Questions from Feminist Theology

I went along to Theology 101 at church today and, apart from being perhaps the first Soup and Theology I've been to without Chris, and missing his particular brand of "Jubious theology" :) , I quite enjoyed learning about feminist theology...

Mark was doing 'What's Right About Feminism?'

Lots to critique in the texts, but I was left with some interesting questions and counter-questions:

• Given that the Bible was written by male authors, did it have to be this way?
• Would the Bible have been essentially different if it had been written by women? Assuming that it would have been, at least to some degree, different, what does this say about the nature of truth? Could it still have been the Word of God? (perhaps a meaningless question.. Scripture is as it is.)
  
• Did the Bible have to have been written by men? Was this a reflection of the (male-dominated) culture, or was it supposed to be this way - determining cultural norms? As in a hegemony, which comes first - the reality or the interpretation of that reality as normative? In other words, perhaps controversially, is the patriachal hermeneutic divinely ordained or the product of a fallen society obsessed with holding power over others? Or is it somewhere between the two?
  

These are complicated questions and raise questions about the authority and authorship of the Bible. Part of the answer may rest on how we see the divine / human authorship of the Bible. But asking 'could it have been otherwise?' is much the same as 'could it have been other?' and leads us onto difficult and possibly dangerous ground. Scripture defines itself.

I'm not normally a fan of feminism, but I have to admit these are interesting questions. Ultimately of course, we know Scripture - as it stands - as God's word and I'm not about to dispute that. But I do think it's a sensible idea to treat texts with a 'hermeneutic of suspicion' at times - as long as you remember to question this hermeneutic as well! As a good friend used to say, 'I'm learning to question my doubts'.

I also think it's important to learn from the way feminist theologians are explicit about their hermeneutical agenda, not claiming to be unbiased or objective. I have some serious issues with some of their conclusions, but I do think they raise some important issues about the importance of questionning our own hermeneutics and use of language.

However, at the end of the day I want to remember that we're involved in a searching for the Truth - above liberation, freedom, 'correctness', or anything else. Because we believe that ultimately Truth is a person (John 14.6), and he alone gives true freedom.

...Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. ...if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed." John 8.31-36

Wycliffe and Tyndale

[Still in my addiction to audiobooks phase!]

After finishing the unabridged 'Dune' by Frank Herbert (read by Scott Brick), which was a completely absorbing 22 hours on another world (and even more marvellous to listen to than read), I'm now listening to Melvyn Bragg's Adventure of English. It's a truly fascinating story for anyone interested in history and language and Robert Powell's narration makes the words and language come alive. From Beowulf to Chaucer to Elizabeth I... (that's about as far as I've got!)

I'm currently deep in the Middle Ages; being inspired and moved by the stories of Wycliffe and Tyndale and their respective Bible translations. Tyndale sounds like a fantastic character particularly. The story of him agreeing to sell a whole print run of 6000 copies to the Bishop of London - which were then burnt - and then using the proceeds to finance a new version - pure brilliance! And Melvyn Bragg rightly raves about the lyricism and brilliance of his translation. He introduced a huge number of new words and phrases into English (see the Wikipedia article for examples). The King James Version stuck to his phrasing and vocabulary in most cases and lots is still familiar today in modern translations.

Tyndale was a preacher and his version was a preacher's Bible, lyrical and memorable. Bragg comments that English Bibles today still share this legacy from Tyndale of being designed to be read aloud and understood by all.

"I defy the pope, and all his laws... If God spared him life, ere many years he would cause a boy that driveth the plough to know more of the Scripture than he did."

Bragg has some great quotes from Tyndale and others, which sadly I cannot share because I don't have the text in front of me, but I highly recommend reading the book - or even getting the audiobook (I have a subscription at Audible - by far the cheapest way!)

Preaching the Gospel

[From a link on Undercover Theologian.]

I liked this article by Tim Keller on Christianity Today's Leadership Journal on 'The Gospel in All it's Forms' about the different aspects of the 'one gospel' and, especially, his wisdom on preaching them:

1. I don't put all the gospel points into any one gospel presentation.

When studying Paul's gospel speeches in the book of Acts, it is striking how much is always left out. He always leads with some points rather than others in an effort to connect with the baseline cultural narratives of his listeners. It is almost impossible to cover all the bases of the gospel with a non-believing listener without that person's eyes glazing over.

2. I use both a gospel for the "circumcised" and for the "uncircumcised."
- or the moralists and the postmoderns

...I use the biblical definition of sin as idolatry. That puts the emphasis not as much on "doing bad things" but on "making good things into ultimate things." ...I tell them that they are sinning because they are looking to their romances to give their lives meaning, to justify and save them, to give them what they should be looking for from God. ...Then Christ and his salvation can be presented not (at this point) so much as their only hope for forgiveness, but as their only hope for freedom. This is my "gospel for the uncircumcised."

3. I use both a "kingdom" and an "eternal life" gospel.

...I point out the story-arc of the Bible and speak of the gospel in terms of creation, fall, redemption, and restoration. We once had the world we all wanted—a world of peace and justice, without death, disease, or conflict. But by turning from God we lost that world. Our sin unleashed forces of evil and destruction so that now "things fall apart" and everything is characterized by physical, social, and personal disintegration. Jesus Christ, however, came into the world, died as a victim of injustice and as our substitute, bearing the penalty of our evil and sin on himself.

4. I use them all and let each group overhear me preaching to the others.

No one form of the gospel gives all the various aspects of the full gospel the same emphasis. If, then, you only preach one form, you are in great danger of giving your people an unbalanced diet of gospel-truth. What is the alternative? Don't preach just one gospel form. That's not true to the various texts of the Bible anyway. If you are preaching expositionally, different passages will convey different forms of the one gospel. Preach different texts and your people will hear all the points. ...

Lots of wisdom there I thought! Read the full article.

Thanks Matt!

Your Atonement is Too Small

From an article on Christianity Today, reviewing 'A Community Called Atonement' by Scot McKnight. Looks interesting!

...A Community Called Atonement is not just a bridge-building book. It is also an expand-your-vision book. To parody J. B. Phillips's famous title, this book could have been called Your Atonement Is Too Small.

McKnight's gaze follows the way Paul focuses his wide-angle lens. McKnight reviews the various metaphors, pictures, and theories of Atonement implicit in Scripture and looks for the big picture. Taking themes expounded by the earliest church fathers—victory, ransom, recapitulation—he wraps them together into one package called 'identification for incorporation.'

Yancey

Christianity Today has a really nice article about Philip Yancey, one of my favourite Christian writers.

I'm a big fan of Yancey's writing, especially 'What's So Amazing About Grace?', which is always in my 'Christian classics pile'. I was also reminded today of how good 'In the Likeness of God' (by Yancey and Dr Paul Brand) is - a fascinating journey through the intricacies of the human body and the insight they give us into the body of Christ. Loved it - the science and the theology!

Coming up

Films I'm looking forward to this summer.

Prince Caspian - 27 June
Not my favourite book, but looks like a fun movie!


Indiana Jones 4 - 22 May
Wahey! How can Indiana Jones not be fantastic?


The X Files 2 - 1 August
Can you believe they're back?! Mulder and Scully rock...

Everything you need to know in 7 minutes

Everything you need to know about the Democratic race for president in 7 minutes. Genius.


Via Marbury.

Articles on the rise of Reform Theology

I'll be keeping up with this ongoing discussion on Christianity Today, between Tony Jones (no, not the Durham one!) of 'The New Christians: Dispatches from the Emergent Frontier' and Collin Hansen of Young, Restless, Reformed: A Journalist's Journey with the New Calvinists.

Also, I thought this guest post from Thomas McCall was interesting to read in its sympathetic - yet cautionary - portrayal of the New Calvinists.