Been reading this great book by Dallas Willard who is a Professor in the School of Philosophy at the University of Southern California. His basic premise is that Christian 'faith' and 'knowledge' are deeply interrelated concepts. Belief is not irrational.
He paints an incredible picture of the current state of intellectual debate in the public sphere. I'm struck by the fact that the whole game has moved on from the concept of faith being a source of credible knowledge and guidance. It is almost like Christianity has lost the argument about its own validity.
Recent research into the Bible reading habits and attitudes of young Australian Christians show some real issues for the perception of the Bible in terms of credibility, plausibility and relevance.
The root causes of youth Bible dis-engagement in the West seem to get deeper and deeper the more I look into it. Young people currently lack understanding of the true nature of the Bible and have few or no worthy role models to guide them in this critical area.
Do we need to go back and win the argument for the Bible again?! The problems in my mind are about leadership and education. Are we clear in our own minds about the ability of the Bible to stand in the face of extensive criticism? Are we sold on the validity of the Bible? If there is even the faintest doubt in our minds (and I've detected a few in myself) we need to go back and do some hard intellectual work.
It's almost embarrassing to admit this, but yesterday I ordered a copy of Larry Stone's, "The Story of the Bible", so that I could get informed again about the details of how this thing the Bible came together. I need to get educated again. How are you doin'?
9 comments:
Hi Marty - is the pic you show that of a Dallas Willard book, or an article or what? Can't find the title on Amazon.
Shalom
Hi GordonG! Try this...
http://www.amazon.com/Personal-Religion-Public-Reality/dp/0340995211/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1301282030&sr=1-3-fkmr0
Cheers...
Hi Marty,
coming from a young persons perspective. I dont find that being 'convinced' that the bible is real to be the key for me to engage in it.
I find the down right challenge that it asks of us to be engaging. if that makes sense.
I dont want the bible to be proven as true. It isn't faith anymore if it is proven true.
BUT i do want people to prove to me the WAY of Jesus is still the best way to engage the world today.
So it is about those significant older generation modelling their lives based on the story of the bible. I think that would engage some young people in the bible.
Thats all just mark rant (has not been proven or studied, just thought up).
:-) Keep it Up
Interesting comment Mark. I find your rejection of the notion of 'proof' challenging. It would seem to contradict what I am arguing for here...
However, I do have problems with your statement about 'faith' only applying to what can't be proven to be true. Is faith just a blind leap in the dark? If it has no rational basis at some level, is it not pure speculation and perhaps even madness? This kind of argument about 'faith' being outside of 'knowledge' is the very thing that has allowed so many people to write faith off, from what I've observed.
I do like your challenge to authentic Christian living though - that is right on the money.
Perhaps the problem is that "older generations" have lost faith in the credibility of the Bible, have stopped living by it, and younger people have noticed this and subsequently written the whole thing off.
it might help if i explain a bit more...
As far as proof goes, seeing someone live in a way that contradicts the worlds general operation is going to prove Jesus died more than a history book.
the problem is that our faith does not have any credibility in the western world and probably never will because it does not support the western world view, if anything it contradicts the way the world should or does operate.
But yeah thinking about the blind stab in the dark thing. thats true i guess. Never thought about it that way before. Faith does seem a bit of maddness at some points, particularly following Jesus ( even a lot of people back in his day called him demonized, maybe that even gives us a hint at what we might be called these days if we truly followed in the steps of our saviour?)
Wow Mark! You really are a Postmodernist (LOL!), and you are making me feel like a forty-something Modernist (or possibly Pre-modernist if I think about it...).
Are you saying that you would only be convinced by what you see in the lives of those who claim to be Christians? Is that the only ‘proof’ that you are looking for? That sounds like an argument from ‘experience’ rather than absolute truth. What would happen if nobody around you was living an authentic Christian life of integrity? Would this nullify the truth claims of the Bible?
I guess I’m arguing that authenticity and truth must go hand in hand.
Maybe the “older generation” of Christians have lost faith in the credibility of the Bible, stopped living lives of authenticity and counter-cultural ‘contradiction’, and younger people have noticed this and thrown in the towel.
‘Experience’ is a fickle beast to build a worldview on. If you don’t look to ‘proof’, ‘truth’, ‘reason’, ‘fact’, ‘history’ and ‘rationality’ to inform your ‘faith’ choices, you are at the mercy of your feelings and your circumstances aren’t you?
Arghh... i see a bit more now.
I see that there is a need for truth and experience to go hand in hand.
How do we present the bible as credible to post moderns? i have no idea because they are focused on individual 'personalised' truth(s). Which makes it complicated.
I think the bible might even create some room for that. For example, Jesus approached everyone differently. Each person that comes into contact with Jesus is given a unique invitation into the kingdom of God.
How did i get onto that?
haha.
Quote "What would happen if nobody around you was living an authentic Christian life of integrity? Would this nullify the truth claims of the Bible?"
That is hard to say. I think that people regardless of whether they are post modern or modern will agree to at least one value or ethic in the bible, maybe that is enough truth to get someone engaged in the bible.
What i am saying is that it might be easier to start with small steps with people who do not see the bible as being credible. Start with something that they do believe or agree with and move from there. More often than not people agree with a lot out of the bible, which can be a great starting point to have genuine conversations about God and start engaging with the bible.
I guess i believe that people can still interact with the bible and maybe even act upon it without believing that the whole text is completely credible and true (or that is what i am finding with the youth at my youth group)
Hope that is kinda staying on topic.
Thanks for the link - Marty. for some reason it isn't listed under the author!! :-)
And on Mark's comment ref faith and proof, can I add...
Hudson Taylor is recorded as saying "Where there is no risk there is no need for God", and I would include the concept of doubt in the wider concept of intellectual risk. In fact I go as far as saying "Where there is no doubt (ie: absolute certainty) there is no need for faith", as faith is taking something 'on trust' even tho you cannot 'prove' it in any scientific way. I agree with Mark that people's lives are evidence of the validity or otherwise of the faith. But even that evidence is not certain proof - the Incarnate love, Atoning death, resurrection power, etc are not facts that can be proven; rather as we see them demonstrated and begin to experience them ourselves we begin to realize their veracity.
Does that make me a po-mo?? I'm 68, not 16!!! :-)
Hi GordonG,
I think (just my interpretation of) Post-Moderns are those who wont accept the Bible as an authoratiative text as far as absolute truth.
Because if one believes the bible is authoritative and contains the absolute truth, then one 'can' prove all those things you listed to themselves.
Where a post modern doesn't believe there is a source of absolute truth, which means that they cant prove that all the events in the bible actually happened.
Interestingly, you probably still have post-modern elements because you are still interacting with the postmodern society that exists now.
Post a Comment