Wednesday, January 27, 2021
Living Spiritual Rhythms - January 27
Monday, January 25, 2021
Reflection for the Week - January 25
Thursday, January 21, 2021
New ebook!
Wednesday, January 20, 2021
Living Spiritual Rhythms - January 20
Monday, January 18, 2021
Reflection for the Week - January 18
Thursday, January 14, 2021
Thursday Thoughts - January 14
Wednesday, January 13, 2021
Living Spiritual Rhythms - January 13
I’d wager that reality is subjectively objective. This configuration appears to correspond to nature and humanity. That is, God, the other, and the world are objectively there, but our access to them is subjective. Yet, subjectivity does not cancel out objectivity, or vice versa. If that’s the case, they are related and distinct at the same time. This ‘tensional’ perspective is important because it helps us avoid absolute confusion between or a complete blurring of self, other, and world.
Monday, January 11, 2021
Reflection for the Week - January 11
Traditional worldview apologetics, as practiced by several notable Christians in the twentieth century, are dead. They simply lack credibility. I’d wager there are several reasons for this, but one of them is basically that our understanding of the world today is no longer the same as it was supposed to be then. While the world remains an informer, the information (neurosciences, genetics, evolution) it now offers challenges, rather than confirms the centrality of apologetics. Let’s move in another direction. Any assumed belief in an Absolute God who is, ought to be replaced by belief in a possible God who gives.
Thursday, January 7, 2021
Thursday Thoughts - January 7
Wednesday, January 6, 2021
Living Spiritual Rhythms - January 6
Monday, January 4, 2021
Reflection for the Week - January 4
The
clarity of the biblical text, some argue, is based on the truth that it is
God’s own communicative action (what God has authored), which gives us light,
not a magisterium or a subjective opinion. What is clear is delivered by the
Spirit speaking in the text. For me, this raises a number of issues, but I’ll
flag just two. I’d wager that it can be extremely difficult to discern Spirit
speech. Any difference between the Spirit speaking text and subjective opinions
– be they by the magisterium or the individual – is not entirely transparent.
Further, when a group of interpreters or even two interpreters come to
different conclusions about the meaning of the same text, making the claim that
‘the Spirit is speaking’ can become a foil for ‘my (our) interpretation is the
“right” one.’ I mentioned recently that the authority of the biblical text and
Divine action are two monumental questions that Christians need to do more work
on. In my opinion, general appeals to the apologetic line that the biblical
text is God’s communication and the Spirit speaking clarifies this transmission
will not get us very far or contribute much to the discussion on authority. A
better direction, at the outset, would be to recognize that the biblical text
is a messy one, tangled up as it is with ancient ways, people, and phenomena.
We should do the best we can with the diversity that’s there, rather than
assuming that it’s all somehow authored by God.