My lovely daughter's Christmas gift to our family was an outing to see A Christmas Carol, the theatrical adaptation of the classic novella by Charles Dickens.
I am not sure I have ever seen it before.
The story brings together many substantial themes: economic inequality, the plight of poor children, joy, judgement, love of money, the meaning of Christmas, altruism, and redemption.
The Bible story it most reminded me was the story of Lazarus and the rich man that Jesus told.
Christmas is about Emmanuel: God with us. Jesus is God's great and generous gift to humanity. He reveals who God is and offers us free redemption. This generosity should inspire us to be generous, particularly to those less privileged than us.
Friday, December 21, 2018
Wednesday, December 19, 2018
The scandal of the evangelical mind
This is the title of an influential book, written in the context of the USA. Recently, I gave a talk with this title, based on Philippians 2:1-13. My argument is that although the book is important and has valid points there is actually a much bigger scandal.
Saturday, December 1, 2018
Institutions, virtue, secularism, and human flourishing
A week ago I attended a fascinating meeting, on “Science, Philosophy, Religion and Human Flourishing” in Cyprus. It brought together about thirty scientists, philosophers, diplomats, people with a range of religious convictions and none.
The sessions were structured as follows. First, three or four speakers gave 7.5-minute talks around a common theme or issue. The talks were meant to stimulate discussion. Then we broke out into small groups of about six people for about 30 minutes of discussion, and then all the participants came together for group discussion. I will post later about some of the things I was challenged on.
Here are the slides for my 7.5-minute talk, ``The role of institutions in human flourishing: challenges and potential''. I was pleasantly surprised at how a range of people said the talk was helpful and stimulating.
The sessions were structured as follows. First, three or four speakers gave 7.5-minute talks around a common theme or issue. The talks were meant to stimulate discussion. Then we broke out into small groups of about six people for about 30 minutes of discussion, and then all the participants came together for group discussion. I will post later about some of the things I was challenged on.
Here are the slides for my 7.5-minute talk, ``The role of institutions in human flourishing: challenges and potential''. I was pleasantly surprised at how a range of people said the talk was helpful and stimulating.
Sunday, November 11, 2018
What is a lie?
Some friends recently asked me ``What does the Bible say about lying?" A quick survey of the whole Bible showed how the issue of lies and lying goes far beyond "telling fibs".
Furthermore, I feel that hypothetical questions such as "If a Nazi soldier came to your door and asked if you were hiding Jews in your basement, would you lie?" derail the discussion.
Lies are in contrast to truth and faithfulness, qualities that are integral to the character of God and Jesus. Here are my notes.
Furthermore, I feel that hypothetical questions such as "If a Nazi soldier came to your door and asked if you were hiding Jews in your basement, would you lie?" derail the discussion.
Lies are in contrast to truth and faithfulness, qualities that are integral to the character of God and Jesus. Here are my notes.
Wednesday, November 7, 2018
What is "double listening"?
This phrase was coined by John Stott in a book, The Contemporary Christian: An urgent plea for double listening, published in 1992.
Double listening concerns Christians listening to what the Bible says while also listening to what the world says. The world is interpreted, affirmed, and critiqued in terms of what the Bible says, while the Bible is interpreted in light of what learns from the world. Everyone does this, whether or not they acknowledge it. However, the challenge is to do it consciously, intentionally, humbly, diligently, creatively, consistently, and constructively.
The idea is helpfully reviewed by Alister McGrath in this lecture.
Here is some of the key text from the Contemporary Christian (p. 27-9).
Double listening concerns Christians listening to what the Bible says while also listening to what the world says. The world is interpreted, affirmed, and critiqued in terms of what the Bible says, while the Bible is interpreted in light of what learns from the world. Everyone does this, whether or not they acknowledge it. However, the challenge is to do it consciously, intentionally, humbly, diligently, creatively, consistently, and constructively.
The idea is helpfully reviewed by Alister McGrath in this lecture.
Here is some of the key text from the Contemporary Christian (p. 27-9).
How, then, can we be both conservative and radical simultaneously, conservative in guarding God’s revelation and radical in our thoroughgoing application of it? How can we develop a Christian mind, which is both shaped by the truths of historic, biblical Christianity, and acquainted with the realities of the contemporary world? How can we relate the Word to the world, understanding the world in the light of the Word, and even understanding the Word in the light of the world? We have to begin with a double refusal. We refuse to become either so absorbed in the Word, that we escape into it and fail to let it confront the world, or so absorbed in the world, that we conform to it and fail to subject it to the judgement of the Word. Escapism and conformity are opposite mistakes, but neither is a Christian option.
In place of this double refusal we are called to double listening, listening both to the Word and to the world. It is a truism to say that we have to listen to the Word of God, except perhaps that we need to listen to him more expectantly and humbly, ready for him to confront us with a disturbing, uninvited word. It is less welcome to be told that we must also listen to the world. For the voices of our contemporaries may take the form of shrill and strident protest. They are now querulous, now appealing, now aggressive in tone. There are also the anguished cries of those who are suffering, and the pain, doubt, anger, alienation and even despair of those who are estranged from God. I am not suggesting that we should listen to God and to our fellow human beings in the same way or with the same degree of deference. We listen to the Word with humble reverence, anxious to understand it, and resolved to believe and obey what we come to understand. We listen to the world with critical alertness, anxious to understand it too, and resolved not necessarily to believe and obey it, but to sympathise with it and to seek grace to discover how the gospel relates to it. . . .
‘Double listening’, however, contains no element of self-contradiction. It is the faculty of listening to two voices at the same time, the voice of God through Scripture and the voices of men and women around us. These voices will often contradict one another, but our purpose in listening to them both is to discover how they relate to each other. Double listening is indispensable to Christian discipleship and Christian mission.Two other books by John Stott that McGrath mentions are Issues Facing Christians Today and Christian Mission in the Modern World.
Sunday, November 4, 2018
Looking forward to the party
Thursday, November 1, 2018
Politics, farming, science, and culture
On a flight, I enjoyed watching the feel-good Bollywood movie Basmati Blues. On the serious side
it looks at a significant modern problem: wealthy multi-national corporations use scientific research to develop technologies that the companies market (in deceptive manners) in the Majority World and disregard the culture and needs of local communities. The fictional story reminded me of real controversies involving Monsanto and Nestle.
Unfortunately, the movie does fit the white saviour trope.
it looks at a significant modern problem: wealthy multi-national corporations use scientific research to develop technologies that the companies market (in deceptive manners) in the Majority World and disregard the culture and needs of local communities. The fictional story reminded me of real controversies involving Monsanto and Nestle.
Unfortunately, the movie does fit the white saviour trope.
Tuesday, October 30, 2018
An excellent book on Christian apologetics
Apologetics concerns discussing intellectual questions or objections that people, both non-Christian and Christian, have about Christianity. The field has a long history, and there are a plethora of books, particularly from the USA on the subject. From my perspective, the books vary significantly in quality and some have quite narrow perspectives or offer simplistic answers and strategies.
The introductory book that I highly recommend is Mere Apologetics by Alister McGrath. He presents quite a balanced approach with regard to different apologetic methods. He also has an emphasis on the audience and tailoring approaches, methods, and arguments to them, particularly when the audience is postmodern. Following C.S. Lewis, McGrath highlights the value of appealing to the imagination and emotions, not just the intellect. Because of this audience sensitivity, the book is relevant and useful in non-Western contexts, unlike many Western books. This is the view of some of my non-Western friends who also say it is particularly accessible and clear as an introductory book.
I quite like this lecture McGrath gave where he discusses the importance of C.S. Lewis for apologetics.
The introductory book that I highly recommend is Mere Apologetics by Alister McGrath. He presents quite a balanced approach with regard to different apologetic methods. He also has an emphasis on the audience and tailoring approaches, methods, and arguments to them, particularly when the audience is postmodern. Following C.S. Lewis, McGrath highlights the value of appealing to the imagination and emotions, not just the intellect. Because of this audience sensitivity, the book is relevant and useful in non-Western contexts, unlike many Western books. This is the view of some of my non-Western friends who also say it is particularly accessible and clear as an introductory book.
I quite like this lecture McGrath gave where he discusses the importance of C.S. Lewis for apologetics.
Sunday, October 28, 2018
Government regulation can be important for free markets
Free markets can be a wonderful thing, creating prosperity and a better life for many. Consequently, there are some who oppose any sort of government regulation of business. However, if you visit a country where there is no such regulation (or laws are not enforced) one inevitably sees corruption, monopolies, exploitation of workers, pollution, and environmental destruction.
The grand challenge is to find a balance.
In this TED talk, MargretheVestager, makes a compelling case for why regulation, particularly of large corporations is important. Part of the issue is that many of these companies are actually not committed to free markets but rather to protecting their market share.
I found it interesting that she started with a Biblical view of human nature, referring to Genesis, and also emphasised values such as trust and community.
The grand challenge is to find a balance.
In this TED talk, MargretheVestager, makes a compelling case for why regulation, particularly of large corporations is important. Part of the issue is that many of these companies are actually not committed to free markets but rather to protecting their market share.
I found it interesting that she started with a Biblical view of human nature, referring to Genesis, and also emphasised values such as trust and community.
Tuesday, September 18, 2018
Dirty political tricks
On a recent flight I watched the movie Our Brand is Crisis. It chronicles the inward and outward battles of a burned out American political consultant who is drawn into a presidential election campaign in Bolivia. It is inspired by a documentary of the same name about the real election in 2002. On the one hand the dirty tricks, cynicism, and immorality are depressing. On the other hand, I fear it is pretty close to the truth.
Saturday, September 8, 2018
Science and theology resources in French
Next weekend I am part of an IFES meeting in Francophone Africa where Christian academics will be discussing the relationship between science and theology. I have been tracking down useful resources in French. Here are some of them.
Science et Foi (is like a French version of Biologos, covering similar topics, includes videos and blog articles.
Réseau des scientifiques évangéliques (like a French version of Christians in Science in the UK)
Faraday Papers have been been translated into French.
Test of Faith video (dubbed in French)
Benno van den Toren and Klaas Borm recently completed a relevant research project.
Two of the papers they have produced are
A Contribution to the debate on science and faith by Christian students from Abidjan
On the Value of Action and Participatory Research for Intercultural Theology: Reflections in the Light of a Research Project on “Science and Religion in French-Speaking Africa
Here are the slides (in French) for two talks I have given previously in France.
Un scientifique porte un regard sur la Bible
La science nous libère-t-elle de la religion?
[This one may be of less interest to people outside of France as it engages with The Pantheon, Victor Hugo, and Les Miserables].
I welcome other recommendations.
Science et Foi (is like a French version of Biologos, covering similar topics, includes videos and blog articles.
Réseau des scientifiques évangéliques (like a French version of Christians in Science in the UK)
Faraday Papers have been been translated into French.
Test of Faith video (dubbed in French)
Benno van den Toren and Klaas Borm recently completed a relevant research project.
Two of the papers they have produced are
A Contribution to the debate on science and faith by Christian students from Abidjan
On the Value of Action and Participatory Research for Intercultural Theology: Reflections in the Light of a Research Project on “Science and Religion in French-Speaking Africa
Here are the slides (in French) for two talks I have given previously in France.
Un scientifique porte un regard sur la Bible
La science nous libère-t-elle de la religion?
[This one may be of less interest to people outside of France as it engages with The Pantheon, Victor Hugo, and Les Miserables].
I welcome other recommendations.
Monday, September 3, 2018
When and why do institutions fail?
Living in stable and prosperous Western countries for decades I took institutions (governments, courts, banks, businesses, universities, churches, charities) for granted. However, over the past decade, I have spent more time in the Majority world, where many institutions struggle to be effective because of corruption or lack of resources. Unfortunately, in the West now many institutions are under siege, starting to fall apart, or doing significant damage. Thus, I have gained a new appreciation for just important institutions are for human flourishing. In November, I have been asked to give a talk to stimulate a discussion about this issue. Hence, I am thinking about the issue more. An article I found helpful and stimulating is this book review by Andy Crouch.
A question I have been thinking about is,
When and why do institutions fail to promote human flourishing?
I believe there are two primary reasons. Often they become intertwined. Both are associated with an inward focus rather than an outward focus.
People within the institution use (abuse) it for their own personal gain (money, power, sex).
Preserving the institution becomes a primary goal in decision making.
Australia has recently seen powerful and painful examples of both reasons.
The first example was documented in the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation_and Financial Services Industry
Banks created perverse incentive schemes that employees used to enrich themselves at the expense of customers.
The second was documented in the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. Churches (of many different denominations) covered up abuse for decades in order to protect the "reputation" of the institution.
Most institutions are started by people who have a vision of contributing to the ``common good, '' whether it is providing a needed service, protecting the innocent, or providing a worthwhile product. However, the problems often begin in later generations when members of the institution are not so passionate or committed to that vision, and have more self-centred goals. Unfortunately, this is transition reflects some common features in the growth and evolution of large organisations.
A question I have been thinking about is,
When and why do institutions fail to promote human flourishing?
I believe there are two primary reasons. Often they become intertwined. Both are associated with an inward focus rather than an outward focus.
People within the institution use (abuse) it for their own personal gain (money, power, sex).
Preserving the institution becomes a primary goal in decision making.
Australia has recently seen powerful and painful examples of both reasons.
The first example was documented in the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation_and Financial Services Industry
Banks created perverse incentive schemes that employees used to enrich themselves at the expense of customers.
The second was documented in the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. Churches (of many different denominations) covered up abuse for decades in order to protect the "reputation" of the institution.
Most institutions are started by people who have a vision of contributing to the ``common good, '' whether it is providing a needed service, protecting the innocent, or providing a worthwhile product. However, the problems often begin in later generations when members of the institution are not so passionate or committed to that vision, and have more self-centred goals. Unfortunately, this is transition reflects some common features in the growth and evolution of large organisations.
Saturday, September 1, 2018
Praise the Creator and Redeemer
Last month my wife and I visited First Presbyterian Church in Evanston, Illinois (North of Chicago). I attended there for 18 months in the late 80's when I was visiting Northwestern University while finishing my Ph.D. During this time I met my lovely wife. It was a trip down memory lane. At church we sang this song which I really liked.
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
Five key ideas about technological change
These are taken from a 1998 talk by Neil Postman, and recently featured in a recent Washington Post column, Is the Internet Evil?, by Christine Emba.
1. All technological change is a trade-off.
2. The advantages and disadvantages of a new technology are never distributed evenly.
3. Embedded in every technology is a philosophy.
4. Technological change is not additive; it is ecological.
5. When a technology becomes mythic, it is always dangerous because it is then accepted as it is, and is therefore not easily susceptible to modification or control.
Thursday, August 23, 2018
What is arrogance?
The Bible talks a lot about pride, arrogance, and humility.
The Psalms lament the arrogance of the wicked.
The prophet Samuel warns King Saul (1 Samuel 15:23)
For rebellion is like the sin of divination, and arrogance like the evil of idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, he has rejected you as king.
What is arrogance?
It is an attitude that affects how we relate to ourselves, to others, and to God.
Arrogance about myself says, ``My opinions, achievements, and behaviour are better than others.'' It is blind to our own limitations and failings.
Arrogance towards others says, ``I know you. I understand you. I know what you need. I have the solution. Join my program.''
``I understand this situation. Let me explain it to you.''
Theological arrogance says,
``I know the Bible. I understand this passage. I know what it means.''
`` My theology is right. Yours is wrong.''
Arrogance towards God says,
``I don't need you, God. I can save myself. I can function fine in life without you.''
``You really should act this way and not this way.''
Arrogance is the opposite of humility. But humility, does not preclude seeing our own value or having strong convictions about what is true and what is false.
Jesus embodied humility. His teaching illuminates it.
The Psalms lament the arrogance of the wicked.
The prophet Samuel warns King Saul (1 Samuel 15:23)
For rebellion is like the sin of divination, and arrogance like the evil of idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, he has rejected you as king.
What is arrogance?
It is an attitude that affects how we relate to ourselves, to others, and to God.
Arrogance about myself says, ``My opinions, achievements, and behaviour are better than others.'' It is blind to our own limitations and failings.
Arrogance towards others says, ``I know you. I understand you. I know what you need. I have the solution. Join my program.''
``I understand this situation. Let me explain it to you.''
Theological arrogance says,
``I know the Bible. I understand this passage. I know what it means.''
`` My theology is right. Yours is wrong.''
Arrogance towards God says,
``I don't need you, God. I can save myself. I can function fine in life without you.''
``You really should act this way and not this way.''
Arrogance is the opposite of humility. But humility, does not preclude seeing our own value or having strong convictions about what is true and what is false.
Jesus embodied humility. His teaching illuminates it.
Wednesday, August 15, 2018
Pele and the beautiful game
On a recent flight I enjoyed watching the movie Pele: Birth of a Legend. It does many things well: pays tribute to the greatest footballer of all time, chronicles his life as a child in poverty, shows the role of Ginga (a unique creative style of play) in Brazilian history and identity, highlights issues of racism and social class, shows the value and influence of families, illustrates the passion of football, ...
It is a beautiful game!
I think some of the negative reviews are too harsh. Albeit, my view of movies is certainly coloured if I watch them on a long flight, when I am somewhat bored and half brain dead.
It is a beautiful game!
I think some of the negative reviews are too harsh. Albeit, my view of movies is certainly coloured if I watch them on a long flight, when I am somewhat bored and half brain dead.
Tuesday, August 14, 2018
Who is a criminal?
I got addicted to watching the Spanish TV Series, The Money Heist, on Netflix. It concerns a group who enter the Spanish mint, blockade it, and print money for themselves.
My favourite scene is the below.
A colleague recently introduced me to the idea of legalised corruption. This is where people working in institutions do not explicitly break any laws but use their position to "rob" it. For example, bankers or university presidents who pay themselves ridiculous salaries. It is nicely captured here.
My favourite scene is the below.
A colleague recently introduced me to the idea of legalised corruption. This is where people working in institutions do not explicitly break any laws but use their position to "rob" it. For example, bankers or university presidents who pay themselves ridiculous salaries. It is nicely captured here.
Thursday, August 9, 2018
What about human free will?
I was recently asked what I think about free will. Does it exist?
What is my perspective as a Christian? as a physicist?
My immediate answer is: I don't know!
These are awfully hard and subtle questions which some very smart people have thought deeply about over the centuries.
From a physics point of view there are the problems associated with Laplace's demon. But that is classical, whereas the world is quantum (which makes it even more mysterious and controversial). Physicists can't even agree whether quantum theory is deterministic or not!
Furthermore, emergence complicates things and gives richer possibilities, particularly when we come to biology.
The mind-body problem encompasses many issues. I would say free will is part of a cognitive package including consciousness, conscience, moral compass, human identity, intuition, emotions, sense of purpose, and a sense of past, present and future. How these functions "emerge" from the physical brain or it what sense they "exist", involves a lot of rich (and controversial) biology and philosophy.
From a Christian point of view, one has to wrestle with the paradox of the relationship between human free will, God's sovereignty, and pre-destination (election). Humans comprise "heart, mind, body, and soul". I take this not as a taxonomy of separate entities but rather a description of our complexity and the many facets to our nature and existence. I really don't know quite how to relate them but want to embrace them all and live with the tension.
However, in the end, I don't know.
I live by faith: essentially I live as if I do have freedom to make choices, choices for good or for evil, that I am accountable to God and to others for my choices, and that in all my human confusion and fraility, I do want to choose good!
What is my perspective as a Christian? as a physicist?
My immediate answer is: I don't know!
These are awfully hard and subtle questions which some very smart people have thought deeply about over the centuries.
From a physics point of view there are the problems associated with Laplace's demon. But that is classical, whereas the world is quantum (which makes it even more mysterious and controversial). Physicists can't even agree whether quantum theory is deterministic or not!
Furthermore, emergence complicates things and gives richer possibilities, particularly when we come to biology.
The mind-body problem encompasses many issues. I would say free will is part of a cognitive package including consciousness, conscience, moral compass, human identity, intuition, emotions, sense of purpose, and a sense of past, present and future. How these functions "emerge" from the physical brain or it what sense they "exist", involves a lot of rich (and controversial) biology and philosophy.
From a Christian point of view, one has to wrestle with the paradox of the relationship between human free will, God's sovereignty, and pre-destination (election). Humans comprise "heart, mind, body, and soul". I take this not as a taxonomy of separate entities but rather a description of our complexity and the many facets to our nature and existence. I really don't know quite how to relate them but want to embrace them all and live with the tension.
However, in the end, I don't know.
I live by faith: essentially I live as if I do have freedom to make choices, choices for good or for evil, that I am accountable to God and to others for my choices, and that in all my human confusion and fraility, I do want to choose good!
Jesus and money
Jesus talked about money an awful lot. Indeed, he talked about it much more than about sex! He used money in illustrations, especially in parables. Jesus used money to teach about the Kingdom of God, about faith, trust, stewardship, authority, judgement, and repentance. But, Jesus was also crystal clear how the love of money (and what it represents) was in conflict with the Kingdom of God.
However, he was not totally negative about money, illustrating how it could be used to bless others and to be used for the good of the Kingdom.
I find it striking that in Jesus time almost anyone was a "daily wage worker". There were no annual salaries, no stock market, no insurance, no retirement funds, or government programs that give money to the poor, unemployed, disabled, widowed, or sick. Every family was just one setback (a major illness, a theft, an accident, or death) away from poverty. There were very few rich people. Furthermore, there were very few people who would have had assets and financial security comparable to the upper middle class in the West today. Jesus teaching about money (and its dangers and potential for good) should be a very sober warning to most Christians in the West, especially to me!
However, he was not totally negative about money, illustrating how it could be used to bless others and to be used for the good of the Kingdom.
I find it striking that in Jesus time almost anyone was a "daily wage worker". There were no annual salaries, no stock market, no insurance, no retirement funds, or government programs that give money to the poor, unemployed, disabled, widowed, or sick. Every family was just one setback (a major illness, a theft, an accident, or death) away from poverty. There were very few rich people. Furthermore, there were very few people who would have had assets and financial security comparable to the upper middle class in the West today. Jesus teaching about money (and its dangers and potential for good) should be a very sober warning to most Christians in the West, especially to me!
Monday, June 25, 2018
The not so dark ages
I learnt a lot from the chapter in Historical Theology, Middle Ages and the Rennasiance (700-1500 AD).
Here is the video introduction from the corresponding chapter in Christian Theology: An introduction.
The first value of the chapter is it highlights how this period was not the "dark ages".
Nor was this period dominated by arcane arguments about questions such as “How many angels can dance on a pin head?” This was actually an intellectually rich time that set the stage for the Reformation.
Under Charlemagne, cathedrals and monasteries became centres of teaching and learning.
The first universities were founded by the church, with a focus on theology and philosophy.
Scholasticism, or “the cathedral of the mind” flourished during 1200-1500, with an emphasis on the “rational justification of religious belief and the systematic presentation of those beliefs”. McGrath says scholasticism “does not refer to a specific system of beliefs, but to a particular way of doing and organising theology.”
Key figures were Erasmus, Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus, and William of Ockham.
The Renaissance occurred in the fourteenth and fifteenth century Italy.
Theological writers tended to ignore the scholastics and focus more on the text of scripture and patristics.
Humanism was concerned with ad fontes (“back to the sources”). This largely meant the New Testament in the original language, Greek.
This humanism is quite different from the secular humanism of today.
Byzantine writers tended to understand salvation in terms of deification, rather than western legal or relational categories, that were emphasized in the Reformation.
This period saw the beginning of apologetics. For example, Anselm’s “ontological argument” and
Aquinas’ five arguments for the existence of God, including the cosmological argument.
Here is the video introduction from the corresponding chapter in Christian Theology: An introduction.
The first value of the chapter is it highlights how this period was not the "dark ages".
Nor was this period dominated by arcane arguments about questions such as “How many angels can dance on a pin head?” This was actually an intellectually rich time that set the stage for the Reformation.
Under Charlemagne, cathedrals and monasteries became centres of teaching and learning.
The first universities were founded by the church, with a focus on theology and philosophy.
Scholasticism, or “the cathedral of the mind” flourished during 1200-1500, with an emphasis on the “rational justification of religious belief and the systematic presentation of those beliefs”. McGrath says scholasticism “does not refer to a specific system of beliefs, but to a particular way of doing and organising theology.”
Key figures were Erasmus, Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus, and William of Ockham.
The Renaissance occurred in the fourteenth and fifteenth century Italy.
Theological writers tended to ignore the scholastics and focus more on the text of scripture and patristics.
Humanism was concerned with ad fontes (“back to the sources”). This largely meant the New Testament in the original language, Greek.
This humanism is quite different from the secular humanism of today.
Byzantine writers tended to understand salvation in terms of deification, rather than western legal or relational categories, that were emphasized in the Reformation.
This period saw the beginning of apologetics. For example, Anselm’s “ontological argument” and
Aquinas’ five arguments for the existence of God, including the cosmological argument.
Thursday, June 21, 2018
Who decides whether a woman is "free" or "oppressed"?
I read a fascinating New York Times article
The College Student Who Has France’s Secularists Fulminating,
which describes how Maryam Pougetoux, a student leader has caused offense because she wore a traditional head scarf when interviewed on TV about student protests.
Some secularists considered it inconsistent with her being president of a student union and with advocacy of the progressive and feminist values she stands for.
Critics seem focused on her clothes rather than what she said.
The College Student Who Has France’s Secularists Fulminating,
which describes how Maryam Pougetoux, a student leader has caused offense because she wore a traditional head scarf when interviewed on TV about student protests.
Some secularists considered it inconsistent with her being president of a student union and with advocacy of the progressive and feminist values she stands for.
Critics seem focused on her clothes rather than what she said.
In such discussions I wonder about whether some women in the Western world are really free?
There is incredible social pressure (from both men and women) for women wear make up, high heels, revealing clothing, and adopt certain poses. Some women freely choose such options, others do so out of compulsion, whether consciously or sub-consciously.
The article about the french controversy is interesting to juxtapose with a recent article in The Australian newspaper, Race, gender politics swamp great debate, Controversy has arisen because the Sydney University Debating Society has introduced gender-based quotas for their teams.
The article features the photograph below of a student who supported the quotas.
Friday, June 15, 2018
The highs and lows of Christian history
A valid criticism of Christianity is that it has been used to justify, to condone and to ignore all kinds of evil: war, genocide, slavery, poverty, discrimination, oppression, abuse, ...
On the other hand, over the past two thousand years some Christians have sometimes played a leading role in many noble initiatives in health care, education, human rights, poverty alleviation, ....
A challenge in any public discussion is to present a balanced perspective of these lows and highs.
The Centre for Public Christianity in Australia has produced a new documentary that aims to present a balanced perspective on this mixed history.
It is now showing in Australia. Unfortunately, I won't get to see it for a while because I am overseas.
For the Love of God. Trailer from CPX on Vimeo.
On the other hand, over the past two thousand years some Christians have sometimes played a leading role in many noble initiatives in health care, education, human rights, poverty alleviation, ....
A challenge in any public discussion is to present a balanced perspective of these lows and highs.
The Centre for Public Christianity in Australia has produced a new documentary that aims to present a balanced perspective on this mixed history.
It is now showing in Australia. Unfortunately, I won't get to see it for a while because I am overseas.
For the Love of God. Trailer from CPX on Vimeo.
Tuesday, June 12, 2018
The collateral damage of evil
On a recent flight I watched the recent movie remake of Murder on the Orient Express, based on the classic mystery novel by Agatha Christie.
On the one hand it is "harmless" entertainment; an interesting murder mystery with some unexpected twists. On the other hand, it strongly brings out how a single act of evil (murder of a child) has a disturbingly large "ripple effect" deeply touching (and ruining) the lives of many others, even those who might be considered to be on the periphery of the event.
On the one hand it is "harmless" entertainment; an interesting murder mystery with some unexpected twists. On the other hand, it strongly brings out how a single act of evil (murder of a child) has a disturbingly large "ripple effect" deeply touching (and ruining) the lives of many others, even those who might be considered to be on the periphery of the event.
Saturday, June 9, 2018
The myth of the perfect life
Until this week I had never heard of Kate Spade. Tragically, this past week she died by suicide, which has attracted much grief and analysis. I thought a commentary in the Guardian was interesting and sad:
So many women have been sharing stories online about their first Kate Spade handbag, like music fans reminiscing about the first time they heard a song by a recently deceased singer – and that is how it should be. She was a part of our lives and part of the cultural landscape for a generation. She made us feel that the perfect life was eminently achievable. How devastating to learn it felt exactly the opposite to her.
Wednesday, May 30, 2018
Helpful synopsis of individual books of the Bible
One of the many amazing things about the books of the Bible is how each one is crafted to tell a coherent, fascinating and powerful story with a clear theological message. However, when one first reads many of them, particularly in the Old Testament, that Big Picture is easily lost or not seen. One can get lost in geneologies and obscure place names...
In light of this, I have found the short videos produced by The Bible Project very helpful. Now whenever I start to study a new book, whether individually or in a small group, I first watch the relevant video. They are quite dense and so I often find it helpful to watch one more than once.
Wednesday, May 23, 2018
A balanced perspective on science and Christianity
The Australian TV show Compass recently had a good episode, Can a scientist believe?.
It was refreshingly balanced, featuring interviews with scientists who are atheists and scientists who are Christian. It also included some content from the COSAC conference that I was recently involved in.
It was refreshingly balanced, featuring interviews with scientists who are atheists and scientists who are Christian. It also included some content from the COSAC conference that I was recently involved in.
Thursday, May 17, 2018
Talk on Genesis 1-3
This morning I gave a talk on the first three chapters of Genesis to a women's group from my church. My wife introduced me! Here are the slides.
For background, I recommend comparing and contrasting Genesis with the Babylonian creation myth the Enuma Elish, which is nicely summarised in this short video.
Another helpful short video is Science and Genesis, featuring John Polkinghorne, Alister McGrath, N.T. Wright, and others.
I have found helpful the book How to Read Genesis by Tremper Longman.
An excellent introductory book that puts my talk in context is Exploring Science and Belief by Michael Poole.
For background, I recommend comparing and contrasting Genesis with the Babylonian creation myth the Enuma Elish, which is nicely summarised in this short video.
Another helpful short video is Science and Genesis, featuring John Polkinghorne, Alister McGrath, N.T. Wright, and others.
I have found helpful the book How to Read Genesis by Tremper Longman.
An excellent introductory book that puts my talk in context is Exploring Science and Belief by Michael Poole.
Monday, May 7, 2018
Learning from the church fathers
I am really enjoying the reading group that is working through Historical Theology by Alister McGrath. Here are some thoughts on chapter 1 which looks at the early church fathers (Patristic Period, c. 100-450). The video below gives a brief overview of the corresponding chapter in McGrath's Introduction to Christian Theology.
Theological debates occurred in the context of Greek philosophy.
Ideas about the Trinity and the personhood of Christ were heavily influenced by Greek ideas about the perfection of God. (p. 12-13)
God is infinite and unchanging. How then can God suffer?
Theology has to be logically self-consistent.
But, what if we compare these Greek ideal of intellectual "perfection" to the teachings of Jesus? He did not present truth as a set of logical propositions. He told stories. Furthermore, he seemed to like paradoxes and “contradictions”. For example, “the first will be last and the last will be first.”
Same old same old.
Some of the issues of the past are the same today. For example, how is theology related to secular academic disciplines?
Tertullian asked “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem”?
i.e,, what do Greek intellectual ideas have to do with the church?
Augustine said Christians should “plunder the Egyptians”, i.e. freely make use of non-Christian ideas, such as Greek philosophy, in order to advance their cause.
Other questions theologians wrestled with include the following.
Can one find God in popular culture? How far does “common grace” extend?
What are the qualifications of church leaders?
Who can be a member of a church?
Is the ministry of a “fallen” church leader valid?
What is the role of analogical thinking
Theological debates occurred in the context of Greek philosophy.
Ideas about the Trinity and the personhood of Christ were heavily influenced by Greek ideas about the perfection of God. (p. 12-13)
God is infinite and unchanging. How then can God suffer?
Theology has to be logically self-consistent.
But, what if we compare these Greek ideal of intellectual "perfection" to the teachings of Jesus? He did not present truth as a set of logical propositions. He told stories. Furthermore, he seemed to like paradoxes and “contradictions”. For example, “the first will be last and the last will be first.”
Same old same old.
Some of the issues of the past are the same today. For example, how is theology related to secular academic disciplines?
Tertullian asked “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem”?
i.e,, what do Greek intellectual ideas have to do with the church?
Augustine said Christians should “plunder the Egyptians”, i.e. freely make use of non-Christian ideas, such as Greek philosophy, in order to advance their cause.
Other questions theologians wrestled with include the following.
Can one find God in popular culture? How far does “common grace” extend?
What are the qualifications of church leaders?
Who can be a member of a church?
Is the ministry of a “fallen” church leader valid?
What is the role of analogical thinking
Thursday, April 5, 2018
The inevitable entanglement of sport and politics
I enjoyed watching the movie Race, which recounts the story of Jesse Owens and his presence at the 1936 Berlin Olympics.
The movie does a nice job of recounting significant historical events while exploring issues of racism, anti-Semitism, hypocrisy, propaganda, and the tortured relationship between politics and sport.
Like good historical movies it had the desired effect of causing my family to race to Wikipedia to see how much of the movie was historically accurate. It seems almost all of it is. Perhaps the main debatable point was it gave a sympathetic portrayal of the film-maker Leni Riefenstahl, who was a propagandist and apologist for Hitler. But, the most disturbing fact I learnt was that although Hitler did not congratulate Owens, President Roosevelt did not invite him to the White House.
[Aside. It took me a while to get the double meaning of the title].
The movie does a nice job of recounting significant historical events while exploring issues of racism, anti-Semitism, hypocrisy, propaganda, and the tortured relationship between politics and sport.
Like good historical movies it had the desired effect of causing my family to race to Wikipedia to see how much of the movie was historically accurate. It seems almost all of it is. Perhaps the main debatable point was it gave a sympathetic portrayal of the film-maker Leni Riefenstahl, who was a propagandist and apologist for Hitler. But, the most disturbing fact I learnt was that although Hitler did not congratulate Owens, President Roosevelt did not invite him to the White House.
[Aside. It took me a while to get the double meaning of the title].
Saturday, March 24, 2018
COSAC talk: science in ancient religious texts
Friday, March 23, 2018
Developing a real Christian mind
This is a draft of my third devotional talk for the forthcoming conference on Science and Christianity.
It is based on Philippians 2:1-11.
In discussions about Christianity and Academia it is common to talk about “the Christian mind” and the “Christian world view” and “loving God with all your mind”. The titles of some influential books are The Christian Mind by Harry Blamires, and The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind by Mark Noll,
All first-year students at Calvin College in the USA a required to take a course entitled “Developing a Christian Mind”. At Oxford, there is also an excellent initiative called "Developing a Christian Mind."
What does the Bible say about what it means to have “the mind of Christ”?
I find this passage from Paul's letter to the Philippians rather challenging.
Having the mind of Christ does not seem to be concerned with intellectual issues or a particular world-view but rather a personal attitude, particularly one of humility.
The passage begins.
A commitment to unity.
It meets being “like-minded” with others who follow Jesus.
If my ideas and views are creating division in the church do I have the mind of Christ?
Put aside my selfish ambition.
It is not all about me: my views, my organisation, my career, my ministry, my achievements, my influence, my status,..
Why does division occur within churches and between churches?
Sometimes it appears to be about differences of belief, about doctrine, or practice.
Contentious issues include church government, baptism, the role of the Holy Spirit, gender roles, Biblical interpretation, support of political parties, music, liturgy, budgets, fund raising, …
The list is almost endless. On the one hand, these are important issues. On the other hand, we should humbly and critically ask how much does “selfish ambition and vain conceit” play a role when a new denomination or a new congregation or a new organisation starts?
Sometimes, the role of ambition can be explicit and blatant. Other times it is more subtle or sub-conscious. We should ask this of ourselves and of our leaders. Am I looking to my own interests or to the interests of others?
Am I primarily concerned with showing I am right?
Where does my identity come from? From my views or from Jesus?
Where does my community identity come from?
Do I value others (including their views) above myself?
What drives academic life? What drives science?
Is it a passion for truth? Unfortunately, too many scientists have big egos. The history of science is littered with brilliant people who were not willing to give up on their own ideas and theories, even when there was overwhelming evidence against them.
Max Planck was the founder of quantum theory. He is sometimes credited with saying “Science advances one funeral at a time”. He actually said
I should clarify and qualify what I am saying.
Being humble and having the mind of Christ does not mean discarding strong convictions. It does not mean unity at any cost. It does not mean not being critical of other views. It does not mean not taking a stand for truth.
It does not mean that all views are equally valid.
What it does mean is being more humble about what I believe and how
I relate to others with different views. How open am I to changing my
views? It means abandoning self-promotion. It means trying to understand what is best for others and serving them.
It means following Jesus example of humility and service.
The best scientists are humble.
They are humble before nature. They are eager to learn, both from nature and from others.
They are willing to change their pre-conceptions and give up cherished ideas when confronted with convincing evidence or persuasive arguments.
What does this have to do with Science and Christianity?
This is an issue that divides churches.
There are a diverse range of perspectives. Some of them I strongly disagree with
them. However, that does not give me the right to ridicule those with different views.
We need to be humble. Be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to anger.
We like to exalt ourselves, our views, our organisations, our achievements, ...
But in the end, we will not be exalted.
Jesus will be. Our views and agendas will fall away.
Jesus is the name above every name.
Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that
Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
It is all about our downward mobility!
It is based on Philippians 2:1-11.
In discussions about Christianity and Academia it is common to talk about “the Christian mind” and the “Christian world view” and “loving God with all your mind”. The titles of some influential books are The Christian Mind by Harry Blamires, and The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind by Mark Noll,
All first-year students at Calvin College in the USA a required to take a course entitled “Developing a Christian Mind”. At Oxford, there is also an excellent initiative called "Developing a Christian Mind."
What does the Bible say about what it means to have “the mind of Christ”?
I find this passage from Paul's letter to the Philippians rather challenging.
Having the mind of Christ does not seem to be concerned with intellectual issues or a particular world-view but rather a personal attitude, particularly one of humility.
The passage begins.
Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others. In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:Here are some specific applications.
A commitment to unity.
It meets being “like-minded” with others who follow Jesus.
If my ideas and views are creating division in the church do I have the mind of Christ?
Put aside my selfish ambition.
It is not all about me: my views, my organisation, my career, my ministry, my achievements, my influence, my status,..
Why does division occur within churches and between churches?
Sometimes it appears to be about differences of belief, about doctrine, or practice.
Contentious issues include church government, baptism, the role of the Holy Spirit, gender roles, Biblical interpretation, support of political parties, music, liturgy, budgets, fund raising, …
The list is almost endless. On the one hand, these are important issues. On the other hand, we should humbly and critically ask how much does “selfish ambition and vain conceit” play a role when a new denomination or a new congregation or a new organisation starts?
Sometimes, the role of ambition can be explicit and blatant. Other times it is more subtle or sub-conscious. We should ask this of ourselves and of our leaders. Am I looking to my own interests or to the interests of others?
Am I primarily concerned with showing I am right?
Where does my identity come from? From my views or from Jesus?
Where does my community identity come from?
Do I value others (including their views) above myself?
What drives academic life? What drives science?
Is it a passion for truth? Unfortunately, too many scientists have big egos. The history of science is littered with brilliant people who were not willing to give up on their own ideas and theories, even when there was overwhelming evidence against them.
Max Planck was the founder of quantum theory. He is sometimes credited with saying “Science advances one funeral at a time”. He actually said
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.Academic theologians and pastors are not immune from self-promotion and a reluctance to respect those with different views.
I should clarify and qualify what I am saying.
Being humble and having the mind of Christ does not mean discarding strong convictions. It does not mean unity at any cost. It does not mean not being critical of other views. It does not mean not taking a stand for truth.
It does not mean that all views are equally valid.
What it does mean is being more humble about what I believe and how
I relate to others with different views. How open am I to changing my
views? It means abandoning self-promotion. It means trying to understand what is best for others and serving them.
It means following Jesus example of humility and service.
The best scientists are humble.
They are humble before nature. They are eager to learn, both from nature and from others.
They are willing to change their pre-conceptions and give up cherished ideas when confronted with convincing evidence or persuasive arguments.
What does this have to do with Science and Christianity?
This is an issue that divides churches.
There are a diverse range of perspectives. Some of them I strongly disagree with
them. However, that does not give me the right to ridicule those with different views.
We need to be humble. Be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to anger.
We like to exalt ourselves, our views, our organisations, our achievements, ...
But in the end, we will not be exalted.
Jesus will be. Our views and agendas will fall away.
Jesus is the name above every name.
Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that
Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
It is all about our downward mobility!
Monday, March 19, 2018
The first will be last; the last will be first
Next weekend I am looking forward to attending a Conference on Science and Christianity.
I have been asked to give three short talks/reflections during some worship times. For balance I have picked from the Bible three passages: a Psalm, a parable of Jesus, and a New Testament Epistle:
Psalm 19, Matthew 20:1-16, and Philippians 2:1-11.
Humility is a common theme.
The first talk will be similar to this one.
Below is a draft outline of a draft for the second talk.
I will post the third talk later.
What is the Kingdom of God like?
The first will be last and the last will be first.
The parable of the workers in the vineyard
Matthew 20:1-16
We all come to any subject in life with pre-conceptions about what is true, what is just, what is important, and what is the actual nature of things.
We can come to science with such preconceptions.
We can come to theology (talk about God) with such preconceptions.
We all have preconceptions about how science and theology are related or not related.
But are my pre-conceptions justified? Are your pre-conceptions justified?
What will it take for you to change your views?
Jesus challenged the pre-conceptions of everyone, especially the religious people of his time. He challenged preconceptions about a wide range of topics: the character of God, how people should live, the role of the law, how people could be saved, who were God’s people,…
Today Jesus continues to challenge people’s preconceptions.
This parable is just one example of Jesus profoundly challenging peoples preconceptions. It should also challenge us.
Context
It is useful to look at any Bible passage in the context of what comes before and what comes after.
In Matthew 19 the disciples try to stop children coming to Jesus. Jesus responds, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
Then Jesus encounters a rich young man. He wants to get eternal life. He claims he has kept all of God’s commands. Jesus tells the young man to sell all of his possessions and give to the poor. He won’t do that. Jesus warns that it is hard for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven.
He says to the disciples that “But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.”
Jesus, then tells the parable to show what the kingdom of heaven is like.
Again, he concludes with “So the last will be first, and the first will be last.”
After telling the parable Jesus predicts his death and resurrection.
Then a mother requests that her two sons sit in power with Jesus in his kingdom.
Jesus then contrasts kingdom leadership to the that of worldly leaders who lord it over their subjects. Whoever wants to be great must be a servant, even a slave.
Jesus came to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
Jesus is promoting an upside down kingdom. The least will be greatest. The greatest will be humbled. The first will be last and the last will be first.
This 17th century depiction of the parable is by Jacob Willemszoon de Wet.
What is the content of the parable?
The owner of a vineyard hires some workers. They all get paid the same amount. Yet, some of them worked fewer hours than others. This is not modern day economics or labour practice!
It isn’t fair! The hard workers complain, just like we would.
The landowner responds that he is not unfair. He has kept his promise. He challenges the grumblers, “Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?”
What is the meaning of the parable?
God is like the landowner. We are the workers.
God is generous. He is full of grace, i.e. he treats people better than they deserve. Some of us may live more virtuous lives than others. But this is irrelevant in God’s economy.
God offers us a free gift of forgiveness and eternal life, through Jesus death and resurrection. We don’t earn this gift.
God has the right to be generous as he pleases. It is not for us to question God. God is God. We don't have the right to tell God what is right and fair.
We may bridle at God’s generosity. We can be self-righteous like the rich young man and think we keep God’s commands and so deserve salvation.
But the last will be first. The first will be last. The tax collectors and prostitutes who repent will enter Jesus' kingdom before the rich and powerful, particularly the self-righteous religious leaders.
The kingdom belongs to those with the humility of little children.
This parable should rattle our pre-conceptions of how God operates, of what is fair, and what is true.
It should lead to humility and repentance and gratefulness for the mercy of God.
The kingdom of God is an upside down kingdom.
Paradox and dialectic are integral to theology.
How is this related to science?
Christians believe that God made the universe. He wrote the laws of nature.
What are some of the most striking things we have learnt in science in the past hundred years?
Sir Arthur Eddington was the most influential astronomer in the early twentieth century. J.B.S.Haldane was an influential geneticist and evolutionary biologist. Both are credited with saying that,
Bill Bryson says the four most remarkable things he knows are
1. You exist.
2. Life does not happen anywhere else in the universe.
3. We live in a planet that we don't really know.
4. All life comes from a single moment of creation.
Science challenges our pre-conceptions of what is true, what makes sense, and how the world should be. Given the universe is made by the God of the upside-down kingdom, perhaps we
should not be surprised it goes against some of our prejudices and intuitions.
How does this apply to our discussions of the relationship between science and theology?
Perhaps we may need to be humbler and be open to new ways of thinking.
Do my pre-conceptions need to be challenged?
I have been asked to give three short talks/reflections during some worship times. For balance I have picked from the Bible three passages: a Psalm, a parable of Jesus, and a New Testament Epistle:
Psalm 19, Matthew 20:1-16, and Philippians 2:1-11.
Humility is a common theme.
The first talk will be similar to this one.
Below is a draft outline of a draft for the second talk.
I will post the third talk later.
What is the Kingdom of God like?
The first will be last and the last will be first.
The parable of the workers in the vineyard
Matthew 20:1-16
We all come to any subject in life with pre-conceptions about what is true, what is just, what is important, and what is the actual nature of things.
We can come to science with such preconceptions.
We can come to theology (talk about God) with such preconceptions.
We all have preconceptions about how science and theology are related or not related.
But are my pre-conceptions justified? Are your pre-conceptions justified?
What will it take for you to change your views?
Jesus challenged the pre-conceptions of everyone, especially the religious people of his time. He challenged preconceptions about a wide range of topics: the character of God, how people should live, the role of the law, how people could be saved, who were God’s people,…
Today Jesus continues to challenge people’s preconceptions.
This parable is just one example of Jesus profoundly challenging peoples preconceptions. It should also challenge us.
Context
It is useful to look at any Bible passage in the context of what comes before and what comes after.
In Matthew 19 the disciples try to stop children coming to Jesus. Jesus responds, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
Then Jesus encounters a rich young man. He wants to get eternal life. He claims he has kept all of God’s commands. Jesus tells the young man to sell all of his possessions and give to the poor. He won’t do that. Jesus warns that it is hard for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven.
He says to the disciples that “But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.”
Jesus, then tells the parable to show what the kingdom of heaven is like.
Again, he concludes with “So the last will be first, and the first will be last.”
After telling the parable Jesus predicts his death and resurrection.
Then a mother requests that her two sons sit in power with Jesus in his kingdom.
Jesus then contrasts kingdom leadership to the that of worldly leaders who lord it over their subjects. Whoever wants to be great must be a servant, even a slave.
Jesus came to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
Jesus is promoting an upside down kingdom. The least will be greatest. The greatest will be humbled. The first will be last and the last will be first.
This 17th century depiction of the parable is by Jacob Willemszoon de Wet.
What is the content of the parable?
The owner of a vineyard hires some workers. They all get paid the same amount. Yet, some of them worked fewer hours than others. This is not modern day economics or labour practice!
It isn’t fair! The hard workers complain, just like we would.
The landowner responds that he is not unfair. He has kept his promise. He challenges the grumblers, “Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?”
What is the meaning of the parable?
God is like the landowner. We are the workers.
God is generous. He is full of grace, i.e. he treats people better than they deserve. Some of us may live more virtuous lives than others. But this is irrelevant in God’s economy.
God offers us a free gift of forgiveness and eternal life, through Jesus death and resurrection. We don’t earn this gift.
God has the right to be generous as he pleases. It is not for us to question God. God is God. We don't have the right to tell God what is right and fair.
We may bridle at God’s generosity. We can be self-righteous like the rich young man and think we keep God’s commands and so deserve salvation.
But the last will be first. The first will be last. The tax collectors and prostitutes who repent will enter Jesus' kingdom before the rich and powerful, particularly the self-righteous religious leaders.
The kingdom belongs to those with the humility of little children.
This parable should rattle our pre-conceptions of how God operates, of what is fair, and what is true.
It should lead to humility and repentance and gratefulness for the mercy of God.
The kingdom of God is an upside down kingdom.
Paradox and dialectic are integral to theology.
How is this related to science?
Christians believe that God made the universe. He wrote the laws of nature.
What are some of the most striking things we have learnt in science in the past hundred years?
Sir Arthur Eddington was the most influential astronomer in the early twentieth century. J.B.S.Haldane was an influential geneticist and evolutionary biologist. Both are credited with saying that,
“the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose”.Yet it is striking to me that this statement was made so long ago. The universe is indeed even stranger than what Haldane and Eddington knew 60 years ago. This was before we had to grapple with the most bizarre properties of quantum physics or the finding that 96% of the universe may be composed of dark matter and dark energy, completely unlike the matter and energy of which we are made and encounter in our daily lives.
Bill Bryson says the four most remarkable things he knows are
1. You exist.
2. Life does not happen anywhere else in the universe.
3. We live in a planet that we don't really know.
4. All life comes from a single moment of creation.
Science challenges our pre-conceptions of what is true, what makes sense, and how the world should be. Given the universe is made by the God of the upside-down kingdom, perhaps we
should not be surprised it goes against some of our prejudices and intuitions.
How does this apply to our discussions of the relationship between science and theology?
Perhaps we may need to be humbler and be open to new ways of thinking.
Do my pre-conceptions need to be challenged?
Friday, March 16, 2018
Latest talk on Science and the Bible
Tonight I am giving a talk on "Science and the Bible" to FOCUS, a Christian group for international students at UQ. I look forward to a lively Q&A session.
The slides for the talk are here.
The slides for the talk are here.
Monday, March 5, 2018
What I learnt from early church history
Here I want to go back and review some of what struck me from the Early Church history course.
The early church lived and grew in a context of a violent society.
The Romans maintained their power and the stability of their empire violently. Christians were persecuted as a threat to the empire and an object of ridicule for their weakness.
This video graphically illustrates this. (Warning: it is violent!)
This violent environment was true until 313 AD when the Edict of Milan by the two Emperors [Constantine (West) and Licinius (East)] freedom of conscience in worship. In 380 AD, Christianity became the official religion of the Roman empire.
How did Christianity spread so widely and effectively throughout the Graeco-Roman world?
In 1917 T. R. Glover, a Cambridge University lecturer, published The Jesus of History, which examined this question and included the following much-quoted sentences on page 71:
The limitations of language.
Concepts such as the Trinity and the co-existing divine and human natures of Jesus are so profound, complex, and subtle that any short statement is going to be somewhat inadequate, lacking some completeness and precision. That does not mean that we should not try. But, we should be humble and be mindful of the limitations.
Doctrine does matter.
Ideas and beliefs have consequences.
For example, the Donatist controversy, became entangled with differing
ideas about the nature of salvation and qualifications for church leadership.
This affected very practical and personal matters such as
who was allowed to remain in leadership and whether Christians who had
failed in the face of persecution were allowed back into fellowship.
Doctrines can divide.
Furthermore, personalities and power struggles an become entangled with disagreements about beliefs. People become so enraged at their opponents that they will resort to violence.
Hairsplitting about words?
The Arian controversy came to a head in the Council of Nicea in 325 and concerned the true nature of the relationship between the Father and the Son. In was encapsulated in a preference for
homoiouios [similar substance/essence]
versus
homoouios [same substance].
The only difference between the two words is the letter i [iota] in the middle.
This is arguably the origin of the common phrase used today “it does not make one iota of a difference.”
The Arians [anti-Arians] claimed the Son was of “similar” [same] substance as the Father.
The disjuncture between belief and practice, i.e. hypocrisy.
Divisions about doctrine, sometimes about subtle wordings, even led to violence. For me the most striking and disturbing was the case of a bishop who was murdered at the altar following a council debate.
The mixed legacy of Constantine.
Following his conversion in AD 312 the emperor changed his attitude to the church. He eventually made Christianity the official religion of the Roman empire. This totally changed the nature and role of the church. Constantine changed the status of the church from a poor marginalised and persecuted community to a well resourced and respectable institution with strong links to government. Prior to Constantine, becoming a Christian or a church leader could lead to suffering and an early death. The church had no money or buildings. After Constantine, becoming a Christian or a church leader could lead to prosperity and social status. The church eventually had significant buildings and wealth.
On the one hand, the stability and resources provided by Constantine, helped the church consolidate, spread, develop institutions, and facilitate theological debate, writing, and publishing.
On the other hand, the church lost its identification with the marginalised, had to struggle with the corrupting forces of wealth and power, and was no longer purified by persecution. (Note, these were things that were all central to the life and teaching of Jesus).
This era does provide insights into the complexities of the appropriate relationship between the church and governments. Christians should be wary of what they might aspire to.
There is nothing new under the sun.
On the one hand, ancient controversies associated with Gnosticism, Docetism, Marcionism, Donatism, … may seem a long way from today’s issues. On the other hand, the core issues of some of these controversies are not so far away. Given our common humanity and frailty, we do keep repeating mistakes. On the positive side, we can also learn from the wisdom and "best practise" of the past.
The early church lived and grew in a context of a violent society.
The Romans maintained their power and the stability of their empire violently. Christians were persecuted as a threat to the empire and an object of ridicule for their weakness.
This video graphically illustrates this. (Warning: it is violent!)
This violent environment was true until 313 AD when the Edict of Milan by the two Emperors [Constantine (West) and Licinius (East)] freedom of conscience in worship. In 380 AD, Christianity became the official religion of the Roman empire.
How did Christianity spread so widely and effectively throughout the Graeco-Roman world?
In 1917 T. R. Glover, a Cambridge University lecturer, published The Jesus of History, which examined this question and included the following much-quoted sentences on page 71:
Here we touch what I think one of the greatest wonders that history has to show. How did the Church do it? If I may invent or adapt three words, the Christian "out-lived" the pagan, "out-died" him, and "out-thought" him. He came into the world and lived a great deal better than the pagan; he beat him hollow in living....Appreciating the violent context of the early church one can also better appreciate the context of the Book of Revelation. It is not some secretly coded prediction about the course of world history. Rather, it is a call for Christians to persevere faithfully in the face of suffering and persecution. Justice will be done. The humble and faithful will be vindicated. The rich, powerful, arrogant, and violent will be judged.
The limitations of language.
Concepts such as the Trinity and the co-existing divine and human natures of Jesus are so profound, complex, and subtle that any short statement is going to be somewhat inadequate, lacking some completeness and precision. That does not mean that we should not try. But, we should be humble and be mindful of the limitations.
Doctrine does matter.
Ideas and beliefs have consequences.
For example, the Donatist controversy, became entangled with differing
ideas about the nature of salvation and qualifications for church leadership.
This affected very practical and personal matters such as
who was allowed to remain in leadership and whether Christians who had
failed in the face of persecution were allowed back into fellowship.
Doctrines can divide.
Furthermore, personalities and power struggles an become entangled with disagreements about beliefs. People become so enraged at their opponents that they will resort to violence.
Hairsplitting about words?
The Arian controversy came to a head in the Council of Nicea in 325 and concerned the true nature of the relationship between the Father and the Son. In was encapsulated in a preference for
homoiouios [similar substance/essence]
versus
homoouios [same substance].
The only difference between the two words is the letter i [iota] in the middle.
This is arguably the origin of the common phrase used today “it does not make one iota of a difference.”
The Arians [anti-Arians] claimed the Son was of “similar” [same] substance as the Father.
The disjuncture between belief and practice, i.e. hypocrisy.
Divisions about doctrine, sometimes about subtle wordings, even led to violence. For me the most striking and disturbing was the case of a bishop who was murdered at the altar following a council debate.
The mixed legacy of Constantine.
Following his conversion in AD 312 the emperor changed his attitude to the church. He eventually made Christianity the official religion of the Roman empire. This totally changed the nature and role of the church. Constantine changed the status of the church from a poor marginalised and persecuted community to a well resourced and respectable institution with strong links to government. Prior to Constantine, becoming a Christian or a church leader could lead to suffering and an early death. The church had no money or buildings. After Constantine, becoming a Christian or a church leader could lead to prosperity and social status. The church eventually had significant buildings and wealth.
On the one hand, the stability and resources provided by Constantine, helped the church consolidate, spread, develop institutions, and facilitate theological debate, writing, and publishing.
On the other hand, the church lost its identification with the marginalised, had to struggle with the corrupting forces of wealth and power, and was no longer purified by persecution. (Note, these were things that were all central to the life and teaching of Jesus).
This era does provide insights into the complexities of the appropriate relationship between the church and governments. Christians should be wary of what they might aspire to.
There is nothing new under the sun.
On the one hand, ancient controversies associated with Gnosticism, Docetism, Marcionism, Donatism, … may seem a long way from today’s issues. On the other hand, the core issues of some of these controversies are not so far away. Given our common humanity and frailty, we do keep repeating mistakes. On the positive side, we can also learn from the wisdom and "best practise" of the past.
Wednesday, February 7, 2018
Learning from Historical Theology
A few years ago I took a short course on Early Church History.
I am now re-engaging with this topic because in the theology reading group we are reading through Historical Theology by Alister McGrath.
McGrath emphasises the distinction between church history and historical theology.
The latter is concerned solely with ideas and intellectual issues.
Theology is basically the study of God. How does one understand God and talk about
God?
In contrast, church history has a broader concern with events, personalities, and institutions. It considers how the ideas were influenced by these and visa versa.
Why do church history and historical theology matter?
Much of what Christians believe today has been shaped by this early period.
The canon of scripture was defined and the Apostle’s and Nicene creeds were formulated then. This shaped ideas about the divinity of Christ, sin, the Trinity, grace, methods of interpretation of scripture, church structure, sacraments …
McGrath quotes Karl Barth
Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them.
This is a painful and tragic truth that happens in the church, politics, science, and personal life again and again.
Theology always occurs in a context: social, cultural, political, economic, intellectual, .. We cannot deny that the context has an influence on the issues discussed, controversies,
emphasis and neglect, language, method, …
However, that does not mean that the context is determinative or that the ideas or statements produced are or are not relevant in other contexts.
Somehow we have to discern what is and what is not relevant in our own contexts.
Christianity is global and historical. Consider these very different contexts:
1. the persecuted church in the third century of the Greco-Roman world
2. upper middle-class Australia today
3. slum dwellers in Latin America in the 1970s under military dictatorships
4. Dalit Christians in India today.
Finally, at least for some of us, the topic is fascinating and stimulating.
Last week we covered the Patristic period (approx. 100-451 AD). Here is the chapter and a short introduction to the corresponding chapter in another McGrath text.
Later I will review some of what struck me from the reading and from the Early Church history course.
I am now re-engaging with this topic because in the theology reading group we are reading through Historical Theology by Alister McGrath.
McGrath emphasises the distinction between church history and historical theology.
The latter is concerned solely with ideas and intellectual issues.
Theology is basically the study of God. How does one understand God and talk about
God?
In contrast, church history has a broader concern with events, personalities, and institutions. It considers how the ideas were influenced by these and visa versa.
Why do church history and historical theology matter?
Much of what Christians believe today has been shaped by this early period.
The canon of scripture was defined and the Apostle’s and Nicene creeds were formulated then. This shaped ideas about the divinity of Christ, sin, the Trinity, grace, methods of interpretation of scripture, church structure, sacraments …
McGrath quotes Karl Barth
"With regard to theology, we cannot be in the church without taking responsibility as much for the theology of the past as for the theology of the present day. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Luther, Schleiermacher and all the others are not dead but living. They still speak and demand a hearing as living voices, as surely as we know that they and we belong together in the church."We can learn much from the past. Some of the early theologians were brilliant minds and some lived exemplary lives. Augustine has had a significant influence on philosophy as well as theology.
Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them.
This is a painful and tragic truth that happens in the church, politics, science, and personal life again and again.
Theology always occurs in a context: social, cultural, political, economic, intellectual, .. We cannot deny that the context has an influence on the issues discussed, controversies,
emphasis and neglect, language, method, …
However, that does not mean that the context is determinative or that the ideas or statements produced are or are not relevant in other contexts.
Somehow we have to discern what is and what is not relevant in our own contexts.
Christianity is global and historical. Consider these very different contexts:
1. the persecuted church in the third century of the Greco-Roman world
2. upper middle-class Australia today
3. slum dwellers in Latin America in the 1970s under military dictatorships
4. Dalit Christians in India today.
Finally, at least for some of us, the topic is fascinating and stimulating.
Last week we covered the Patristic period (approx. 100-451 AD). Here is the chapter and a short introduction to the corresponding chapter in another McGrath text.
Later I will review some of what struck me from the reading and from the Early Church history course.
Sunday, January 28, 2018
Why societies need a free press
I really enjoyed the movie, The Post, which is based on the role that the Washington Post, and particularly the Publisher Katharine Graham, played in publishing the Pentagon Papers after the Nixon White House obtained a court order stopping the New York Times from doing so.
One intriguing aspect of the movie was it showed how much the world has changed since 1971, particularly with regard to technology and gender issues.
Newspapers and secret military documents were all hard copies. This made stealing, copying, and distributing the latter difficult. Articles were written on typewriters and newspapers were mechanically typeset. Photocopies were done page by page. The only phones were land lines and pay phones.
It is a long way from today's fast-paced and highly connected world of the internet, email, Wikileaks, and mobile phones.
The journalists and politicians were largely middle-aged white males. The movie shows what a pioneer Katharine Graham was and how hard it was for her to be taken seriously. She had the added obstacle that she had been belittled as a child and as a wife and so struggled to overcome her low self-confidence. Meryl Streep brilliantly shows this increasing confidence. The movie also shows how Graham became much admired by younger women.
The movie briefly mentions how Graham's husband died by suicide, leaving her to take over the newspaper. It does not discuss the associated mental health issues.
The main issue in the movie is resolved by a 6-3 ruling of the US Supreme Court, which allows further publication of the Pentagon papers. Justice Black wrote:
One intriguing aspect of the movie was it showed how much the world has changed since 1971, particularly with regard to technology and gender issues.
Newspapers and secret military documents were all hard copies. This made stealing, copying, and distributing the latter difficult. Articles were written on typewriters and newspapers were mechanically typeset. Photocopies were done page by page. The only phones were land lines and pay phones.
It is a long way from today's fast-paced and highly connected world of the internet, email, Wikileaks, and mobile phones.
The journalists and politicians were largely middle-aged white males. The movie shows what a pioneer Katharine Graham was and how hard it was for her to be taken seriously. She had the added obstacle that she had been belittled as a child and as a wife and so struggled to overcome her low self-confidence. Meryl Streep brilliantly shows this increasing confidence. The movie also shows how Graham became much admired by younger women.
The movie briefly mentions how Graham's husband died by suicide, leaving her to take over the newspaper. It does not discuss the associated mental health issues.
The main issue in the movie is resolved by a 6-3 ruling of the US Supreme Court, which allows further publication of the Pentagon papers. Justice Black wrote:
In the First Amendment the Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy. The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government's power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.Some of this is quoted in the movie. I also recommend the earlier movie, The Pentagon Papers, which focuses on the role of Daniel Ellsberg who was the source of the leak to the New York Times and the Post.
Friday, January 26, 2018
Where did universities come from?
This video nicely answers the question, showing how many universities, even in the non-Western world, had origins that were rooted in the church, mission, theological education, and service.
Today many of these universities have quite different goals and values. Some seem to want to deny their origins or are embarrassed by them.
Important questions that this raises include:
Are these origins irrelevant today?
Has something been lost?
Are the many problems universities do have today, particularly those associated with the focus on money, metrics, management, and marketing, due to the loss of a theological basis for their mission?
Today many of these universities have quite different goals and values. Some seem to want to deny their origins or are embarrassed by them.
Important questions that this raises include:
Are these origins irrelevant today?
Has something been lost?
Are the many problems universities do have today, particularly those associated with the focus on money, metrics, management, and marketing, due to the loss of a theological basis for their mission?
Saturday, January 13, 2018
A classic movie confronts anti-intellectualism
During the holidays my family watched the classic 1960 movie, Inherit the Wind, loosely based on the infamous Scopes trial, held in 1925 in the USA.
There is much in the movie that one could be concerned about, particularly from a Christian point of view. First, it is not historically accurate. This problem and all the nuances of the trial were discussed in detail in the Pulitzer-Prize winning book, Summer for the Gods, by Edward J. Larson.
Whoever brings ruin on their family will inherit only wind, and the fool will be servant to the wise.
This is quoted during a powerful and tragic scene when a fundamentalist preacher verbally attacks his own daughter.
Only after I watched the movie and read the associated Wikipedia page did I learn that the movie was not meant to be so much about the issue of Evolution vs. Fundamentalism. But rather was meant to cast a poor light on McCarthyism, which was happening around the time the movie was made.
There is much in the movie that one could be concerned about, particularly from a Christian point of view. First, it is not historically accurate. This problem and all the nuances of the trial were discussed in detail in the Pulitzer-Prize winning book, Summer for the Gods, by Edward J. Larson.
Second, the Christians in the movie are "red-necks" who come across as unthinking and unfeeling. On the other hand, unfortunately, there are Christians who do act like some of the characters in the movie.
The title of the movie is based on Proverbs 11:29
This is quoted during a powerful and tragic scene when a fundamentalist preacher verbally attacks his own daughter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
