A masters student is working on a project addressing conflict in the local church. This week they worked on a chapter looking at biblical-theological issues relating to their projects. I never like this week, even though I'm the one who set it up. I don't like it because few are equipped to do a decent job of it.
What would be a decent job to me? Something along the lines of what Richard Hays does in the issue chapters of Moral Vision. From my perspective, what inevitably comes out is a somewhat superficial, personalized reading of some passages that seem to reinforce the intuitions of whoever is doing the reading.
A seasoned pastor recently suggested to me that what the coming generation might need to address some of its deficiencies was more Bible classes. But I guarantee if I listened to one of his or her sermons I would hear pretty much the same superficial kind of mirror reading of Scripture that hears its own theological values in the text. What he or she meant was I would like to tell them what I think the Bible means and them be convinced that it is the very command of God.
I don't remember the name, but I heard someone saying something similar about the recent Evangelical Manifesto. It was something like, "We don't need a manifesto; we just need the Bible." Tell that to the other 20,000 denominations who disagree with you, all of whom are just following the Bible.
Well, all of that is aside. We were chatting a little tonight about the distinction between managing and resolving conflict. Some think that conflict is always bad and always needs to be resolved. Others prefer to speak of managing it, thinking of it as inevitable.
Part of the discussion had to do with a book that sought out five types of conflict in the Garden of Eden. The thought occurred to me that, in a sense, human history is God's managing rather than resolving conflict. True, Christ has set the resolution in motion. Resolution (salvation) is a done deal. But if the conflict began with Satan and was passed on by Adam, then human history is God managing conflict rather than resolving it... at least not immediately.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Yep, "conflict" is such a muddy term... including a range all the way from differences and disagreements through to open war. Depending on the level we might "manage" or "resolve" it... not just in the church but also in marriage? It is an interesting point that the presence of evil in the world in the face of an almighty God who could at once end the conflict--yet lets the conflict continue (howbeit "managed") for a time yet is instructive... thanks for that thought
It is hard to talk to someone who knows the answer and believes that what is written is as it was "in the beginning"...I have chosen in the past to not engage those whose identity is so tightly bound to a "legal understanding" of "truth", because any disagreement is a challenge to their understanding of themselves. I do understand this reaction, and possibly have to re-think my commitment "not to engage". Understanding and committing to a hermenuetic IS an identity. That is what the political situation is all about in this world. Challenges to ownership are brought to the forefront based on "an authority". This becomes problematic, because the person has a secondary identity that is more important than being human. Humanity is made in God's image, each individual, in each ethnic group, and in each culture. But, we cannot live without secondary identification factors, at least not in this life, so, we disagree and "war" based on the values we hold most dear. And those who are reflective enough to understand these secondary identifications are "blessed" in that, they are free to love by engaging or not. And then, conflict becomes more about the outcomes, than the initial differences.
By the way, I have "terrors" of "jihad". Jihad, or holy war, is an identification so closely related to a "model of God", circumventing rationality, that it undermines order (family ties, and marriage), individuality and freedom in the "name of God". Some believe that this is what discipleship is all about. Is God like that, promising us rewards for obedience to super spiritual commitments? Brrr....
Angie, I'll confess that I often can't follow the train of thought in your responses--especially how they connect with whatever my post happens to be. Sometimes I read them several times to try to follow what you're saying and what the connections are. But usually I'm just not quite sure what to say in response.
I think you have some really good things to say on topics that you're interacting with in Washington or thinking about in that context. I would love to read and link a blog by you about your time there.
I think I suggested you open a blog a while back. That would make it easier for people to dialog with your thoughts. When you post them here and they aren't closely related to what I post, people are puzzled, like the commenter a few weeks ago.
I have a dilemma. I agree with you that many read the Bible with their own preconceived ideas as to it's meaning. I know of Pastors who have done precisely what you wrote about in your blog and have I am sure over 18 years of ministry done the same thing. However, sometimes when I read your blog, I get the feeling that only those with a PhD in Bible or Theology could possibly have any idea what God is trying to convey through the Bible. Maybe Luther and Wycliffe and the others who brought Scripture to the common man should not have wasted their time if only the well educated professors can discern what the Bible really means.
I don't really believe that you think that but your blogs at times do come off that way. Thanks for your posts. I enjoy reading and thinking about them.
David, my opinion here is that it is both much simpler and much more difficult than the vibes I apparently give off.
It is much simpler because a child could hear God speak in the words of the Bible. Most valid preaching is, in my opinion, a triangulation of Spirit-led reading of the biblical text undergirded by a Christian common sense we have inherited from 2000 years of Christian tradition. I believe anyone can know what God intends to convey (present tense) through the Bible.
At the same time, I believe it is also more difficult than I let on to know what God was conveying originally in the Bible. I for one act as if I know more about the original meaning of the Bible than I do. I have a hunch not only that I will have to wear a dunce cap in heaven for my stupidity, but that we will all be shocked to know how foreign the worlds of the Bible were from all the things we have thought about them.
My opinions...
If you are wearing a dunce hat, I hate to think of what I will be wearing :)
I think managing conflict in the Church from a biblical/theological standpoint is especially hard today because there are so many issues of conflict that the Bible says nothing about. We try to stretch the application of Scripture to our present circumstances through hermeneutics, but even that becomes hazy.
Case in point, last semester at Trinity I attended a Christian ethics class to hear a friend of mine give a presentation on transgender issues in the Church. They put forth the following scenario: "You have a transgender person who became a believer a year ago and this person wants to become involved with ministry in some form (being an usher, helping lead worship, running sound etc.). There are only a few people in the church aware that this person is transgender and a couple of them have raised objections. What do you do?"
There were about fifty people in this class, 97% of whom were MDiv majors and already part-time or full-time pastors in area churches. I was sick to my stomach when the most popular answers to the issue were:
1. Tell this person that the sex change will have to be reversed before they can get involved.
2. Have this person tell the congregation that they are transgender and let the members decide what should be done
And of course, these two positions were defended using "biblical application."
I do admit that as a mere philosopher I cannot imagine how difficult it would be for a pastor to be in that type of situation, but at the same time I sincerely hope that none of the people in that class will EVER be in a situation even remotely close to that. However, in this day and age it would seem that the issues of conflict in the Church will head in this direction more and more.
It is good for me to hear that you don't understand. I am sorry for that, as it is not understood, I suppose, by many. I have a very great tendency to try to connect whatever I read (such as your blog) and experience and hear...therefore, many times the responses I have are due to extraneous information that I am trying to connect to what you are saying...I am usually thinking all the time, so, my thoughts go in many directions. I need to recognize before I respond to something that I am not giving proper context to what I am saying....I guess you could say that because people don't have privy to my mind, and understanding of how I am putting together things, that it correlates a little with how we (mis)understand the Bible.
Post a Comment