Theology as Art September 24, 2007
Posted by Erik in Articles, Treatises, the relational church.add a comment
There is a difference between art and science
Science is primarily interested in empirical facts. Science uses methodology and experimentation to verify a result. It involves controlled environments and known formulas and facts. It has its surprises and its anomalies; but it is, for the most part, boring in my honest opinion.
It is not that science isn’t valid. Far from it. Science yields a wealth of data, and as a tool, it is invaluable. But as a way of life or as a world view, it is boring.
Think about it for a minute. Science leaves little room for creativity or discussion. It is simply the power of the mind and a problem it confronts. It is about obtaining fact, not truth.
This is why evolution fails so miserably as a worldview. It tries to view the universe dispassionately, as a simple machine. It fails to explain the inexplainable, and chalks it up to “one day we will know.”
And science is only as objective as the scientist performing the experiments and compiling the studies. It is limited by his/her/their limitations or biases. And so, it is never truly objective.
Art in Contrast
Now consider art. Art is not bound by laws and formulas. A technically perfect replica of a famous painting or performance of an aria might have all the right pieces in the right places, but it lacks soul, lacks life.
One of my favorite musicians died ten years ago. His name was Rich Mullins, and he was a beautiful artist. He lived in a trailer and taught music to Indian children. Although his CD’s won awards and sold many copies, he would often delay a tour so he could go on a missions trip to Ireland or South America.
Rich believed in his art. It was his way of expressing his devotion to Jesus, his selfless love for others. He would say things that would upset people because of their simple truth. As one interviewer put it: “You have the capability of being quite charming and also extremely offensive.”
This was how Rich wrote his theology, with the strum of his guitar and his slightly shaky vocals. He called out to his Savior in the voice God gave him, with the art God instilled in his soul.
Art is expression. Rather than pretending that it is objective, art embraces the fact that the artist is subjective. His feelings and thoughts and driving values become part of his work. He does not ignore who he is in creating his art; he becomes part of it.
God is an artist, not a scientist
Science is really just observing God’s habits. He liked giving some animals spines and jellyfishes jelly. He liked giving birds good eyesight and apparently liked painting spots and stripes on African animals. He created the stars to operate however the operate (we think fusion, but we can’t get close enough to check); and he had a particular proclivity for dipping his paintbrush in the carbon when it came to making lifeforms.
He preferred green for plants because it made summer look full; but he went with blue for the sky and the ocean, just for contrast. He decided that planets worked best at certain orbits, and he apparently got carried away with the moons when it came to Jupiter (there are 63 we know of).
And when it came to making human beings, he figured my wife and daughter needed good looks more than I did.
My Point Has Something to do with “Happy Trees”
Really all I am trying to say is that sometimes we think science and rationalism are the answers to understanding life, the universe, and everything (subtle Douglas Adams reference). But they’re NOT. We are human beings with experiences and emotions – cold dead facts do not become us, and we have a tendency to twist them anyway.
We are, however, like our Creator, artists. If we accept that we come to the table with subjectivity, biases and baggage, then we can enter into open dialogue.
Today, I heard someone answer a question by saying, “Those are good questions and they deserve a response.” It struck me because in my mind, my answer went this way, “Those are good questions, and they deseve a discussion.” I don’t think we always have to have the answers. We get to enjoy the journey.
Rather than having to be right and have the system down, we can enjoy the dialogue. We, as a community, can enter into exploration together and get to know each other and the truth even better.
I remember Bob Ross. He used to be on PBS a lot, with his white man afro and his insane obsession with landscapes featuring “happy trees.” I think he really genuinely enjoyed helping people paint via TV. It was a real joy to him because he was creating, and he knew that you were creating along with him. It was a communal thing – bizarre I know, but true.
We should rediscover the art of conversation, instead of the science of lecture. I think theology needs to be an art, where we are constantly checking things, trying things and exploring possibilities. Art is not a free-for-all (despite some protests of the untalented hacks who are trying to get you to buy nothingness). It has standards, both aesthetic and technical. But it is also free to explore; and that is its strength.
Taking the Time to Define September 8, 2007
Posted by Erik in Definitions.add a comment
I am not sure how the term relational theology has been used in other circles, and we may need to select a new title for this emerging way of thinking on this blog. If relational theology somehow limits God, as one poster noted some time ago then this is certainly not what we mean here.
On this site, relational theology is a structure of belief that is built around the concept that God is primarily a relational being. He does not exist in isolation but rather in constant interaction with other beings – namely us – and his creation – the universe.
- It is theology because it is a study of what we know about God.
- It is relational because in understanding God, we see that we know him only through relationships in which he expresses himself.
In this form of relational theology, everything takes on a natural tension. It is not easy to demarcate statements as Calvinist or Arminian, preterist or futurist. Instead, the truth exists in the tensions. Relationships are continual things, thus theology is not static but vibrant and alive.
The nature of redemption, of anything really, is that of journey – both past and present. We are part of a narrative rather than the climax of the story.
To my knowledge, no one has rethought God and the Bible from this perspective. Most people bring relational aspects into established systematic theologies. We are attempting to produce something wholly different and unique, but prayerfully close to what was originally intended.
We Emerge September 4, 2007
Posted by Erik in Treatises.2 comments
It is easy to live in the shell of thinking that we have formed over our lives (both long and short) and convince ourselves that we have arrived, that we have it all down. We convince ourselves that we know all there is to know in order to make decisions.
One pastor friend of mine was asked what beliefs he had changed since graduating from college some thirty-five years ago now, and he replied with pride, “Absolutely none!” He answered that way because he believes he learned the truth and he will hold to that truth with stubborn rigidity and unfailing loyalty. I admire his devotion, but I have to wonder about whether this is really the way we should be thinking.
Theology and doctrine are after all human pursuits. They are developed by human beings based on the Bible. They are not the Bible. And human pursuits such as interpretation and translation are just that – human. They are not divine, although they are keyed to the task of seeking divine truth.
The ancient rabbis knew that no man or group of men could ever get everything right. They believed that there was always room for improvement. One particular rabbi, Hillel, taught that every rabbi must consider his yoke. (Yoke was their word for a way of understanding Torah.) He encouraged everyone he taught to rethink everything for themselves and understand Torah in their own way.
If a student came to Hillel and offered an explanation or commentary of Torah that made things overly complicated or added rules or just plain did not make sense, Hillel would respond, “You have destroyed Torah.”
When a rabbinical student would come to him and explain something from Torah in a way that made it clearer or rang truer, Hillel would say, “You have fulfilled Torah.”
Jesus once said to his disciples: “Do not think that I have come to destroy Torah or the Nevi’im (prophets). I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.” (Matthew 5:17) Jesus came to simplify Torah, to reinterpret the Jewish law in a simple more direct way – namely, the way he lived his life. The best way to live a righteous life is to live like Jesus did – selflessly loving everyone and calling them to love God and each other.
You see, that’s why we never arrive. We never have it down. We never get it perfect. We have to always be questioning and seeking a better, clearer way to think about God. Doctrine and Christian living are not destinations, they are journeys and we will always be on the journey.
We do not arrive; we emerge. We are constantly emerging from patterns of thinking, from ways of living, often from stuff we do not even know is influencing us. We are really sometimes oblivious to parts of things, and we have to be willing to open ourselves up and rethink the way we are thinking.
We emerge. All our lives, we emerge. We fail when we think that we have everything under control. It is only when we accept that this thing we are doing – anything we are doing – is bigger than us and we are just part of something even bigger than that. We are just emerging.
Restoration September 2, 2007
Posted by Erik in Treatises.add a comment
In the beginning, God created the heavens AND the earth… [Genesis 1:1]
Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth… [Revelation 21:1]
There is something involved about the heavens and the earth. They often occur together; and it is no mistake that John ends the Revelation by drawing on the primitive language of Genesis in presenting the new ideal. They are intricately connected.
One World
It is in vogue in modern Christianity to make a distinction between “this life” and “the next.” All kinds of colorful language is used to distinguish between heaven and earth. But in the original creation poem, they are classed as one creation. They are one world. And to the first man, walking in the garden in the east of Eden, he must have felt this way. He and God shared a unique bond – there was a communion between them, a sharing. Although he did not have the terminology for it, his spirit was united with God’s spirit and he was at one with all of God’s creation.
Talking about God’s Kingdom, Jesus said that in order to see it you have to be “born of water and spirit.” (John 3:5) There is a physical and spiritual side to every human being. We were created for a world comprised of both – but sin tore us away from the spiritual. This is why the spiritual feels so unnatural to us. Our humanity has been conditioned by generations of living according to the flesh.
When we look at ourselves as totally physical beings, it should not surprise us that we see only animals. From a physical point of view, our bodies function as those of animals. We eat we sleep; we reproduce; we defend ourselves; we attack others. We function. Without the spiritual aspect, we are just animals.
In fact, we are worse than animals because we have the capacity for a whole life – a unique existence that fuses the spiritual and physical. An animal is fully physical. They are complete as is. We are not. We are left incomplete and broken.
Twisted and Turning
When sin entered the equation, it twisted the creation away from God. Under its subtle but constant pressure, our race warped and bent out of form and into distortion. With every successive generation we become more broken, more altered from our original form.
Often the Bible uses the term repent for seeking God’s righteousness. It literally means “to turn.” If you think of sin in terms of twisting creation away from God, then repentance is seeking our original form – our original position. It is not becoming something we are not, but rather becoming something we were intended to be.
God is seeking to restore the connection we shared with him, but sin has twisted us. We cannot connect as we are without damaging ourselves. The process of being reformed to God’s image – our original form – is painful and often requires time and pain. Sometimes it requires bending beyond what is actually required so we will naturally fall into the proper form.
Why should it surprise us that this process of restoration is difficult? Realigning something as complex as a human being is not like rewiring an electrical outlet. There are millions upon millions of interconnected beliefs, emotions, thoughts, processes involved. God is at work; we are at work; but even in the best case scenarios, it is often trial and error on our part.
Ultimately…
God has in mind the redemption and restoration of his entire creation, not just individuals. Ultimately, this thing of salvation is not just about “souls” but about reuniting heaven and earth as it was meant to be. It is not about properly understanding biblical prophecy or appropriately exegeting Greek and Hebrew pronouns. It is about the restoration of man and his dominion as part of the kingdom of God.
We get to be a part of that reconciliation and redemption – not as crusaders and warriors but as teachers and caregivers. As God twists us back into connection with him and he becomes more real to us, we become more human and we call others to this walk. We walk in Jesus’ light and call others into the light.
