home | archives: April 2008

Welcome

FaithFusion offers blogs and columns on many topics: storytelling, society and culture, philosophy, religion, politics, science, and especially “deep doctrine magic” about all seven.

 

Features

 



Tags

 

Archives

 



 

Search

 



Updates



Follow me on Twitter
 



Recently read:
Nonfiction















 


Recently read:
Fiction







 



Passion

Avatar by Roccondil at 04:20 PM ET , Tuesday, Apr 15, 2008

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Churchianity



After some recent reading and thinking on the subject I thought I'd talk a little bit about passion and its importance in the church.

A little background here: I'm a Presbyterian. I have grown up in two conservative PCA churches, one of which educated me very well in doctrine and biblical history. I still sometimes trade biblical trivia with a good friend of mine and love it. The great strength of this, of course, is that I know my way around a Bible and can tell you where to find stuff on a lot of subjects. I also know my Church History and can tell you which theologians come where, what the major movements were, and what happened in the crusades (and I seriously had trouble with coveting when I saw a t-shirt with “Jonathan Edwards is my homeboy” on it).

The problem is that often I have all this head knowledge and no heart knowledge. I can quote chapter and verse on the great theologians from the Apostle Paul to R. C. Sproul, but if I don't have any heart, it's nothing. It doesn't do me any good because I'm not living it.

I was convicted several weeks ago when I was listening to R. C. Sproul talk about the Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard. On a side note, Kierkegaard was a Christian, albeit a controversial one and one who has (unfortunately) had a legacy that he didn't intend in the form of existentialism. As I was saying, Sproul was explaining that Kierkegaard's concern was that the church of his day had no passion for God. They had theology, oh yes they had it, and they had good liturgy, but they had no passion: they were a dead church. Kierkegaard's philosophy was meant to reawaken a flame of passion for God in the church of his day.

So in honor of Kierkegaard, here are some places where the church needs passion.




Courtships and mandates in Scripture, part III: God’s will hunting

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 10:17 AM ET , Monday, Apr 14, 2008

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Deep Doctrine Magic: Cross Firings, Legalism



In Courtships and mandates in Scripture, part I: Undoing ‘umbrella’ understandings, I tried to sort through many legalistic, System-based constructs erected by people like Bill Gothard and others, who place human- and principle-centered moralistic methods between God and individuals. As a result, they glorify — though perhaps incidentally — principles, rather than God Himself, and very often not even Biblical principles but instead a “Talmud” of ideas they’ve derived from culture or merely Biblical descriptions, not commands.

The second column, Courtships and mandates in Scripture, part II: Dichotomies, decisions and dating, explored further, tracing back to the original courtship-and-dating discussion that brought it about. No Christian can truly claim to have found “God’s will” for how to find a spouse in Scripture — we receive no clear commandments for a System there, only general guidance for how to honor others and their hearts, and moreover, God Himself.

This third and last installment of the series explores more the ideas of discerning God’s will through some sorts of “signs,” or trying to base our wisdom on anecdotes — either those found in Scripture or those we find in our own lives or the lives of others.

Interestingly enough, while I was writing this — originally a response to questions from a NarniaWeb forum participant — I was reading further from the book How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. In it, authors Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart directly delve into the dangers of finding “commandments” for our own lives in only Biblical narrative, which could very likely only be describing what happened to others, not ordering our emulations of their actions.

Moreover, just as with Gothard’s “basic principles” system, which can so easily bring about worship of human character instead of the Creator, such an approach to the Bible sidetracks readers far and away from the Word’s original intent: to tell God’s story, not our own.




C.S. Lewis on Art

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 12:32 PM ET , Saturday, Apr 12, 2008

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Life Applications, Storytelling, Media: "Narnia: AWAKE"



In a series of unsourced quotes found in a Tabletalk magazine column, from Ligonier Ministries, C.S. Lewis reminds his readers, or any readers, that with Art, is better to receive than to give — that is, to give one's own meanings. And somehow, while reading Lewis' thoughts and Ryken's paraphrasings, I began to apply the truths not only to Lewis's own fantasy stories, but the greatest true “myth” of them all: the Bible itself.

One of the most important pieces of advice Lewis gave to readers of literature is that they must receive a work of literature instead of using it. Lewis wrote, “A work of…art can be either ‘received’ or ‘used’. When we ‘receive’ it we exert our senses and imagination and various other powers according to a pattern invented by the artist. When we ‘use’ it we treat it as assistance for our own activities” (emphasis added). According to this line of thought, “The first demand any work of art makes upon us is surrender. Look. Listen. Receive. Get yourself out of the way.”

This is not to deny that we should make sense of what we read. It is instead a caution to let stories set their own agenda of concerns according to the order created by the author, not to impose our own agenda on them according to our own timetable as we progress through a story. Lewis’ rule of thumb was to let stories “tell you their own moral” and not “put one in.” The relevance of this to the Narnian stories is that the religious aspects of the stories usually do not appear until approximately halfway through the books. Many Christian readers are impatient with that and force the opening chapters into something that Lewis did not intend.

The second warning that Lewis gave is not to reduce works of literature to a set of ideas. He claimed that “one of the prime achievements in every good fiction has nothing to do with truth or philosophy…at all.” To regard a story as “primarily a vehicle for…philosophy is an outrage to the thing the poet has made for us.” Works of literature “are complex and carefully made objects. Attention to the very objects they are is our first step.” This, too, should steer us away from how many Christian readers deal with The Chronicles of Narnia.

— from The Chronicles of Narnia: The Imagination of C.S. Lewis by Leland Ryken, Tabletalk Magazine, January 2008




Courtships and mandates in Scripture, part II: Dichotomies, decisions and dating

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 09:43 AM ET , Monday, Apr 07, 2008

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Rebuttals, Deep Doctrine Magic: Legalism, Life Applications



Last week’s Courtships and mandates in Scripture, part I: Undoing ‘umbrella’ understandings column began a three-part series touching on several interconnected issues, prompted by a private message I received that was itself prompted within a NarniaWeb forum discussion on “Wuv, Twue Wuv and Mawwiage.”

In the first installment here, I introduced what I contend are the wrong understandings of “courtship” if it’s defined as veritable arranged marriage, based in a worldview that places human authorities on too high a determining pedestal and between individuals and God. Teachers such as Bill Gothard and his imitators manage to find in Scripture “evidence” for Systems of mechanistic man-centered obedience and “patriarchalism.” These result in first, shocking ignorance of God’s past and future Grace, and second, reliance on rules and principles instead of God Himself, between Whom we have no other mediator but Christ!

The following material, which is excerpted from a lengthy message I sent to an interested forum discussion participant, continues those thoughts. It concentrates on how the Graceless, if/then System-based mindset is not directly commanded in actual Scripture and can lead to disastrous results in life, relationships, and everything, just as easily as can cheap, worldly, selfish and serial “dating.”