flexibility

I don't remember if I've written about this subject before, but some some conversations and an article I read recently made me think more about Rob Bell's analogy of the Christian faith as a trampoline, and the more I think about it, the more I like it. To me it represents the epitome of "flexibility." I think that a lot of Christians are afraid of the term "flexible" because they take it to mean something that it is not, like maybe compromising the faith. But when you really think about it, something that is flexible (like a trampoline) is actually able to endure quite a bit of force and still keep its structural integrity. It is not surprising that those who operate, by contrast, with a "brick wall" metaphor for their faith find the idea of flexibilty to be either threatening (i.e. "if you try to bend it, it will break") or confusing ("What do you mean? A brick wall can't bend!")

cosmos and chaos

"my life work is fundamentally creative in nature. And creating has its own rhythms, its own pace. Inspiration comes at strange times when you create. And inspiration comes because of discipline." (115) I realize this thread is a little off-topic from what I have been writing about lately, but I really identify with Bell in this feeling. So often we buy into the popular impression that the creative soul finds inspiration when he is unhindered by structure or discipline. But I believe that God had created us after his image such that our creative tendencies are necessarily tied up in the need for recognizing, affirming, and establishing order. I wish I could remember where I first read the phrase "cosmos and chaos." I think it was while reading something about Leonard Bernstein. But I don't remember if it was he who came up with the phrase. Anyway, it had to do with the idea that we, as artists, have a drive that is founded upon the need to create "cosmos" or order amidst the chaos around us. I realize that Bell is talking about the setting in which creativity is fostered, more so than our reasons for creating. But I think it is all tied up in the same desires for order.

Velvet Elvis meanderings

 " . . . let's make a group decision to drop once and for all the Bible-as-owner's-manual metaphor. It's terrible. It really is." (62) Rob Bell points out that the Bible is full of the "common grace" message and uses the example of Paul at Mars Hill. He quotes the poets of the day and affirms the truth of their writings, while at the same time making clear that they didn't have the whole picture. This is not unlike what the medieval philosophers did with the writings of Aristotle; they pressed the pagan philosophy into the service of the Christian faith. Now granted, they didn't always do this successfully, but in many ways they did and that legacy continues in many of the ways that we interpret Christianity to this day. All truth is God's truth.

measure, form, and order

Augustine says that "goodness" consists in "measure, form, and order."* What are the implications of this for music? To me it seems to shed light on our God-given desire toward order and form in music, and toward being able to have some measure of excellence in music, and in any of the arts, for that matter. Possibly many applications for aesthetics in general . . . hmmm . . . maybe a future article or paper on this.

*This is from a lecture I am currently listening to, entitled "Reason and Faith: Philosophy in the Middle Ages" produced by The Teaching Company; lecturer: Thomas Williams.

Velvet Elvis

" . . . sometimes when I hear people quote the Bible, I just want to throw up. Can I just say that? Can I get that off my chest?" (42) Yes! Thank you, Rob Bell, for saying what many thinking Christians experience. Also, ". . . the Bible is open-ended. It has to be interpreted. And if it isn't interpreted, then it can't be put into action." (46) If this claim causes you concern, stop to think about why. I think a lot of us have been influenced by modernist attitudes toward the Bible, i.e. that it can be approached scientifically. But that just doesn't work. Another question raised is that if you leave room for personal context and experience, you are somehow compromising the inerrancy of scripture. But it is not possible to read the Bible (or anything, for that matter) without also bringing to it your personal experiences, historical contest, your own way of learning, knowing, etc (more on Polanyi's concept of "Personal Knowlede" later). This is a complex issue, and is tied up in the characterization of Christianity as a bastion of certainty, which I am strongly against (an area in which I agree with the postmoderns). I am excited to see Bell embracing the idea of mystery in our faith. I believe the quest for certainty has cause many problems for Christians and non-Christians alike. Does the Bible say "Seek ye first the certainty of God" or "Seek ye first the ability to answer all questions beyond a shadow of a doubt"?

Incarnational Humanism and Common Grace

I just finished reading The Passionate Intellect, and I have to say it is one of the best books I've read in a long time. It stimulated my thinking in so many ways, not only regarding university and the humanities, but about philosophy and dualism, and how as Christians we need to resist academic fragmentation and advocate a more integrated model of the intellectual life.

This book has helped me to realize that my belief in the concept of "common grace" is a salient aspect of my faith right now which causes me to distance myself from many evangelicals. "Incarnational humanism . . . insists on the humble acceptance of God's presence in non-Christian achievements" (167). Also, "Western culture has benefited immeasurably from the work of people on whom Christians (or a portion of the church, at least) too a dim view . . ." (173). This is a far cry from the ultra-conservative evangelical view that we must protect ourselves from any knowledge that comes via non-Christians. This is not only unbiblical, but would be impossible to live out. Thank you, Klaussen and Zimmermann, for elucidating a biblically-based respect for the life of the mind.

Creators of Culture

Question of the day: Who was Giambattista Vico, and why haven't we heard more about him? Apparently he was the father or our modern idea of the humanities. He opposed Descartes's notion that "human knowledge has to conform to the mathematical ideal of certainty . . . " (100) He argued that, "made in God's image, we are creators of culture" and "humanistic knowledge is known by participation" (101). He called this scientia nuova ("new science"). What an exciting parallel to Polanyi's concept of personal knowledge!

The Passionate Intellect

I highly recommend this book (by Klaussen and Zimmermann) to anyone who is interested in the subjects of university education, the humanities, and postmodernism. I wish I could have read it before I completed my college education (though it wasn't yet written!); through tracing the historical development of the university it has given me a new appreciation of the benefits of a well-rounded education, and along the way has cleared up some philosophical terminology, such as "dualism," "ideology," and of course, "humanism." And while it clarifies many terms and concepts, it is also a reminder that the concept of humanism is complex; understanding it involves an in-depth consideration of the Enlightenment and its critics, in all their various forms.
"Why is Heidegger so important? Because he attacked directly the Enlightenment's way of measuring truth and determining rationality. Something was considered rational and true when it could be examined neutrally and objectively. Objective knowledge had to be free from any personal involvement . . . " (116)