Finding shelter from the vacuous and inconsequential is getting harder and harder to do. The rhythm of the ‘trite’ leaves us exposed to a devaluing of heart, mind, and imagination. Rapid-fire rhetoric connected to an entertainment based church and culture infiltrates our capacity to think. In contrast to this prevailing and woeful meltdown, there is the possibility of a critical adventure. While it’s true that criticism is never an end in and of itself, it is an essential component to chasten naïveté and to promote the virtuous life. Engage, evaluate, embrace―the Infinite One, other, and world. Enter the spooky haven of relationality (the essence of being relational); the space to dwell in oneself as another.
Read More...
Read Less...
In the light of the rising power of science
to explain the world, rethinking our interpretations of Genesis 1-3 is a
crucial enterprise today. If you’re interested in this topic check out our book
From Evolution to Eden. Amazon is
unloading these at 61% off – now only $3.49.
http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Eden-Making-Sense-Genesis/dp/1938367197/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1440154029&sr=8-1&keywords=laughery
Read More...
Read Less...
Primates like us are
imaginative meaning makers and story tellers. I’d wager this is part of our complicated,
yet fabulous niche. We want to explain things and understand ourselves, God,
and the world. Scrambling for answers to significant questions is a complex
multi-faceted event and leads us into an imaginative spark where we make
meaning and recount stories. In this sense, we tend to make a lot up and to
tell some pretty remarkable tales in the quest to discover what’s true
Read More...
Read Less...
Evolutionary ethics properly
argues that there are biological reasons for ethical developments and
orientations in humans. Thus, moral sensitivity appears to be a biological
phenomenon, yet this alone does not explain particular or well defined moral
codes and configurations that have arisen in the human niche, nor does it help
us draw conclusions about right and wrong. So, there’s more. We’re also heavily
embedded in and dependent on context, culture, texts, and tradition, and
through these become interpreters of ourselves. These informers, which offer
some direction, are nevertheless so diverse and porous that we’re left having
to continually work out how to live with others in a shared world.
Read More...
Read Less...
Since we’re at a “defining moment” in the history of
Christianity, I’d wager it’s time for a re-examination of who God is and what
God does. Tread carefully, but tread we must. The biblical writers give an
Ancient Near Eastern or Greco-Roman picture of God, and their limited
understanding of the natural world had a significant influence on their
theologies. We are better informed today about nature, notably evolution, and
this can’t help but cause us to re-view the theologies of those who precede us.
Some of these may be worth holding on to, yet others will have to be let go of.
The days where the Christian faith attempted to stand on the biblical text
alone for its theology are over. It’s now just a matter of how long it will
take for Christians to accept this, consult multiple informers, and refigure
what they believe about God and the world.
Read More...
Read Less...
Science
is fallible and sometimes gets it wrong. Granted. Some theologians use this as
a foil to discount science all together, whenever it goes against their
theology. “Oh yes” they quip, “science is often having to revise its findings,
frequently changing its views, and therefore it’s untrustworthy.” But this is
absurd. There is no reason to entirely discount the stable findings of science,
many of which are not going to change. Furthermore, science is frequently
self-correcting and capable of offering new and better understandings for where
it was in error. Thus, theologians should stop making excuses for not accepting
valuable scientific data concerning human evolution and the cosmos, and
recognize its potential significance for and justified challenge of some of
their theological interpretations regarding who God is and what God does.
Read More...
Read Less...
When
reading about the world, Judaism, and resurrection in the biblical text, we
must proceed with due caution. These topics cannot all be simply put in the
same context because they are thought to be “Revelation,” but they have to be
taken on an informational basis that is relevant to each particular subject.
Genesis 1, for example, is not the same as Genesis 2-3. Exodus is different
than Psalms. Isaiah is not like Proverbs. John is narrative, and Romans a
letter. While this diversity of genres is accepted by most, there’s still some
work to do in configuring how each of the subjects connects to the
“world-views” of the times. Doing so will be one of things that might help us
discern just how much of the biblical writings are to be directly applied to
our own contexts, which remains an open and explosive hermeneutical question
today.
Read More...
Read Less...
