Skip to main content
What is it to become 'human' as a follower of Christ? Life's diversity in conjunction with an understanding that God has created diversity demands that I consider life in its totality of relationships with all races, cultures, and systems of thought. Why have I limited my life-span of experience to a culture, and even more narrow, a Christian sub-culture, which changes with the seasons? Do I really want to look back on my life and see how disgusting is my loyalty to my immediate social constructs? I do not speak this way because I have pent-up frustration or because I have been wronged by my subculture, rather I speak this way because in my encountering life, I have happened upon wise and tempered dissenters who have challenged me to look beyond my particular temporal cultural setting and see my experience as a world-corporate experience. This brings me to my first problem.

One issue I must sincerely address is the role of experience in my development of thought on life and godliness. Being that our culture and ultimately my thought still finds remnants of enlightenment rationalism and scientific empiricism packed away in its assumptions, I cannot escape the fact that I have to rationalize my understanding of experience before I feel like I have dealt with the issue; so I ask questions pertaining to continuity, analysis, and verification whose basic framework is all assumed under the umbrella of 'so-called' objective observation. I want to escape the over-rationalization of FAITH! I cannot encounter personally what I do not believe has any significance other than observatory characteristics i.e. God in a petri dish. However as we are creatures of extremes, I must fully understand that under-rationalization leads to superstitions and hysterias of divers sorts. As dialectics would have it, then, the coalition of body and soul must be found somewhere in the middle of these divergent paradigms. Philosophical frameworks aside, how can I develop a concept of the spiritual life that contextualizes my specific situation in the world, both body and soul, yet is not limited, in perspective, to my sphere of existence? Essentially I have envisioned living a life enraptured in mobilization rather than fixation. Fixation implies constants, which are for the most part static, whereas mobilization implies dynamics, that is the necessity of considering various contingencies and circumstances.

Popular posts from this blog

You and Whose Army?

America elects a pro-choice candidate and suddenly my fellow Christian brothers and sisters head for the hills screaming the world has come to an end. Are not abortion rates much higher in several other countries? Why aren't we just as concerned about "life" in those countries? America elects an economically progressive candidate and people are screaming "socialism" preparing for a Rapture. (An mid-1800's invention of conservative Christian theology). Doesn't America know that Democracy is one of the youngest political philosophies to be employed? Why do we think the fate of the world depends on the success of our economical and political philosophies? America is struggling economically, and Jesus is now coming back to rescue his 2000 year old church from this difficult tribulation. Doesn't America remember that its only 232 years old? Why does God's blessing equate with monetary blessing? Why do American Christians constantly tie the end of the ...

Pastor Or Theologian?

I received a facebook message from a long-lost college friend and roommate the other day. In his cordial greeting he noted, and correctly, that I had just graduated with a Masters in Theology. I really appreciated the recognition and congratulations, but what bothered me was his next question. He asked if I was "going to be a Pastor or a Theologian?" I laughed, not because I thought the answer to the question was obvious, but because of the fact that he dichotomized the two disciplines as mutually exclusive. My first reaction was to respond with a smart alec remark about his ignorance and misconstrued views of Christianity and its relationship to education, but then I had to stop and remember that he graduated from the same undergraduate institution which I graduated from, and probably, like me, attended a 'fundy' church growing up. Reminding myself of this context cooled me off a bit and I kindly responded that I would hope someday to do both. Nonetheless, what his ...
John Henry Newman sets out to defend the idea of Liberal (when I say "liberal" it is in the sense of a Liberal Arts degree)University for the training of young men. (His book is aimed at men and for the purpose of men... I dont know if the education of women at that time was still frowned upon). Within a series of nine discourses (which he initially delivered at the inaugural year of the University in Ireland)he sets out to defend his picture of what a University education should look like. Newman's arguments are logical and well defended with the arguments building, like a tower is built, upon one another. Each discourse takes up a specific thesis and is defended in the following pages. He first demonstrates that Truth is One, that is composed of one overarching, interrelated matrix. There are many systems of thought that are a play, but nonetheless, all Truth is delicately intertwined so that if you neglect one aspect of the Truth in essence you are unraveling the binds...