Students of Emergent (Emerging Students?)

I know some of you might disagree, but I’m pretty convinced that we can learn quite a bit from the Emergent movement.  Of course, the Emergent movement is quite “liquid,” so I guess I tend to appreciate the more orthodox side of it – I learn more from those who are more faithful to Scripture, in other words.  I’ve mentioned An Emergent Manifesto of Hope ed. by Pagitt and Jones (2007) here before, and though some of the chapters were frankly repulsing, I think one of the better ones is “Humble Theology” by Dan Kimball.  Here are a few excerpts.

“I want to be continually discussing, learning, reading, and thinking seriously about all varieties of theological thought.  I want to be constantly exploring which theological beliefs have changed throughout history, which ones have remained consistent.  There are many unknowns and mysteries in theology.  We should be able to continually think and learn about theology with open hearts and open minds.  It is not a weakness to explore theology outside what we’ve been taught in our specific church or seminary.  It’s not a weakness to admit there is a lot we just don’t know.  I see that as a strength, not a weakness.  Weakness is when we simply close our minds and become afraid to explore different ideas, which may mean we are afraid to be challenged or discover something new.”

In some ways and to some extent we try to do that on this blog (and see here for more info). Kimball closes the chapter with a few thoughts to ponder.  I’ll list a few (emphasis his).

“We can hold certain beliefs as truth and not feel arrogant or close-minded when we do.  Yes, there is mystery, and yes, there are a lot of unknowns, but we can still confidently say we do know certain things that God revealed to us. …  It is not a weakness to be open to theological rethinking. … Approach theology with humility. … Be loving and gracious to others when you disagree.”

These are things worth wrestling over, especially in our changing times.  A hundred years ago we could stand for the truth against the liberals with a fundamentalist defensive posture.  Today is a different day.  We need a different posture of standing for the truth.  We have different people to speak the gospel to – not many higher critics and liberals, but more skeptics, doubters, mockers, the broken-hearted, and the poor.  Humility and love is, I believe, a great posture to assume as we stand on and for the truth.  And it sounds quite biblical!

Speaking of being students of Emergent, I have this “Five Perspectives” book coming in the mail, so stay tuned.

shane lems

sunnyside wa

Humility – Where Has It Moved? (Chesterton)

 This one is worth reading aloud – a few times.

“What we suffer from today is humility in the wrong place.  Modesty has moved from the organ of ambition.  Modesty has settled upon the organ of conviction; where it was never meant to be.  A man was meant to be doubtful about himself, but undoubting about the truth; this has been exactly reversed.”

G.K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (SanFransisco: Ignatius Press, 1995), 36-37.

shane lems

sunnyside wa

Faith, Doubt, & Certainty in Christian Discipleship (Newbigin)

This is an amazing and truly outstanding book.  Lesslie Newbigin’s Proper Confidence (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995) is honestly one of the best brief and to the point books I’ve read on Christian epistemology (i.e. knowing things – specifically how faith and knowledge relate).  I would love to do a series of blog posts on this book, but I don’t have the time right now.  Instead, I’ll blurb a bit now, and come back to it later.

In this book, Newbigin talks about modernism & fundamentalism along with postmodernism & liberalism.  He wonderfully describes them, critiques them, points out the strengths of each, but then says neither will ultimately do for a Christian pilgrim “on the way.”  In fact, says Newbigin, our knowledge is “partial here in via, but promised in its fullness at the end” (p. 7).  We cannot assume a sort of enlightenment or even fundamentalistic view of knowledge, that we know so much based on scientific, reasonable propositions.  Nor can we assume a sort of liberal or postmodern view that nothing can be known with any certainty.  Instead,

“If the place where we look for ultimate truth is in a story and if (as is the case) we are still in the middle of the story, then it follows that we walk by faith and not by sight.  If ultimate truth is sought in an idea, a formula, or a set of timeless laws or principles, then we do not have to recognize the possibility that something totally unexpected may happen.  Insofar as our knowledge is accurate, we shall be able to predict the future.  Future and past events are governed by the same laws, the same principles, and the same realities.  But if we find ultimate truth in a story that has not yet been finished, we do not have that kind of certainty.  The certainty we have rests on the faithfulness of the one whose story it is.  We walk by faith” (p. 14)

Again, I’ll come back to this book some other time.  If you want a lesson in epistemology, especially how to think and act when it comes to liberalism and fundamentalism or postmodernism and modernism, reason and faith, and so forth, you really have to get this book.

A few more reading tips: First, Newbigin appropriates Polayni well in this book.  Second, this adds a new “robustness” to Van Til’s presuppositional arguments.  Finally, I assure you that if you read this book of Newbigin along with Herman Bavinck’s Certainty of Faith, you will not only be edified, your faith will also be strengthened, and you’ll have a great set of lenses with which to read and view the Christian faith in light of science, doubt, and skepticism.   Both books are around 100 pages and probably easy enough for anyone who knows the basic outlines of the history of philosophy.

shane lems

sunnyside wa

Vanhoozer on Proof-texting

Kevin Vanhoozer, in his excellent book The Drama of Doctrine, gives the reader some things to consider about proof-texting (compiling a list of texts to prove a point).  To be sure, Vanhoozer certainly affirms that texts teach us doctrinal truth, but he says they do more than that.  For now, note what he says about the dangers of proof-texting.

“…Proof-texting is a terrible example of how theology should treat the biblical text in order to do it justice.  Proof-texting assumes a uniform propositional revelation spread evenly throughout Scripture: one verse, one vote.  Not only does this approach risk decontextualizing biblical discourse, it also leaves unclear just how the texts cited in support actually lend their support to the point in question.”

It has to do with language, says Vanhoozer: “A picture of language holds the proof-texter, and propositionalist theology in general, captive.  Propositionalism mistakenly assumes that language is essentially a matter of picturing states of affairs….  Propositionalism thus gives rise to a kind of textual positivism,” which means “regarding theories as nothing more than summaries of experimental data or statements about observable phenomena.  Proof-texting is positivistic, according to this analogy, to the extent that it regards theology as nothing more than summaries of exegetical data or statements about extractable propositions.”

What then?  Vanhoozer continues by saying that “the truth of Jesus Christ comes clothed in the forms of narratives, songs, parables, fulfilled prophecies, pastoral epistles, and apocalyptic…”  This means that “it is a truth that must not only be believed, but felt, done, and loved.  Scripture enjoins us to receive the propositional content of testimony in a variety of ways that correspond to the variety of its forms…the testimony in Scripture is doing more than conveying information: it is training our thinking and perceiving to understand what God is doing in Jesus Christ and in the Scriptures themselves.”

Before tearing Vanhoozer (or me!) apart for this, please read more of his work.  I think he is on to something big; he’s not selling out to post-liberalism or postmodernism, nor is he simply staying in the trenches of modernism.  He is critically engaging both at the same time, and making some helpful contributions along the way.

For the above quotes, see The Drama of Doctrine (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005), 271, 288.

shane

sunnyside wa