• Home
  • About
  • Podcast Archive
  • Subscribe (RSS)
  • Subscribe (iTunes)
  • Deacons
  • Live Events
  • Advertise With Us

Homebrewed Christianity

Equipping grassroots theologians for creative thinking, engaging, and living.

Living the Questions

You are here: Home / Archives for Christianity

Living Out Faith Loud (Day 15)

March 7, 2013 by Bo Sanders 12 Comments

I’m blogging my way through Neighbors and Wisemen for Lent. Today we read chpt. 15 where the author tells us a story about Dr. John Perkins’ visit to a packed Reed College auditorium.Neighbors & Wisemen

For those of you who don’t have the book, here are some selections from the chapter to get you up to speed.

With his simple Southern accent, he set the stage of racial and economic injustice in America. He began with his childhood and walked the room through the essential and painful drama of the 1960s. He unapologetically insisted that the disparities of race and class remain today.

From there Dr. Perkins moved to his own thoughts on the very real plight of America’s disenfranchised and marginalized communities. He expressed how these populations have been systematically removed from the national consciousness, and affirmed the absolute need for a new generation, one fueled by compassion and a sacrificial life.

Tony was shocked at the amazing reception Dr. Perkins got from a student body that allegedly not only had no interest in Christianity but a real and serious dislike of all things Christian. Then he says:

“Reedies want the same thing that Jesus wants. They want authenticity, not hypocrisy. They want faith that leads to activism, not institutionalism. They want to believe in something not because it is redundantly preached but because it is sacrificially lived.”

Yesterday I mentioned Christianity’s territorial participation in the Culture Wars that developed in the 20th century. Whether you think I was too partisan or pessimistic in my assessment of the situation, what you can not get around is that there is a problem.

We have a problem. 

More specifically, we have a problem with how we frame the cultural conflicts. When we use the militaristic language of “combat” we miss what may be really going on. As I said earlier this week, our language about combat not only  influences how we interpret our experiences, it is actually creating those experiences at some level.

I’m going to say this again: while I do not like drawing lines and attempt to be generously orthodox, it seems to me that there is a kind of christianity that the world is fine to let us hold and actually finds quite intriguing.  Dr. Perkins has that kind of faith. He even gets to use Jesus’ name without folks getting offended or upset.

 

There is however another type of Christianity that is not as well received. This other kind of Christianity, in many ways, is seen to make the world a worse place. I think that I know at least part of why that is the case.

Modern Enlightenment Christianity – an inheritance from Christendom and the Inquisitions – seeks to categorize, compartmentalize, then control the categories. It is forceful, muscular Christianity. Much more like the Romans in power than the type of power we see Jesus utilizing.

Think that I am over stating it? Look at Dr. Perkins. What if it came out that he did not have perfect theology? What if he held some views about social issues that did not meet the litmus test contemporary clashes? Would he be discounted? Marginalized? Attacked and discredited? I don’t think that there is any doubt.

Part of this comes from our categorization of ortho-doxy and ortho-praxy. We live in a climate when the former (right-belief) is far more scrutinized than the latter (right-action). Ortho explanation

The seminary that Tony and I went to tries to correct this by adding another overlapping area called ortho-pathy (right feeling). This is a spiritual formation-discipleship emphasis.

That is a move in the right direction. What I fear is that we have become so ingrained with this rabid obsession with our form of orthodoxy that we not only neglect the other two but would discount someone like Dr. Perkins who’s life speaks so loudly about Jesus that his words do not have to.

Our contemporary spiritual climate is so inflamed with animosity, conscientiousness, adversarial approaches, combative critiques, and dismissive polemics that we become gun-shy about adopting the kind of faith that makes the world a better place and shines a welcome light in dark situations.

If you think that this world is full of spiritual poo and it is only a matter of time before Jesus steps back in with vengeance and flushes this world down the eternal drain … then any good we do now is no more than rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

In that case the only thing that really matters is right belief (orthodoxy) for which we will be judged …

Well, you know the rest. The us-them mentality becomes completely acceptable. The neglect of right-living (orthopraxy) and right-being (orthopathy) becomes justifiable.

I would simply say that Jesus’ story of the sheep and the goats seems to put far more concern on being judged by our right actions than any theological litmus test. So not only does God seemed more concerned about it, but the world what God loves seems more attracted by it. 

I loved this story about John Perkins’ visit to the college. I am inspired at one level and completely discouraged at another.

Is it just me?
Am I overstating the scope of the problem? 

 

  • Share on Facebook.
  • Share on Twitter.
Filed Under: conversations, latest Tagged With: Bible, book, books, Christianity, church, Culture, faith, George Fox, God, jesus, John M. Perkins, judge, justice, orthodoxy, orthopraxy, Portland, race, religion, Seminary, society, Tony Kriz, world

Day 14: Going to College with Christians

March 6, 2013 by Bo Sanders 11 Comments

I have been waiting for us to arrive at Reed College. While I was fascinated with Albania and appreciate the Horse Brass Pub very much, I love Reed. Neighbors & Wisemen

I first learned about Reed through the book Blue Like Jazz which was written by Tony’s friend named named Don – who he mentions in this chapter.

It rocked me. 

One of the reasons it impacted me so much was that I lived in upstate NY at the time and we had a Reed. Our college was called Skidmore and it had much the same reputation in our town.

When I would go to our area’s pastor breakfast, my fellow ministers would make many of the same disparaging remarks about Skidmore that Tony mentions about Reed.

Evangelicals have an odd relationship with colleges like this. Whether it is the free-thinking, the critical scholarship or the permissive lifestyle of many students – these kind of colleges are seen as something between mission fields and combat zones. They represent a threat.

It was through Blue Like Jazz that I figured out that I had inherited a terrible allergy. My heart was wrong. My attitude was wrong. My approach was wrong.

I instantly changed my perspective and we developed a wonderful relationship with many Skidmore students. I’m not sure how much we changed the campus – but I was changed greatly by my relationship to the campus.

 

When I moved to the Pacific NW for seminary, the town that I lived in and pastored in had a Reed. Evergreen State in Olympia Washington played the same role for us that Reed played for the christian community that Tony represented. We were able to connect with an amazing young man who was a student at Evergreen and I would drive out every Sunday morning and most Wednesdays to pick him up for church.

 I’m blogging my way through Neighbors and Wisemen for Lent. If you want to catch up on the previous entries [click here]

I am fascinated with this pattern. What sits behind it, for me, is an awareness of a massive shift in american Christianity in the 20th century. After the Scopes Money Trial in the 1920’s, conservative Christianity lost much favor in the public arena. In the court of public opinion we had won that trial but lost much respect and influence.

The result was that conservative Christianity retreated into its own self-made institutions. You see the rise of Christian colleges, Christian radio, and eventually even Christian bookstores, Christian TV, and other manifestations of products tailored to those who wanted to consume Christian goods.

In an open capitalist market it is easy to see why this happened. The assault from the outside world led some branches of the family to pull back into their safe bubbles and develop an animosity to the outside world.

Eventually we got what came to be known as The Culture Wars. 

If you want to read a fascinating book, look into The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind. Here is a spoiler alert: the Evangelical mind was neglected in lieu of the Culture Wars. We are still suffering for it.

 

So when it comes to these radical College expressions, they are something to be resisted and even combated. I think that we are worse for it. The culture is worse for it. Our scholarship (or lack thereof) suffers because of it.

That is why I am so happy that Tony is taking us onto Reed’s campus.

We have some growing to do. We have some repenting to do. We have some bridges to build and we have some lesson to learn.

Ring the bell – school is about to start!  

 

I’m glad that we are on this journey together.
I would love to hear your experiences of this kind of combative mentality
or your what the culture wars look like in your area. 

 

  • Share on Facebook.
  • Share on Twitter.
Filed Under: conversations, latest Tagged With: Bible, book, books, Christian, Christianity, creation, education, evangelical, evolution, God, jesus, Portland, Reed College, Scopes Monkey, Tony Kriz

Unlikely Allies and Not That Kind of Christian (Day 10)

February 27, 2013 by Bo Sanders 9 Comments

I have had some unlikely allies over the years. I have seen people who are passionately against Christianity and even loudly non-christian be softened and encouraging about the way I live out my faith. Neighbors & Wisemen

It turns out that it has something to do with not being ‘that’ kind of a Christian.

This is a difficult idea for me. I try not to be a judgmental christian – especially about other christians. I don’t like how it sounds when others do it and I don’t like how it makes me feel when I do it. I try to have a generous orthodoxy.

The problem, however, is that there is a type of christianity that makes my uncomfortable and upset. I will go as far as to say that it makes the world a worse place.  Something happened in post-Christendom where the fundamentalist impulse merged with a nationalistic and militaristic brand of Christianity to become some sort of monstrous, warped Frankenstein creature. It is barely recognizable in the pages of the Gospel.

Some people try to distance themselves from it by saying “that is not real Christianity”. I think that is a mistake. In fact, I think that is a major mistake.

The reality is that this is Christianity. I don’t mean following the teaching of Christ or something – I mean that Christianity is product, a brand and an institution at some level. It’s no use saying ‘that is not real Christianity’. It is Christianity. It’s what Christianity has become.

Through a historical drift, many amalgamations, adaptations, adjustments, compromises, syncretism and compromise – these things have produced what we call Christianity.

You can say that Jesus wasn’t a Christian. You would be correct. You can say that this is never what Jesus wanted, and you would be justified. But I believe that what you can not say is that this is not Christianity.

People I don’t like or agree with are still my family. These are my sisters and brothers in Christ. That I can’t change.

What I can have some influence over is what kind of Christian I am. What has been so amazing to me over the years is how supportive, encouraging and intrigued non-christians have been with this kind of christianity.

It is still shocking to me when people who don’t believe what I believe become unlikely allies for me. I am often encouraged by people outside the faith to keep going. They seem to think there is something good in my brand of faith and that the world could actually use more of this kind of christianity.

Now this usually gets me in trouble with the kind of christians who have bought into Constantinian forms of Christendom. They see my unlikely allies’ endorsement as evidence of compromise. Of course they would – that is how that brand of Christianity works after all.

I am convinced, however, that there is a way to be in the world while following Christ that world actually thinks is a good thing and that they would be interested in … if the world didn’t already work the way it does.

 

Have you seen this happen?

Are you comfortable with my drawing lines? 

Do you like my family analogy? 

 

  • Share on Facebook.
  • Share on Twitter.
Filed Under: conversations, latest Tagged With: book, Christian, Christianity, church, generous orthodoxy, God, jesus, Tony Kriz

Why Christians Aren’t Funny

January 22, 2013 by Deacon Jordan 3 Comments

A couple weeks ago, Relevant Magazine (the most relevant of all magazines) published an essay on Christianity’s tenuous relationship with humor titled Why Christians Aren’t Funny. Christian and Jordan consider themselves moderately funny and definitely students of comedy, so they invited the article’s author, Larry Shallenberger, on to discuss the topic of Christians and their weak-ass senses of humor. Larry is a pastor and writer from Eerie, Pennsylvania, and long-time member Burnside Writers Collective. They discuss the cultural implications of not being funny, why Christians aren’t historically linked with comedy (it’s probably because of Northern European roots), and the value of humor in spirituality. Later, Christian and Jordan discuss the Oscar nominations and make a few picks. Then they discuss a local news story in which someone covered up the “ST” on a stop sign with “PO”, and talk to an artist in Boulder who sells poop signs online. Unfortunately, that interview wasn’t entirely recorded. Follow Christian and Jordan on Twitter *** If you enjoy all the Homebrewed Christianity Podcasts then consider sending us a donation via paypal. We got bandwidth to buy & audiological goodness to dispense. We will also get a percentage of your Amazon purchase through this link OR you can send us a few and get us a pint!***

Subscribe on iTunes Here!

Subscribe on iTunes!

Subscribe on iTunes Here!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

  • Share on Facebook.
  • Share on Twitter.
Filed Under: CultureCast, latest Tagged With: Christianity, comedy, Relevant Magazine

Phyllis Tickle on Emergence Christianity

January 19, 2013 by Bo Sanders 1 Comment

Before the big event in Memphis to celebrate Phyllis and her book Emergence Christianity, Tripp got to chat with the first-lady of emergence.  This is Phyllis at her best! cdtickle1

As many of you know there was concern leading up the conference and controversy coming out of it. This interview we recorded before all of it – that conversation is happening over at the blog. 

You can get the book Emergence Christianity at Amazon and help the podcast.

We would love to hear your voice on the SpeakPipe. Go to the HomeBrewed Christianity homepage and click on the little microphone on the right hand side of the page. Leave us an MP3 message that we can use in an upcoming episode – or just let us know what you are thinking.

Remember: Easter comes early this year! Which means that Lent starts on February 13. Bo will be blogging through Tony Kriz’s new book Neighbors and Wisemen throughout Lent.

The Kindle version is only $9.99 .

Come and join the conversation.
*** If you enjoy all the Homebrewed Christianity Podcasts then consider sending us a donation via paypal. We got bandwidth to buy & audiological goodness to dispense. We will also get a percentage of your Amazon purchase through this link OR you can send us a few and get us a pint!***


Subscribe on iTunes Here!

Subscribe on iTunes!

Subscribe on iTunes Here!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

  • Share on Facebook.
  • Share on Twitter.
Filed Under: church history, emergent, features, podcast Tagged With: Bible, book, books, Christianity, church, conference, controversy, emergence, God, history, jesus, Phyllis Tickle, vision, Women

Brian’s Best Book So Far

December 10, 2012 by Bo Sanders 5 Comments

I have read a lot of Brian McLaren books.  Pre-Seminary has was a go to thinker and writer for me.  I use him as a resource now – I hand out his books to lots of people.  In the past year I have led two long-term studies through A New Kind of Christianity and Naked Spirituality at my church. 

I’m almost done with his newest book Why Did Jesus, Moses, the Buddha, and Mohammed Cross the Road?: Christian Identity in a Multi-Faith World  and I am pretty comfortable saying 3 things about the book:

1. It is his best book so far. For a long time I treasured The Secret Message of Jesus. In that book McLaren had collected in one place an amazing set of insights and background information as well as putting forward a proposal for thinking about and interpreting the Gospel texts.

With Everything Must Change Mclaren turned a corner. He began to address contemporary issues that were not just about ministry or Bible issues. His scope changed to global and political matters that mattered. Until now, I have always said that Everything was his best book.

I appreciate the spirituality stuff of Naked and the mega-concepts of New Kind of Christianity. What he does in Why Did Jesus?  is even bigger (and better) than Everything.

Because of who Brian is and what he has done, he has been invited to participate in some gatherings and activities that are now informing his perspective and writing. The voice that he writes Why Did Jesus? with is huge. His examples are significant and conclusions are of consequence.

2. While the title is a great title, it may have been better on a different book. This isn’t really a book that has much do with Mohammed, Buddha or any other historical figure. It is not a book about inter-religious dialogue per se. It is not a work of comparative religion.

Perhaps a better title would have been “Thoughts on being a great kind of Christian in a world where Christianity isn’t the only religion.”  Or even – as Randy Woodley’s bumper sticker says – ‘When Jesus said to love your enemy – he probably meant ‘Don’t Kill Them.’ 

It’s a great book and I get the opening joke. I just hope people aren’t expecting a different  kind of subject matter. It might feel like false advertising.

3. Brian has continued to advance as a researcher, theologian, and thinker. The last two thirds  of the book is a series of constructive proposals about traditional doctrines might be revisited in order to make us more generous as a community while allowing us to be equally as faithful individuals. He covers everything from christology to the doctrine of the trinity – baptism to liturgy – in a masterful way. As an emerging theologian I could not have been more impressed with his project.

My three favorite parts are :

  • When he walks us from Constantine to Columbus. Ouch. 
  • When he talks about humanity being related to God – or how we relate to God. Could not have been more impressed. 
  • How he interacts with the work of Rene Girard without it feeling like ‘Hey I found this really cool new thing that solves all our problems and now it is all I’m going to talk about.’  He works it into the meal without making it the main course. 

I would be interested to hear from you.
Have you read the book? 
What did you think?
How does it compare to McLaren’s other works?

You can also listen to the book on Audio – read by the author! – as you jog, drive or work out.

In case you missed our latest sit-down with Brian from the Wild Goose West Festival last Summer. 

  • Share on Facebook.
  • Share on Twitter.
Filed Under: books, engaging, latest, thinking Tagged With: 9/11, Bible, book, books, Buddha, Christianity, God, history, ideas, jesus, McLaren, Mohammed, Moses, religion

The John 14:6 Challenge Edition!!! [TNT 39]

November 14, 2012 by Tripp Fuller 19 Comments

Over 50 different HBC Deacons have answered the call.  They responded to the John 14:6 Challenge & now Bo and I get to Nerd Out with some of your calls!  It was a ton of fun to interact with you all and we will be looking forward to more interactive fun in the near future.

The release of Brian McLaren’s new book Why Did Jesus, Moses, the Buddha, and Mohammed Cross the Road?: Christian Identity in a Multi-Faith World  and our subsequent live event with him at Wild Goose West (audio here) got the ball rolling.  Then when Brian’s new publisher Jericho Books who hooked us up with some promotional copies we decided to open the mic up to y’all.

Bo has been blogging as we received the calls.  First he proposed an alternative reading to John 14:6 & now he is trying to get rid of Salvation altogether (sarcasm!).

At the conclusion of the podcast Bo started talking Christological smack so soon and very soon I will be leading Bo high up the Christological mountain where the divine Logos & Sophia make sweet eternal symmetry.

This episode is sponsored by Slave Free Earth – they are asking the deacons to join them in ending human trafficking and specifically sex slavery. Go to SlaveFreeEarth.com and join the 7 Community. Pledge to:

  • Pray 7 minutes a week
  • Give 7 dollars a month
  • Challenge 7 people a year to join

Send us the confirmation email of your joining and we will give you a shout out on the podcast – send up a question with that email and we will respond to it on the next TNT podcast.

Donations are tax deductible.
*** If you enjoy all the Homebrewed Christianity Podcasts then consider sending us a donation via paypal. We got bandwidth to buy & audiological goodness to dispense. We will also get a percentage of your Amazon purchase through this link OR you can send us a few and get us a pint!***




Subscribe on iTunes Here!

Subscribe on iTunes!

Subscribe on iTunes Here!

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

  • Share on Facebook.
  • Share on Twitter.
Filed Under: latest, TNT Tagged With: bo sanders, Brian McLaren, Christianity, Emergent, exclusivism, heaven, inclusivism, Islam, John 14:6, Nerd, pluralism, religion, theology, Tripp Fuller

What if John 14:6 isn’t even about Salvation?

November 13, 2012 by Bo Sanders 39 Comments

Over the past two months we have been having a lot of fun talking about John 14:6.  The release of Brian McLaren’s new book Why Did Jesus, Moses, the Buddha, and Mohammed Cross the Road?: Christian Identity in a Multi-Faith World  and our subsequent live event with him at Wild Goose West (audio here) got us started.

Then Jericho Books gave us some copies to give away so we put out the John 14:6 Challenge. People stepped up with posts and used the speakpipe to leave us messages.

I swung first with “Jesus wasn’t talking about Muslims in John 14:6″ and followed it up with “an alternative to John 14:6″ saying that one that famous passage is off the table for thinking about how to deal with other religions … where does one start? What are the alternatives?

Last week, Tripp and I recorded a TNT that will come out this afternoon where we listen to some of the calls and talk about some of the posts…  in that midst of that conversation, (beginning in minute 15)  we put out an idea that I thought should be in written form and not just audio.  Here it goes:

Not only is John 14:6 not about other religions – since it is a disciple’s invitation – but it is not even about salvation. It is about relationship and not salvation.

I blame it on lazy reading that results in conflating subjects. I think that Jesus is inviting those who follow him to relate to ‘the Father’ (Abba) as he relates to Abba by:

  • living the life he laid out,
  • walking the way he modeled and
  • embodying the truth we proclaim.

Tripp implies that is has something to do with Calvinism and it’s histroical impact of making salvation:
A) transactional instead of relational
B) individual instead of communal

So I want to ask the question (you may want to listen to the TNT episode to hear the whole context):

What if John 14:6 is not only not about other religions – but isn’t even about salvation? How would that impact your use of that passage and where else would you turn in the Bible for an alternative?

Personally, I would go to Acts 4:12 “God has given no other name under heaven by which we must be saved.”  Mainly because it has the word ‘saved’ in it AND sounds semi-exclusive … which is what people TRY to get John 14:6 to be – but simply isn’t.   That is the conflation that I am talking about.

Thoughts?  Responses?   

  • Share on Facebook.
  • Share on Twitter.
Filed Under: bible stuff, books, church history, engaging, latest, thinking Tagged With: Brian McLaren, Christianity, Emergent, exclusivism, heaven, inclusivism, Islam, John 14:6, pluralism, religion

Jesus wasn’t talking about Muslims in John 14:6

September 27, 2012 by Bo Sanders 38 Comments

I love John 14:6. I take so much encouragement from it and it challenges me deeply.

I love John 14:6 but I do not like what many today are doing with it: hiding behind it as a catch-all explanation for other religions.

Jericho Books has given Homebrewed a bunch of Brian McLaren’s new book to give away. We put out the John 14:6 Challenge and many people have responded with posts and voicemails (through the speakpipe microphone on the right hand side of the homepage). Later today we will be recording a TNT that includes this challenge.

Here is what I love about the passage and the three things I don’t like that people do with the passage:

What I love - this is a disciples invitation. It happens within a story, it is in dialogue that Jesus’ famous sentence “I am the way, the truth, and the life”. It comes in response to a very specific question. Here is the thing – the question is not “What about other religions?” The question was a disciples’ question about following.

Three things people do that scare me - My first concern is that people only quote John 14:6 and not John 14:1-5 or even 14:7. They have ripped this one sentence out of its narrative context and acted like it emerged in a vacuum. This is never a good sign. In fact, the only way this famous sentence of Jesus works as an answer to the question ‘What about other religions?’ is if you isolate it from the rest of the story and place it in a vacuum.

The second concern is that our inherited (non-Hebrew) concern with substance and our language’s (non-Hebrew) lack of relational emphasis really handicaps us when reading the scriptures. I have to explain to people all the time that when Jesus calls God ‘Father’ he is speaking relationally – he related to God as one relates to one’s pappa (or abba). He is not saying that god IS ontologically a Father. Language about God is not univocal, it is equivocal. Or, if you prefer, as Nancey Murphy points out, language is not representative of God, it is expressive. Language does not represent God is a 1:1 ratio – it is merely expressive of some aspect or nature of God.

The third concern is that in John 14:6 Jesus could not possibly have been talking about Muslims. He had never met a Muslim (as Islam didn’t exist yet) and therefore could not have been talking about them. In fact, once one comes to terms with this reality, one has to question whether Jesus would have even know about Buddhists or Hindus either. No, Jesus had probably never encountered them and certainly wasn’t referring to other religions in John 14:6.

(Unless of course you are retroactively ascribing attributes … at which point you are going to have to explain why you chose this one over other preferable ones.)

This sentence was uttered:

  • in conversation with his disciples
  • in response to a very specific question
  • as an invitation to his disciples
  • to relate to God as he related to God

Where the problem seems to lie: When people miss the relational language (come to the Father as related to God), remove the sentence from its narrative context (as if it emerged in a vacuum) and assume that Jesus was referring to things he couldn’t possibly have known about … then irony sets in.

The ironic thing is that quoting John 14:6 as a stand alone explanation – without receiving it as a disciples invitation – one may actually be doing the exact opposite with that passage as Jesus was asking one to do: follow his way.

Having said all of that: Maybe Prophet Isa was talking about Muslims in John 14:6. Maybe he was saying that if they want to relate to God as he did – that they could only do so by walking his way and following his life.  In fact,  if you take away the univocal  calling God Father (ontologically) and see it as expressive (or equivocal) of relating to God as one relates to a loving father … you would remove the biggest obstacle Islam has to Jesus – namely that the Quran tells Muslims not to say that ‘God has children’.

You may think that I am out in left field here – but until we:

  1. stop quoting John 14:6 in a vacuum
  2. stop thinking that Jesus was talking about other religions
  3. stop thinking that Jesus’ Father language is univocal (instead of relational)

We won’t even be able to have the conversation and explore the possibility.

 

  • Share on Facebook.
  • Share on Twitter.
Filed Under: engaging, latest, thinking Tagged With: Bible, book, books, Buddha, Christianity, church, Father, God, Hebrew, image, Islam, jesus, Jewish, John 14:6, Language, McLaren, Moses, Nancey Murphy, Prophet Isa, Quran, religion, univocal

Stop Comparing Religions

August 14, 2012 by Bo Sanders 25 Comments

I had the chance to teach adult Sunday School this past weekend as we worked our way through Brian McLaren’s A New Kind of Christianity. We are up to Question 9 “the Pluralism Question”. I had looked forward to this all Summer.

Now unfortunately I did not have the time to cover some classics on the subject like:

  • Variety of Religions Experience by William James
  • The World’s Religions by Huston Smith
  • The History of God by Karen Armstrong

What I was able to do is to build on the thought of folks like  John Hick. In his famous works ,such as An Interpretation of Religions, Hick provides tour-de-force in the realm of comparative religion. He is not, however, simply reporting on religions – he is putting forward a theory about religions.

Many of Hick’s fans and critics alike end up saying the same two things when talking about him. The first is about the analogy of the mountain.  The metaphor about many paths leading up the same mountain is a pluralistic classic. The second is about the blind men and the elephant. This is of course based on a Kantian dualism between the numenal and the phenomenological.

Religions are like blind men, each with their hand on a different part of the elephant and thus describing different aspects of the same reality. One has the trunk, one the ear and one the leg. They each talk as if they have grasped the whole but in reality, they have not. Though it may appear as if they are talking about very different things (a Christian from a Muslim or Hindu) they are actually all touching the same entity.

Then there a critics of Hick.  Both Mark Heim in Salvations and Stephen Prothero in God Is Not One are post-Hickian.

Critics of Hick seem to have two main critiques (I am being very general here):

The first is that analogy of ‘paths up the mountain’ is flawed. Religions are like different paths up different mountains. The mountains may all be in a range together – in that they have some similarities and are in proximity to each other – but essentially they are not all leading to the same place. Being a good Hindu, which may have some ethic overlap with say the Christian sermon on the mount, is still not the ultimately after the same thing. Religions do not all lead to the same place and so just walking on road for long enough does not guarantee arriving at the same destination.

The second concern is about the Kantian blind men and elephant. When one takes on this enlightened view, one is placed in an elevated position above the religious traditions. They think that have a grasp on the whole but in reality it is only a part (ear, trunk, leg). The Katian-Hickian at that point is in the real seat of truth. The question then, is why would anyone ever participate in any particular religion?  Why even be a Christian – for example – and only grasp the part? Why not be a generic ‘God-ian’ and recognize the whole? In this way, studying religion is a way to not actually participate in any actual religion! Ironic isn’t it?

 Here was my main point on Sunday: the problem is comparative religion itself. The very discipline that we end up being unsatisfied with contains within it (from the very beginning) the inherent problem that we end up being frustrated with.

The problem is this – comparative religion is a product of a Western approach (with its intrinsic dualism) that first imports and them imposes it categorization upon other traditions and then looks within that compartmentalization for points of similarity and contrast. This will never work.

What I ended up doing was pointing folks toward an innovative concept called ‘Comparative Theology: deep learning across religions borders’ developed by Clooney in the book “Comparative Theology”.

His point is that each tradition tells its own story – in its own words. The art then is not in compartmentalization but in humble listening. Each learning to hear each tradition-religion bring forward its own stories, teachings, practices and values we remove ourselves from being ‘over’ the religion as a judge/reporter and humbly place ourselves at the feet as a learner/listener or at the table as friend/partner.

 I love Clooney’s approach. I find the epistemology and posture refreshing. I also think that in the inter-connected, trans-national, multi-religious 21st century it is going to be ever more critical to distance our selves from approaches of centuries past.

I have written before that I don’t want to apologize for being a Christian (I truly love it) but the time for apologetics is passing into the night of history. It’s a new day and a new approach is needed for the plurality and multiplicity that we increasingly live in. Many conservative christians hide behind exclusivism to guard against the threat of relativism.  What I love about Clooney’s approach is that they are not asked to give up their internal belief as christians but are challenged to adjust their external posture toward those of other traditions.

 

  • Share on Facebook.
  • Share on Twitter.
Filed Under: engaging, latest, thinking Tagged With: Bible, book, books, Christianity, church, Clooney, comparative, God, God is not one, Hick, Hindu, history, Islam, jesus, Jewish, Knitter, Muslim, pluralism, Prothero, relativism, religion, Sikh
«Older Posts

Search

Subscribe via iTunes

 


Support the brew

Return to top of page

Copyright © 2013 ·Delicious Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in