I thought this quote was appropriate to these latest posts. I just received Brian McLaren's new book in the mail yesterday. While I probably won't be able to dive in to the book until some of my class reading is done, I did come across this quote at the beginning of the book. It's Brian quoting someone else:
Never accept and be content with unanalyzed assumptions, assumptions about the work, about the people, about the church or Christianity. Never be afraid to ask questions about the work we have inherited or the work we are doing. There is no question that should not be asked or that is outlawed. The day we are completely satisfied with what we have been doing; the day we have found the perfect, unchangeable system of work, the perfect answer, never in need of being corrected again, on that day we will know that we are wrong, that we have made the greatest mistake of all. - Vincent J. Donovan
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Monday, February 8, 2010
Doubt part 2
As a follow-up to my previous post about doubt/deconstruction, I thought I would address a question I got from a trusted friend. How far is too far when it comes to deconstruction? or stated another way, is it possible to go too far?
For me, the answer is no, it's not possible to deconstruct too far. Let me qualify that though. If one's intention is to: know and love God deeper, know and love others deeper, know and love oneself (and how we were uniquely created) deeper, and know and love God's creation deeper, then no, you can not desconstruct too much.
If one believes, like I do, that our thoughts about God, others, ourselves, and creation are shaped by culture, context, history, etc, can we also agree that those thoughts are human constructions? Even if we talk about revelation, we still have to say that revelation is mediated through our humanity. No one has the God's eye view of truth. It's amazing how we can think we finally have God nailed down. The church throughout history has thought that, and I would offer that they were/are wrong. Right about things? Yes, of course. Beyond and above deconstruction? No, of course not. And, this finitude (the condition of our humanity) is not something that is a problem, but it leads to a plurality of truth (Thanks John Franke for exploring this topic!).
So if our ideas and thoughts are human constructions, my contention is that they are always open to deconstruction. And, in fact, deconstruction should be the normal way of life for someone on the path to an integrated spiritual wholeness. Deconstruction is allowing the voice of the Other (God, another person, another culture, another lens to view things, etc) to be heard and embraced.
Next post - I talked about glimpes of a reconstructed faith in the first post about doubt. So, in the absense of clarity, what are some of the characteristics that will be part of a reconstructed faith?
For me, the answer is no, it's not possible to deconstruct too far. Let me qualify that though. If one's intention is to: know and love God deeper, know and love others deeper, know and love oneself (and how we were uniquely created) deeper, and know and love God's creation deeper, then no, you can not desconstruct too much.
If one believes, like I do, that our thoughts about God, others, ourselves, and creation are shaped by culture, context, history, etc, can we also agree that those thoughts are human constructions? Even if we talk about revelation, we still have to say that revelation is mediated through our humanity. No one has the God's eye view of truth. It's amazing how we can think we finally have God nailed down. The church throughout history has thought that, and I would offer that they were/are wrong. Right about things? Yes, of course. Beyond and above deconstruction? No, of course not. And, this finitude (the condition of our humanity) is not something that is a problem, but it leads to a plurality of truth (Thanks John Franke for exploring this topic!).
So if our ideas and thoughts are human constructions, my contention is that they are always open to deconstruction. And, in fact, deconstruction should be the normal way of life for someone on the path to an integrated spiritual wholeness. Deconstruction is allowing the voice of the Other (God, another person, another culture, another lens to view things, etc) to be heard and embraced.
Next post - I talked about glimpes of a reconstructed faith in the first post about doubt. So, in the absense of clarity, what are some of the characteristics that will be part of a reconstructed faith?
Friday, January 29, 2010
Doubt and the journey
Scot McKnight had a great post where he responded to someone who was experiencing doubts. The post is here.
This post really speaks to me. I would say I'm going through such a stage of deconstruction and doubt. It was initiated by a lot of things, but mainly personal experiences, self study, and dialog with trusted friends/mentors. In the book Made to Stick, the authors talk about the "curse of knowledge". What they mean is that once we truly learn something, we can not really unlearn it, nor can we remember how we thought on that topic before we learned the new thing. An example for me is the Bible.
Having studied topics around textual, historical, and social criticism surrounding the Bible, as well as interpretive theories, it is difficult for me to read the Bible “pre-critically” anymore. Will that change? Maybe, but for now, this is where I’m at. I am no longer satisfied with surface readings of a text (and this is all texts, not just the Bible). I also see life more holistically and inter-disciplinary. Meaning, I see value in some of the theories of Jungian psychology for human development and spiritual formation. I see value in what sociology teaches us about cultural formation. I see value in postmodern philosophical understandings of epistemology and truth, and what that can teach us about how we know and learn spiritual things. I see value in the mystics approach to non-dual thinking. I guess what I’m saying is that I no longer see the Bible as the final arbiter of truth on all matters pertaining to life.
This has caused friction amongst those who, unlike me, do not wish to question things to a deeper degree. I’m not at all saying one way is better than another, but I am saying that there is a difference in approaches that can cause friction. What I've learned from relational psychology and spiritual formation studies is that I can no longer deny how i'm "wired", and to say that deep thinking is wrong (and I should just be like everyone else) would be to deny who I am. The friction can be beneficial, but at this stage of things, it causes more internal conflict in me than it does positive growth. I can attribute that to what McKnight talks about in the post referenced above, i.e. deconstruction/reconstruction.
I would say I’m still immersed in the deconstruction phase; questioning assumptions, re-evaluating my spiritual life, etc. I might say that I have a small glimpse of what the reconstructed faith could look like, but as of yet, nothing tangible. The lack of clarity and tangibility appears to some to be selfishness, uncertainty, indecisiveness, etc. Understood, but nothing I can do to change that at this point. It’s a tension of uncertainty and freedom that I have never felt before, but I could never go back to the place I’ve deconstructed.
This post really speaks to me. I would say I'm going through such a stage of deconstruction and doubt. It was initiated by a lot of things, but mainly personal experiences, self study, and dialog with trusted friends/mentors. In the book Made to Stick, the authors talk about the "curse of knowledge". What they mean is that once we truly learn something, we can not really unlearn it, nor can we remember how we thought on that topic before we learned the new thing. An example for me is the Bible.
Having studied topics around textual, historical, and social criticism surrounding the Bible, as well as interpretive theories, it is difficult for me to read the Bible “pre-critically” anymore. Will that change? Maybe, but for now, this is where I’m at. I am no longer satisfied with surface readings of a text (and this is all texts, not just the Bible). I also see life more holistically and inter-disciplinary. Meaning, I see value in some of the theories of Jungian psychology for human development and spiritual formation. I see value in what sociology teaches us about cultural formation. I see value in postmodern philosophical understandings of epistemology and truth, and what that can teach us about how we know and learn spiritual things. I see value in the mystics approach to non-dual thinking. I guess what I’m saying is that I no longer see the Bible as the final arbiter of truth on all matters pertaining to life.
This has caused friction amongst those who, unlike me, do not wish to question things to a deeper degree. I’m not at all saying one way is better than another, but I am saying that there is a difference in approaches that can cause friction. What I've learned from relational psychology and spiritual formation studies is that I can no longer deny how i'm "wired", and to say that deep thinking is wrong (and I should just be like everyone else) would be to deny who I am. The friction can be beneficial, but at this stage of things, it causes more internal conflict in me than it does positive growth. I can attribute that to what McKnight talks about in the post referenced above, i.e. deconstruction/reconstruction.
I would say I’m still immersed in the deconstruction phase; questioning assumptions, re-evaluating my spiritual life, etc. I might say that I have a small glimpse of what the reconstructed faith could look like, but as of yet, nothing tangible. The lack of clarity and tangibility appears to some to be selfishness, uncertainty, indecisiveness, etc. Understood, but nothing I can do to change that at this point. It’s a tension of uncertainty and freedom that I have never felt before, but I could never go back to the place I’ve deconstructed.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Great Post!
So, I've been encouraged by a few folks to start blogging again. Mostly because they are probably tired of hearing me talk about all my unformulated crazy thoughts :-) Anyway...I'm giving some thoughts to getting back to writing. In the mean time, this post was priceless, and I agree 100%.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Just had to post this link...
http://www.brianmclaren.net/archives/blog/religious-right-insanity-evangel.html
Good job pointing out this lunancy Brian. I totally agree with Frank Schaeffer.
Good job pointing out this lunancy Brian. I totally agree with Frank Schaeffer.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Blogging, Trends, Blah Blah
http://www.iamjoshbrown.com/blog/2009/03/23/why-i-dont-blog-anymore/
This guy's posting was very timely for me to read. As you can obviously tell, I haven't blogged anything in forever, and those of you who know me on Facebook know that I haven't been there in awhile either. While I don't agree with everything the blogger said, the heart of what he is saying has given a small voice to some of the stuff that has been swirling in me lately about blogging, Facebook, and trends in general. I was actually going to blog about it, but then thought...why? what is the point? I will say this: He makes a great point about voices, and about how this media is starting to propogate the same power structures that exist in culture...stamping out the voice of the margins. I ask...what happen to discernment? What happened to thinking through an issue instead of believing in the latest trend because it's cool? Do people really care about what I (or others) are doing 24X7? And if they do...why?? Anyway, before this turns into a posting about trends, I'll stop. Not sure whether I'll blog anymore. Maybe...maybe not.
This guy's posting was very timely for me to read. As you can obviously tell, I haven't blogged anything in forever, and those of you who know me on Facebook know that I haven't been there in awhile either. While I don't agree with everything the blogger said, the heart of what he is saying has given a small voice to some of the stuff that has been swirling in me lately about blogging, Facebook, and trends in general. I was actually going to blog about it, but then thought...why? what is the point? I will say this: He makes a great point about voices, and about how this media is starting to propogate the same power structures that exist in culture...stamping out the voice of the margins. I ask...what happen to discernment? What happened to thinking through an issue instead of believing in the latest trend because it's cool? Do people really care about what I (or others) are doing 24X7? And if they do...why?? Anyway, before this turns into a posting about trends, I'll stop. Not sure whether I'll blog anymore. Maybe...maybe not.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Back in school...again
So, since the Lehigh thing fell through, I'm taking a class at Biblical. The class is Theology, Ethnicity, and Gender. It's taught by John Franke. I'm absolutely loving the class so far. It is challenging some things in me, in a good way. More on that later. As far as the Culture, Starbucks, etc. postings....haven't had a chance to work on them, but maybe in the next few months I will.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)