Other religions!

We are often asked about 'other religions' with respect to either 'salvation' (however this is conceived in made-up religions) or moral performance: being a 'good' person (notwithstanding that Yeshua has pointed out that no one is good but Yahweh). 

Our reflex is to attempt to discuss the exclusivity of Christ, but often without knowing to start with him being Creator (Colossians 1:13-17ff).

Another way to approach this question is to have a 'grid' by which to talk about the other religion in terms of its structure of reality.

This grid has 3 elements, or dimensions of consideration for any religion:

The centre or 'What/who is god?'

This is the religion's 'centre', generally it is expressed in its conception of deity: for instance is it personal, or localized in a person who might or might not exhaust the deity (thus, Jesus localizes deity, but does not exhaust it). Is the deity communicative: is the communication propositional and thus congruent with our propositional capacity? Is the deity non-propositional, or non-pesronal, such as would be typical of Eastern religions. or even non-existent, as in Buddhism?

The deity or 'Where is god?'

Flowing on from the centre of the religion is the characterization or the place of deity. Is god contained by our general ontological framing, or external to it? On the surface, a deity-concept that is 'contained' by the context that 'contains' or grounds us, is within the system that hosts the dilemma of man (man's' dignity and his corruption being the joint bounds of man's experience of life). On the face of it, not a very encouraging conception.

 

Or is the deity outside of our life-world, to borrow a term? That is, outside 'the world'. As an example, the typical ancient pagan gods are within the world and seem to be contingent, much like flawed super-men. Some pagan gods are identical with the world but manifest in 'spirits' of place and dynamics (e.g. weather gods). Where the god is is the foundation, along with the 'centre' for understanding the connection, if any, between god and man.

Discontent and its Resolution

What is the fulcrum by which the resolution of the dilemma of man: or, as some may like to put it the 'problem of evil' (although the 'problem' goes far deeper than the superficiality of its typical expression). Is it the content of man's actions or is it external to man's actions?

 

This may obviously be a question that springs from the Bible; a Judaeo-Christian question, but still worthwhile: does man 'save' himself?. Does the cosmos 'save' him - or bury him, as in popular atheism?. Does the deity who is still within the 'system' 'save' him, but then, how? Or is saving, or the means of resolution of the dilemma, from without the 'system'?If it is not external to the system, then it must explain how a profoundly corrupted whole system can in any way be the source of the dilemma that is created within and configured by that very system.

Man's connection with reality

How is man connected to the external reality in his full personhood: How does the religion connect man's inherent telos (we cannot but think of the future in some way, as the future is always there as the next thing to do and every next thing subsequently in pursuit of our ambitions) with his contingent state? This is about purpose and its ground. How does man's life revolve about what does not exist: the future and his ambitions for it.

And then, what is the character of man's dilemma the tragedy of his greatness and his foulness which dogs us all and is inescapable historically and existentially.

 

No final answer can come from within the creation, from a non-person, and without relationship, connection and a basis in the real. Denial of the real, which some religions use as their ontological escape hatch, is a vain option.

The world thus connected to

What is the world that we can make sense of it in some way, or us in the world who want to and seek to make sense of it: of our relationships, of our whole 'life-world' (a useful term without wanting to import all of Husserl's ideas and those he influenced)? 

Where does our interaction come from, what is it, and how do we think we can trust it?

The start of analysis of how other religions deal with the concrete facts of the dilemma and its existential tensions is set in this grid that seeks the structure of other religions on these three pivots.It provides a starting point for inquiry and perhaps creates a path for coming to grips with the nature of the 'program' of the religion under consideration.

 

Or in other words

In brief we might inquire into:

• What is God?
• Where is God?
• Who is man?
• Why is man?
• What is the problem?
• Why is the problem?
• What is the solution?
• Why would we care?

See another way of putting this.

Chance based on chance

I came across an old debate of WL Craig's on science and Christian faith.

In the debate Rosenberg completely misunderstands Christian faith, confusing it with animism at best, rather than giving the basis for a rational world view deriving from the direct rational source of creation in propositional information: God thinks of it, speaks it and it happens. What happens is directly related to the words spoken opening up the creation to propositional access.

As an intended creation, propositionally exposed to us, it is accessible to propositional inquiry: we can keep asking and exploring to find out what it is with no limits.

Schaeffer in The God Who Is There in the section on Musique Concrete reports an example of such:

"...The voice is first built up out of chance sounds, reflecting modern man's view that man who verbalizes arose by chance in a chance universe with only a future of chance ahead of him."

Chance here means irrationally, without reason, and so inexplorable and unfathomable. Finally without coherence and epistemologically void.

This is the world, finally ungrounded, the world that Rosenberg unwittingly seeks to build science upon. But his world, the world of mere material with random and informationless interactions, is only the basis for non-science, for the animism that he ironically thinks represents Christianity. Why would science want to explore anything...it's all chance; there is no rhyme or reason! 

But the Genesis creation account shows us that the creation, the cosmos is full of reason and knowledge..there to be found for man-in-God's-image. Not a stranger in the world, not an alien, but its vicegerent.

Incidentally, Rosenberg's dilemma lies at the heart of the fatal contradiction of theistic evolution: that the God who speaks, didn't in fact speak, but somehow worked into a non-speaking cosmos that denies on its own nature any system of information and 'just happens', undermining any basis for a rational epistemology.

The Bible as literature and history

A recent sermon was on the robust trustworthiness of the Bible.

Only so much (or so little!) can be said in the normal 20 minutes we compress sermons into these days, but the idea was good.

It might also be the basis of attracting non-church-goers who are interested in the Bible as a book. There are probably few, but there could be some, particularly contacts of church members.

Now, few non-church people would want to attend a church gathering (service), so any presentation and discussion would need to be a separate event: maybe a series of, say, three 2 hour sessions, including relevant refreshments (coffee and supper/morning coffee/afternoon tea).

The series would look at the structure, of the Bible, its historical books and general historical  flow, its view of man and history, the nature of its literature and text.

It could include relevant videos on archeology, manuscripts, historical connections, and the logic of the 'story of reality' presented by the Bible.

Even if no outsiders attended, it would be useful equipping for church-goers, many of whom, I'd be sure, have uncertain views of the Bible as literature, history, and overall thematic development.

Schaeffer's ontology and Genesis days

From  The God Who is There  - end of chapter 2

God has created a real, external world. It is not an extension of His (sic) essence. That real, external world exists. God has also created man as a real, personal being, and he possesses a "mannishness" from which he can never escape. On the basis of their own world-view often these experience-seekers are neither sure the external world is there, nor that man as man is there. But I have come to the conclusion that despite their intellectual doubts, many of them *have had* a true experience of the reality of the external world that exists, and/or the "mannishness" that exists. They can do this precisely because this is how God has made man, in His own image, able to experience the real world and man's "mannishness." Thus they have hit upon something which exists, and it is neither nothing, nor is it God. We might sum up this third alternative by saying that when they experience the "redness" of the rose, they are having the experience of the external world, as is the farmer who plows (sic) his field. They are both touching the world that is.

My comment

The days of Genesis 1 (which Schaeffer claims in his Genesis in Time and Space, are unimportant) underscore the external objective reality of the cosmos and our experience of it and within it.

God speaks and rationally related events follow that are congruent with the propositional word. Each event, and the events as a set are separate from God, but also real.

We can experience the reality as it is mediated in the 'days' -- the space-time -- of our normal experience of life in the objective world. The days of action overlap with our days of experience of the results of the communicative action by God and place our experience in the same domain as which God is active in creating.

Yet our experience is also subjectively but genuinely substantiated as we are real persons with objective existence in the objective created world separate from God: it is a world in which we can really know real things and represent them in meaningful propositions (created by word on God's part, understood by word on our part: this provides the basis for empirical inquiry of the created world).

We are linked to the external world and its objectivity by God's communication to us of 'imageness' which gives us genuine 'mannishness', to use Schaeffer's term, and real experience of the real external world. The link is grounded by the days of genesian action that place it objectively in the same days our history is denominated by, and separate it from God, while showing God is active, present and communicative in that domain by which his domain overlaps our domain he thus created by his word.

Political prayer

A friend (my son's godfather), asked for some thoughts on prayers he was rostered to make at his church's morning gathering.

They were to touch on:

1. the forthcoming Australian referendum regarding the formation of what would amount to a third house of parliament and a formal constitutionally significant consultative body for the executive government, and
2. the needs of refugees.

I offered the following thoughts: 

Referendum

We pray for the forthcoming referendum that whatever the outcome, opportunities for the gospel in remote places will arise and that our brothers and sisters who live in such places will be able to proclaim your word with effect and bring your salt and light to communities where people have no hope.

[I think anything more might be too political, and as a church I don't think we care much about politics except that the gospel is able to flourish and people hear it meaningfully and turn to Christ in repentance.]

Refugees

We pray for those fleeing persecution and war. Particularly for our brothers and sisters in Christ. We ask that your church in all places will be hospitable to those who are persecuted and that we might effectively make representations to the government on behalf of those fleeing persecution because of their Christian faith; that they may find succor in this land.

We also pray that the difficult task for refugees in coming to grips with the disparate cultures of their hosts will be eased by their faith in you, and those who have not turned to you in repentance and belief may hear your gospel and be obedient to it.

Later I added:

Oh, and another theme to bring in: "Paul teaches us to persevere in times of our momentary light affliction. We pray that your indwelling Spirit equips your saints in difficult circumstances, whether here or abroad, to be faithful witnesses to your grace and power and to be encouraged despite their circumstances as he world sees them, to continue to grow in grace and in communicating your gospel."

 

Evidence for God

The primary evidence, to my mind, apart from the life, teaching and resurrection of Yeshua of Nazareth (which is THE primary evidence) is that God as creator prior to and external to the world (the entirety of the cosmos), his creation, is the only adequate and reasonable ground of our sense of transcendence -- expressed in our pursuit of relationship, beauty, joy, delight, even peace; none of which are finally meaningful in any way in a materialist conception of the cosmos. The obvious expression of transcendence in daily life is the mind and the fruitfulness of our awareness of and fellowship with other minds. Mind transcends material.

Our desire for God (or its inverse, often vehement in atheists, libertines, hedonists and Epicureans) expresses this ground - that we are not merely supervenient upon matter -- whatever that may be--but are truly connected to the source of mind, of life, and all significance which flies in the face of death, that comes from that connection.

Being the creator, Christ -- back to the true prime-- integrates our experience of the creation or sense of meaning and purpose and stands as the explication of the human dilemma and its resolution.

The human dilemma? Man cannot be his own integration point: it manifests in his discontents arising from alienation: the sense of disquiet, of separation (sin in the Bible). Man cannot be his own integration point because he is limited and contingent and must reach outside himself for resolution of his manifold disjuncts with reality. To casual observance transient (Ps. 103:14ff), or ephemeral, inexplicably ungrounded in a creator-less conception; or, on closer knowledge, navigating his own futility as all his being appears to collapse in death and be rendered nugatory -- yet, there is the paradoxical wonder of personhood and relationship.

The starting point of self-hood: I am not not myself, but distinct and individual, is content-less in isolation and forlorn in mere contingent human relationship. It can only be integrated in fellowship with the one who is, necessarily: resolution by our union with Christ for fellowship with our creator, Yahweh.

The Festival of Psalms

We held this festival recently at church: partly as worshipful encouragement, partly as godly entertainment and partly as education and outreach. It was designed to be 'visitor friendly'.

The choir took most of the running, along with congregational singing, and read segments and prayers.

The read segments included academic, devotional and exotic (!) components. The exotica was a North American Indian translation of Psalm 23.

But it was the academic segment that was most interesting.

The story of the Psalter

Widely respected scholars such as Brevard Childs, Gerald Wilson and James Mays have demonstrate that the canonical editors of the Psalter had clear intent. The Psalter, as we have received it, is organized into five books, with the 'seams' being marked b doxologies and psalms of theological significance. Royal psalms are placed with wisdom psalms at the seams, Typical of Hebrew literature, however, our modern demand for clinical and forensic certainty is not met.

There is a thematic development through the five books within the Psalter. The first book (Ps 1 -- 41) frequently shows David in trouble, crying out to god for vindication. The second book (Ps 42 -- 72  generally sows David comfortably on the throne but with hints of decline emerging. the third book (Ps 73 -- 89) show Israel in decline, her monarchy ineffectual and her people in dire circumstances. Psalm 89 puts this problem most sharply. God's covenant with David, with which the first three books of the psalms are primarily concerned, has apparently failed.

The fourth book (ps 90 -- 106) seems to be the editorial centre which poses the question, "What will happen now that the covenant is broken?" A response to this problem is developed throughout book four and in book five (Ps 107 -- 150). The response can be summarized:

• Yahweh is king
• He has been our 'refute' in the past, long before the monarchy existed
• He will continue to be our refuge now that the monarchy is gone
• Blessed are they that trust in him!
  

So the Psalter is a symphony in five parts, swelling towards triumphant songs of praise to God who reigns over his people, despite the swirling currents of chaos and opposition.