wisdom that is transported by these legends. If you meditate these stories, they take you places that conservative theology could never attain. But the same can be said of almost every part of the Bible.
Oh come on, you know of the kind of people I am talking about, who suddenly go underground with their faith and are sometimes trashed for being “new age†or some other terminology. You won’t find them on the Internet because they do not have any requirement for it. I too am only here because my son is a programmer and he has left me his old computer. I use it to look for religious exchange and have stayed with ILP all this time. As you can tell by my scarce appearances, I have other things to do, but am pleased to converse with you (or Omar) and others to a certain degree.
I think it hasn’t really started, although I see the Apocalypse in a different light. It is true that many of the natural cataclysms proposed for the world seem a little apocalyptic, but these have largely been brought about by “Christian†countries – which would be an odd way to interpret revelations. I don’t think that this kind of polarisation of our problems will help. The problems we have are not “there†with “themâ€, but here in us. Even Paul said that we don’t have so much a problem with flesh and blood as with destructive attitudes and opinions which are systematically followed.
Fundamentalism is, to my mind, one example of such destructive attitudes and opinions. Spiritual people are recognising their commonalities across the religious landscape, whilst fundamentalists obstruct, oppress, kill, blind and maim (as well as the number of secular forces) in the name of God. It is an odd religious world in which the prince of peace is only seen as the avenger and Islam (=submission to God) sees followers become suicide bombers.
Hi Tentative,
long time no read …
Agreed. I like to quote the scene when Elijah is on the mountain when a great wind comes, but God is not in the wind. An earthquake splits the ground but God is not in the earthquake. Then a burning fire comes, but God is not in the fire. Last of all there comes a quiet whisper …
Well, since you have brought up the religion of islam, do you think there might be some of a moderate islamists that don’t believe in suicide killings? I’m not sure of the teachings of the koran, but would you know if it speaks of killing infidels if they don’t convert? I won’t argue the point of some people who get over zealous in how they represent the Christian faith, but as far as I know the New Testament does not condone violence and I’m not saying you have (for qualifying’s sake). Do you think the warnings in Revelations aren’t indictative of events to come? If they are not, what do you think is the relevance of that part of the Bible?. Regarding fundamentalist thinking, I believe there are levels to it. I have no problem with people who the whole Bible literally if they don’t invoke violent attitudes for their faith or any other religion for that matter. Speaking for myself with no reflection on other people, I am trying to keep my arrogance level to nil with the Lord’s help. However Revelations is interpreted by anyone else, I believe it is relevant to the New Testament.
Yes, the Qur’an does speak of such things much like Isa 13:16 reads, “Their infants also shall be dashed in pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be rifled, and their wives ravished†[in the wrath of Jhvh of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger]. We obviously can’t read such statements without accepting the historical context and rejecting its morality.
The majority of Moslems don’t believe in suicide killings – especially those who are in such a spiritual dialogue with other religions.
Which is exactly my point. The New Testament is very clear in its revolutionary promotion of selfless love and even love towards ones enemies. One asks why Christian nations have been so violent since Christ?
I know that Luther despaired at the book when translating, asking why it was a part of the Bible. It’s original audience seems to have consisted of persecuted Christians and consequently its major theme is encouragement derived by keeping destiny in mind. That is, what will happen in the end has already been determined, Jesus will return and defeat evil forever. However, the goal of apocalyptic literature, as numerous scholars have pointed out, is to conceal as much as it is to reveal. Therefore it has been the subject to such speculation that we have quite surely lost its initial meaning. Unlike the claim of many eager preachers of destruction, the plot of Revelation doesn’t unfold in an unbroken line but instead there are frequent diversions as different images are used to expand on the story of good conquering evil. It is allegorical – even if modern society has grown able to produce some of the horrors written down there.
I think you do well to do exactly what you say. It is what we should all be doing if we claim to follow Jesus Christ, since it was what he taught us according to the Gospels.
Why don’t we? It wouldn’t contradict my statement or hurt my feelings, and insofar as ‘moderist theologians’ would embrace that characterization, it would only prove me right.
I’m quite amazed by your position, since I’m sure you can see that the Bible portrays a steady development from pagan idolatry to spiritual maturity, slow but steady. It is a slow realisation of what “God†and what Humankind is, an anthology of human experience with the Holy, the story of a spiritual minority wandering through the religious monuments of times and nations past. This account is pushed on by the fact that “God†is always the totally other, revealing new aspects of being, awakening new insights and taking people down new ways.
It can’t surprise you that nearly two thousand years after Jesus lived, that the message is showing yet more facets of what it means to be made “in the image of Godâ€, giving new enlightenment into what it means to “follow Christ†and being a “new creationâ€? Considering the damage that Christianity has caused in the meanwhile, I can’t stand up for a creed that amounts to, “I believe in the book, the whole book, and nothing but the book!†because I witness too great a history of carnage, and to little blessing and grace. I have no doubt that the human race is to blame, but the kind of God you are talking about would have to accept that he had failed again and slowly come around to the fact that he was to blame for creating a species that was only able to cause large amounts of suffering and only minimal well-being.
Well, Good! Then let’s get out the shovels, the brooms, the mops, and have at it. A 2000 year old house needs a whole bunch of house cleaning. The spirituality is there, the wisdom is there, but the dust and dirt of 2000 years needs to be scraped off so people can see it.
Oh, and don’t forget the paper towels and the Windex…
Do you think the warnings in Revelations aren’t indictative of events to come? If they are not, what do you think is the relevance of that part of the Bible?. Regarding fundamentalist thinking, I believe there are levels to it. I have no problem with people who the whole Bible literally if they don’t invoke violent attitudes for their faith or any other religion for that matter. Speaking for myself with no reflection on other people, I am trying to keep my arrogance level to nil with the Lord’s help. However Revelations is interpreted by anyone else, I believe it is relevant to the New Testament.