I-YOUniverse

Too Small a Boat

jlh — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 21:51:14 +0000

If I define history as the objective scientific recount of exact events, then history is too small a boat for matters of faith.

It’s virtually impossible to know objective scientific fact (so-called). For example, suppose a videographer recorded the assassination of JFK, even that won’t provide an inerrant record of events.

We question whether biblical stories are true because we doubt them. We don’t constantly question the sun; we accept its reality. But our continual debates about whether biblical stories go back to actual events may arise from doubts that such events occurred, in any form.

“Objective scientific history” is a myth of the modern age. The moment something occurs, the reality of it begins to recede into the past. Human finitude places it beyond absolute knowledge.

But we can know with a high degree of certainty that an event occurred, without having total command of “objective scientific data” about it. To say that we cannot know the precise details of the life of Abraham is not to say that it doesn’t matter whether he lived, or is simply a story or legend.

I relate today to Abraham in precisely the same way that I relate to the good Samaritan: through the biblical story. Of course it matters that Abraham lived in ancient Mesopotamia about 3500 years ago, whereas the good Samaritan is a character in one of Jesus’ parables. Nevertheless, as a reader and a believer, I relate to both in the same way, the only way that is available to me.

(Another kettle of fish is the question of whether reality itself is a story in the mind of God.)

Endlessly debating the degree of objective historical veracity in a biblical account is like a dog chasing its tail – it goes on ad nauseum and gets you nowhere.

I don’t want the Bible to be “objective scientific history.” That’s way too small and too leaky a boat to trust eternal truth to.

I’m back!

jlh — Sat, 24 Sep 2011 15:54:21 +0000

I’ve been on hiatus for a couple of months, but now I’m back.

What I’ve been reading in the interim includes: Tony Hillerman, author of great mysteries that feature a Navajo detective; N. T. Wright, author of Simply Christian and Mark for Everyone. Also books about Celtic spirituality by Esther de Waal and others.

Celtic spirituality is very exciting. I’ve begun to recite St. Patrick’s breastplate every morning, the classic 8th century prayer.

Wright describes a powerful metaphor for our age, that is the age we’re just emerging from: the dictator has paved over every spring, every well, every river – in short every source of water. He requires people to drink from authorized pipes only, and puts additives in the water at will. Now, however, water bursts through the concrete; muddy water floods everywhere.

Water represents spirituality. Since the Enlightenment, people in the West have been trained to ignore matters of spirit, except those coming through authorized channels, the mainline churches, which often present a tame version of spirituality. Since the mid-60s, however, people have been seeking for all things spiritual, often without discerning that some are positive and some are not.

Wright’s metaphor is compelling to me. People are hungry and thirsty for spiritual truth, but as the song says, they are “looking for love in all the wrong places.”

Well, it’s good to be back. I promise to write regularly. Please comment to let you know you’re there. Shalom!

Memorial Day

jlh — Mon, 30 May 2011 11:35:43 +0000

We have a three-day weekend. We take a moment to remember with gratitude the sacrifice of countless men and women to give us our freedoms.

Passing time in prison

jlh — Thu, 05 May 2011 18:17:33 +0000

Reading Bonhoeffer’s Letters and Papers from Prison, vol 8 in DB Works/English. I find it too painful to read for long stretches; also, like the psalms, it sinks more deeply into consciousness if you read a little at a time.

You discover the less confident man in letters to his friend and biographer Eberhard Bethge. In these letters he speaks of being unable to catch his breath, reciting hymns and scripture to gain composure; of suicidal thoughts, once; of sexual longings, although this discussion is highly intellectualized; of being tempted to sleep late, rather than rise on schedule, do calisthenics, and write.

Throughout the world there remain prisoners of conscience. I pray for them. I pray for their release. I pray for a better world.

******************************************

The death of Osama bin Ladin. I support the President’s decision to get him, and applaud the courage of the SEALs and others involved.

Bonhoeffer’s idea of “stupidity”

jlh — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 19:28:52 +0000

I’m continue to read Letters and Papers from Prison. I have finally the complete text of “After Ten Years.” Bonhoeffer describes stupidity, as an intentional unwillingness to see through deception, a refusal to seek the wisdom of the Lord. For me this is scary stuff, because I see it going on in the U.S. now. It’s not about IQ; it’s a response to an upsurge of political or religious power. People brush aside facts as inconsequential.

As a veteran of the SBC Church Struggle years ago, I saw this happen a lot. Good people who refused to see, refused to hear—lest they turn and be saved.

The great tragedy is that willful stupidity, intentional blindness/deafness if you will, infects groups of people, and renders them vulnerable to misrule by tyrants.

If scientists are right, and our world is ticking away toward ecological meltdown, then we can expect God to call on us to throw our lives away on behalf of the children of the future, from whom we have borrowed and are squandering the world.

How honest?

jlh — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:22:08 +0000

Finished reading John AT Robinson’s Honest to God, the 1963 bombshell, which I didn’t read in 1963. I was a high school sophomore; I guess it wasn’t required. I didn’t read it in college, either, however. For me college was a time for affirmation, not questioning. Today I find the book not threatening, but more shallow. 143 pages, it tackles three theological heavyweights: Bultmann, Tillich and Bonhoeffer.

Bultmann worked at de-mythologizing the NT, an enterprise reversed by Tolkien and Campbell. Turns out myth is language for truth humans have no language for. Tillich used psychology and philosophy to translate the obscure language of philosophy into an unknown tongue of his own devising. Bonhoeffer’s rather startling terms such as “man come of age” and “religionless Christianity” must be put into the context of his imprisonment and resistance to Nazi Germany and the churches’ failure to oppose effectively.

I found a careful discussion of Robinson by NT Wright online, which was helpful.

Next I’m tackling a first reading of volume 8 in Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works/English, Letters and Papers from Prison.

Reading, reading

jlh — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 18:26:01 +0000

I am plowing through my first read of Sanctorum Communio, (DBWE 1), Bonhoeffer’s first dissertation on the church. Now at p. 250, reading only the text, not the extensive notes, which include material in the original but not published due to cost. Frankly, I have almost no clue what he’s talking about much of the time, although it gets easier in later chapters perhaps because they are less sociologico-philosophico-mind-bending-lich and more theological. The basic idea is that the church-community = the Body of Christ = the communion of saints exists in the world under the Word for others just as Christ was a man-for-others. Bonhoeffer held on to this idea throughout, even though his theology in the prison era expressed in the theological letters April 30, 1944, and on, became secular and this-worldly.

I found a copy of John AT Robinson’s Honest to God (1963), which presented a brash, shocking version of Bonhoeffer’s ideas to the world; in so doing, he served to give push to the need for a careful, wholistic presentation of Bonhoeffer’s writing—which has led to the Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works (German and English).

I’m fascinated by Christians of the WWII period who were in resistance to totalitarian regimes. I’m not totally sure why. I think we have much to learn.

The tyranny of our world is not political or by overt force in many cases (countries like Libya, Burma, Latin American dictatorships, and China being exceptions). Rather, it is social: the understated pressure of advertising, peer groups, and neighborhood associations. It is financial, the burden of maintaining a certain lifestyle at any cost. It is the sneering laughter of the cynical and sophisticated (see C.S. Lewis’s third sci fi novel). It is the silence of a church, numbed by prosperity and approval.

The structures of tyranny are corporate. Injustice is outsourced, made invisible. Decisions made in New York affect West Africa, China, Indonesia.

Thinking wins

jlh — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:00:03 +0000

I’ve gotten out of the habit of writing, so I’ll start again.

Our Neighborhood MeetUP viewed a film on the life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German Lutheran pastor who collaborated with German leaders seeking to kill Hitler. Bonhoeffer wrote extensively about the Christian life, including Discipleship and Life Together, a description of daily life at an illegal seminary in Nazi Germany.

Discipleship is primarily an exposition of the Sermon on the Mount.

Bonhoeffer faced an impossible choice: either the defeat of his nation or the destruction of Christian civilization. He found that traditional ethics could not guide him. Therefore, he threw himself on the mercy of God and did what seemed right to him in the situation where he found himself.

Many Christians who lived in countries under the heel of Nazi Germany faced similar dilemmas. The ten Boom family of Holland also compromised traditional Christian values, such as obeying the laws of the state, always telling the truth, and so one— in order to achieve a higher good, resistance to tyranny and rescue of its victims.

In light of such historical events, a lot of Christian discourse today strikes me as irrelevant. Hundreds of thousands if not millions of persons die of preventable causes. Global warming and other ecological issues call the future of the planet into question. People of all faiths have more in common with each other than with people who share language, nationality, and other factors but lack a common worldview.

It’s time to rethink many of the basics. I’m looking forward to reading Rob Bell’s new book Love Wins. I understand Bell tackles many of these questions.

First impression

jlh — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 17:54:21 +0000

Finished a quick initial reading of Love Wins. Don’t know what all the flap is about. The book is straightforward, well documented with Scripture, and cogently argued. Why would anybody object to that?
For a long time I’ve thought of “heaven” and “hell” as relationships not locales. I’ve clearly seen people who choose to live in heaven or hell, for example, when addicted to destructive substances and people, or when espousing toxic religion.
Perhaps what all the hubbub is about is hubbub. The fundamentalist faction is good at controversy. They’re expert mud slingers, as are others as well.
More about Rob Bell’s excellent book Love Wins later.

What’s the true cross look like?

jlh — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:33:19 +0000

Want to share some handouts from our Neighborhood Bible Meet UP. They have to do with the cross. Bonhoeffer’s Cost of Discipleship, chapter 4 “Discipleship and the Cross.”

[I know everybody doesn't get hung up on gender exclusive language. The basic rule is simple: "man" now refers to males almost exclusively, not to either males or females in a group. If you do get hung up, check out Discipleship, volume 4 in Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works English, part of the complete works set.]

BEING CHRIST’S DISCIPLE

Reading: The Cost of Discipleship, pp. 86-101

“The cross is neither misfortune nor harsh fate….The essence of the cross is not suffering alone; it is suffering and being rejected. Strictly speaking, it is being rejected for the sake of Jesus Christ….

“‘…let them take up their cross…’ From the beginning it lies there ready. They need only take it up. But so that no one presumes to seek out some cross or arbitrarily search for some suffering, Jesus says, they each have their own cross ready, assigned by God and measured to fit. They must all bear the suffering and rejection measured out to each of them. Everyone gets a different amount. God honors some with great suffering and grants them the grace of martyrdom, while others are not tempted beyond their strength. But in every case it is the one cross.” (Discipleship, Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works, vol. 4, pp. 86-87; this is a new translation)

Scriptures Cited

Mark 8.22-38, a second look at Jesus the Messiah
Leviticus 16.8-10,21-22,27; Hebrews 13.12-13, atoning for people’s sins
Galatians 6.2, Bearing one another’s burdens
Matthew 26.39-42, Jesus in Gethsemane (means “the oil press”)
Matthew 11.28-30, “my yoke is easy, my burden is light”
Luke 14.25-27, hating those dearest to you
(“Hate your mother” is an example of exaggeration/hyperbole; also hate vs. love is an idiom of Jesus’ language Aramaic, meaning choose one vs. the other)
John 1.3; 1 Cor 8.6; Heb 1.2, Christ stands as mediator between us and all else
1 John 2.15-17, love not the world (that is, all that opposes itself to God)
but John 3.16 “God so loved the world” (that is, creation)
Genesis 12.1-3, God comes between Abraham and his father; Genesis 22, God comes between Abraham and his son Isaac.
Mark 10.28-31, receiving 100-fold with persecution in this life
Mark 10.32, Jesus’ leading the way to the cross alone
Galatians 2.19-20, I am crucified with Christ.
Hebrews 12.1-2, who for the joy set before him endured the cross

Questions for discussion

What are some phony “crosses” people bear today?
How can you discern between phony crosses and real crosses?
What if you can’t find the genuine cross in your life?
Suppose you’re feeling like you should be a martyr, if you “really” followed Christ. How might the Living Christ respond?