Nneka - Do you love me now

Nneka - Do you love me now

(live session @ streets of Paris)

Lyrics

http://www.lyricsmania.com/

I heard my name, did you call me ?
Did you speak truth, when you dug wounds,
When you spilled blood, did you say love ?,
When you promised the most high,
You will not betray

Do you love me now (x4)

Yes, it's heavy on my heart to communicate,
Absentminded on the earth devoted to sin,
Not knowing i'm dead,
Your phrases are highly majestic,
I am amazed by your great linguistics,
Yet your words are placed together,
To sell dubious manifestoes,
The end is devastating, barrage of lies,
Your words are sweet enticing but false grandeur,
Still I go, I go to the foutain where waters flow,
Where the truth uprises there I will grow now

Do you love me (x4)
I will grow

I know I have never been found,
It is dark for we are all blind,
In solitude we know God
In public we do not act God,
Is it destiny is it mean to be,

Do you love me now,
Now that everything has been said and done,
Do you love me, now that I function in your madness,
Do you love me now, for your love is so cold,
Oh sodom and gomorrah caution !!
Do you love me, now that I am no longer me

(Merci à Kiki pour cettes paroles)

Send "Do You Love Me Now" to your Cell

Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nneka_(singer)

Nneka Lucia Egbuna (born 24 December 1980) is a Nigerian-German hip hop/soul singer and songwriter. She sings in both Igbo and English.

Biography

Nneka is the daughter of an Anambra state Nigerian father, and German mother^[1]. She was born and raised in Warri, in the Delta region of Nigeria, and went to the primary school of the Delta Steel Company, then the secondary school at the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation. Nneka relished the experience of singing from an early age in her school and in the church choir. After relocating to Hamburg, Germany, at the age of 18, she pursued a career in singing alongside a degree in Anthropology.^[2] She now divides her time between Nigeria and Hamburg.^[3]

Music career

Since 2003 Nneka has been working closely with the hip hop beatmaker DJ Farhot, a producer living in Hamburg. As a young singer she first gained public attention in 2004 while performing as an opening act for dancehall reggae star Sean Paul at Hamburg Stadtpark. After much acclaim, Nneka was given a green light to record her first album.

After releasing her debut EP 'The Uncomfortable Truth' with the music label Yo Mama's Recording Company, she performed on her first tour with Patrice Bart-Williams in April 2005, playing shows in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.

She finished recording her first album in the autumn of 2005. Entitled 'Victim of Truth', it was released not only in Germany but also in England, France, Netherlands, Nigeria and Japan. Garnering rave reviews from the media, the UK's Sunday Times later declared it “the year’s most criminally overlooked album”, comparing it favourably to 'The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill'.^[4]

Following the release of the album, Nneka enjoyed a sustained and successful period of touring, performing at festivals such as Chiemsee Reggae Summer, Haarlem (BevrijdingsPop), Den Haag (Park Pop) and Saint-Brieuc (Art Rock Festival) as well as in respected venues like La Maroquinerie and New Morning in Paris, Tivoli in Utrecht, Paradiso in Amsterdam and Cargo and ULU in London. She has also supported artists such as Femi Kuti, Bilal, Seeed, and Gnarls Barkley.

In February 2008 she released her second album, 'No Longer at Ease'. The title of the album is taken from a novel of the same name by Chinua Achebe and reflects the lyrical content of the record. Most of the songs are political, talking about the plight of the Niger Delta and the corruption in Nneka’s homeland. “No Longer at Ease” combines the political and the personal in “a winning mix of soul, hip-hop an reggae”.^[5] The lead single from it, 'Heartbeat', became her first song to break into the German Top 50.^[6] In September 2009, the song entered the UK Singles Chart at number twenty.^[7]

The following months saw tours in France, Italy and Portugal, while she also supported Lenny Kravitz on his French tour in April 2009.

Nneka has been nominated in three categories for the 2009 Channel O Music Video Awards,^[8] and won an award for Best African Act at the 2009 MOBO Awards.

In late 2009, she was chosen as of one Beyond Race Magazine's "50 Emerging Artists," resulting in a spot in the publication's #11 issue (with Bodega Girls and J. Cole on the cover), as well as an exclusive Q&A for the magazine's site.^[9]

In November 2009, Nneka staged her first concert tour of the United States where she performed shows in New York City, Vienna (Washington DC), Boston, Philadelphia, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Furthermore she was a special guest on The Roots Jam session. Her first US release Concrete Jungle was set for 2 February 2010.

Her track 'Kangpe' is also featured as a soundtrack on the EA Sports FIFA 2010 video game.

In January 2010, Nneka appeared in Late Show with David Letterman in New York before getting her US tour underway.

In June 2010, she won the reggae category of the Museke Online Africa Music Award 2010 with her hit song, Africans.

She agreed to go on tour with Nas and Damian Marley to help them promote their 'distant relatives' album. She has done a remix of her highly rated track, 'heartbeat' with Nas which is expected to be made public soon.

She has also agreed to participate in this year's Lilith Fair Concert (2010) where the likes of Tegan & Sara, Sarah McLachlan, Kelly Clarkson, Jill Scott, Erykah Badu, Corinne Bailey Rae, Mary J. Blige, Rihanna and others will be performing. She will be performing in Washington, Raleigh and Charlotte (United States). She recorded a song for the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa called "Viva Africa". It is a tribute to the premier mundial on African soil.

She won the award for best indigenous artist in Nigeria at the Nigerian Entertainment Awards 2010 which was held in New York, U.S.A.

Musical style

Even though Nneka sings more than raps, she names hip hop as her primary musical root and most important source of inspiration, while citing artists such as Fela Kuti and Bob Marley as well as contemporary rappers Mos Def, Talib Kweli, and Lauryn Hill as key influences in her own pursuit of musical recognition.^[2]

Her lyrics reflect much of her history and life in Nigeria as well as her time spent in Western Europe. Her songs stress the issues of capitalism, poverty and war and are often loaded with moral and biblical messages and references, with some music commentators comparing her to Erykah Badu, Neneh Cherry^[10] and Floetry.^[11]

Discography

Albums

• 2005: Victim of Truth
• 2008: No Longer at Ease Germany #31, France #34, Switzerland #42, Austria #49^[12]
• 2012: Soul Is Heavy France #38, Switzerland #30, Austria #46^[13]

Singles

• 2005: The Uncomfortable Truth
• 2006: Beautiful
• 2006: God of Mercy
• 2007: Africans
• 2008: Heartbeat #9 Portugal, #20 UK, #34 Austria, #49 Germany^[14]
• 2008: Walking
• 2009: Kangpe

Compilations

• 2009: To and Fro (3 CD-Box-Set)
• 2009: J.Period & Nneka The Madness (Onye-Ala) Free Download
• 2010: Concrete Jungle

EPs

• 2005: The Uncomfortable Truth

Soundtracks

• 2011: "Beat The World"

The Death of Poetry by 20th Century Modernism, Part 2/2

We move from what I considered a favorable analysis of 20th Century Modernism's rationalism to a deeply flawed discussion about Postmodernism and Process Theology. Poe and Davis come up short here and this is an instance where "science meets philosophy/theology and each are as large and demanding as the other..." which, to me means, that a good scientist cannot be expected to be a good philosopher/theologian, try as they might (though I applaud any-and-all efforts attempted). Nor do we usually find that "good philosophers/theologians make for good scientists" generally (although John Polkinghorne may be the exception here). And it seems that this book is an instance of these general observations of a theologian and a scientist trying to make sense of science and the bible (God in the Gaps) and a little known theological perspective about God and ourselves called process theology.

Whereas in part 1 after having made a good start with their discussion of Rationalism and the Church, we move into part 2 that is less than steller to find a poor grasp of two subjects. The first is the typical evangelic short-sale of process theology and then the confused-sale of the God-in-the-gaps theology attempting to bridge science with faith by making it a quasi-science. Causing me to make notations within the body of the article below of my observations and disagreements - which are many - in a review that was especially long and not fun to write because of its many erroneous statements and errors.

However, the value of this discussion does show that:

(i) conservative evangelicalism may be now admitting to their dependency and causal relationship upon Modernism. However, until evangelicalism's correspondent placeholds are lifted from their over-abundant dogmatic assertions and systematic doctrines there can be no moving forward for this faith group as a whole. (One that I think Emergent Christianity better validates through its postmodernistic approach to science, philosophy, and theology).

(ii) It also tells of evangelicalism's gross misunderstanding of process theology, which I found revealing and have thusly included my remarks within the body of the text as shown below. I did not expect less but I would've been encouraged to have found a better analysis of process theology than what is laid out here by two "experts" in their fields of theology (Poe) and chemistry (Davis).

(iii) The last value I found is that even in evangelical Christianity we now may find admission that God is as actively "entangled and enmeshed in our world" as we are in "His creation and divine personage." Not that evangelicalism has not been saying this all along. But because they are now trying to speak it from a postmodernistic, process-like version using open theology and an admixture of Emergent Theology as their new, formative voice. And from that attitude can we then find a more generous evangelical admission towards scientific studies and assertions (perhaps even towards brethren that hold a more open view towards an evolutionary understanding of creation).  Along with the absorption of some kind of process-like theology in the future (but more probably in the direction of a revisement of classical and open theology). Time will tell. Or is it, the timing will be telling?

But in whatever case, the point has been made that our modernistic western civilization has been the death knell to poetry and to the storied narrative. One that can be recoverable within postmodernism as it continues to proceed forth in participatory and authenticating ways. Ways that will bear with postmodernism its own forms and versions of obstacles no less than Modernism has experienced. We expect this but can also embrace its turmoil within the ever-expanding worlds of multi-ethnic globalism, the rich and variegated experiences of pluralism and societal individualities, and the technological solidifications portending to our many diversified societies.

Only some form of postmodernism seems most able to allow this diverse symposium of culture, heritage, religion, and humanism. But we are nonetheless assured that above all, in all, and through all God will be there enlightening mankind to His ever steady presence, plans and ministries through the Church of Jesus Christ (aka Stanley Hauerwas!) by the power of His Holy Spirit working above us, within us, and through us to the glory of God's salvation remaking all things new. Amen and amen.

R.E. Slater (res)

May 17, 2012

ps - the usage of the phrase God in the Gaps is new to me. So we will together read of it together and see what it is about. However, we should likewise defer opinion b/c it may be as well mis-analyzed here as process theology was mis-analyzed. Consequently I can only react in proportionate response and conjecture and must save theological credulity for a later discussion should this same sophistry arise and give us more cause for a better informed response to its quasi-theological perspective.

Continued from Part 1 -

The Death of Poetry by 20th Century Modernism, Part 1/2

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2012/05/death-of-poetry-by-20th-century.html

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Beyond the God of the Gaps

http://musingsonscience.wordpress.com/2012/05/17/beyond-the-god-of-the-gaps/#more-1808

by rjs5

posted on May 17, 2012

Part One of the new book by Harry Lee Poe and Jimmy H. Davis God and the Cosmos: Divine Activity in Space, Time and History asks questions about the way humans have conceived of God and the way this impacts ideas about God’s action in the world. The last two chapters in Part One Poe and Davis consider process theology and God of the Gaps thinking. These chapters delve more deeply into the question that frames this portion of the book – what kind of God interacts with the world – and how does he interact.

Process theology and intelligent design are two [very] different ways of wrestling with the idea of God in the context of the materialism and naturalism that has captured Western thinking. These assumptions of materialism and naturalism are, it seems to me, in the air we breath and the water we drink. They are simply the unreflective, unexamined starting point for much of Western intellectual engagement, both in the academy and in the broader culture. Poe and Davis explore the positives and negatives of process theology and then move on to God-of-the-gaps arguments and finally to the way to get beyond these philosophical arguments to a more robust theological view.

Process theology

Allows natural theology to take a cue from evolutionary theory with all of being, including creation and the nature of God, evolving in time. There are rather unChristian, deistic, [my edits here, if any thing process is more panentheistic - res], philosophical forms of process theology that invoke, perhaps, a spiritual nature to life, but have no room for a personal God of the sort revealed in scripture, or for a God who acts in his creation [perhaps I've missed something in process theology but it seems that process is all about a personal God revealed in scripture and as an active actor in creation - res]. This is interesting, but need not really concern us in the search for ways to think as Christians about the interaction between God and his creation.

Is process theology a valid option to think about the role of God in the world? [yes - res]

[see relevancy22's sidebars under "theism" - res]

There are also some forms of process theology that are more clearly Christian. Here Poe and Davis outline the thinking of William Temple and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. These two have put some ideas forward that are worth pursuing. Poe and Davis acknowledge this, but seem to view the strength of process theology as lying in the way it underscores the inadequacy of a purely material outlook rather than its positive suggestions, although their comments about the inadequacy of natural selection leave me scratching my head. I expect the questions on natural selection will come up again in Part Two of the book. Poe and Davis sum up this discussion emphasizing the impact of process theology on one’s view of the interaction of God with the world:

Process theology makes the same error as the reductionist monarchical model makes when it assumes that God must always act in only one way. Rather than think God must always do the same thing, we may think of God relating differently but appropriately to every level of organization of the universe. He may operate in a deterministic way at some points and in an indeterminate way at other points. Like Calvinism and Arminianism, process theology would have God always do it the same way, which leaves God less free than the people who think about God. (p. 120) 

Poe and Davis quixotically argue the issue of freedom in the doctrine of Arminianism that is nothing but about the freedom of God, man and nature. And then they throw in process theology to boot. Consequently I find their arguments specious. The only value that can be allowed here is that they actually may be referring to the nature of these viewpoints as a closed-system. But there again process theology was formed to open-up church doctrines that appear closed. So again I find this summary statement invalid. - res

Some claim God must know and determine everything, his omniscience and sovereignty demand this[sic, the view of  Calvinism - res]; in contrast many process theologians claim that God must leave everything free, action by God would deny the universe the freedom to become [another gross misrepresentation of process theology; ultimately God's sovreignty does grant this kind of freedom, and does not remove it by determinism and reductionisti,c or mechanistic, process as classical theology would teach - res], and becoming is the core of process theology [amen. this is a true statement. - res]. Poe and Davis suggest that both these extremes are lacking.

[Consequently I find Poe and Davis' knowledge of process theology uninspiring. We have here at relevancy22 been working through a synthesis between process theology, on the one hand, and conservative theism, on the other hand, something that I've been calling relational theism. For more on this subject please refer to "theism" under the sidebars here. - res]

God-of-the-gaps Provides

Another approach to natural theology. In this case a metaphysical framework is at play that views events as either of God or simply natural.

The God-of-the-gaps phenomenon arises as people try to fix the place in nature where God may be found to act. This understanding of divine activity is consistent with every other kind of real event in a closed material world. If the activity of God cannot be shown to be of the same kind as other events in the material world, than it cannot be understood as real. Of course, if the activity of God can be described within nature, then it must be a natural event rather than divine action! (p, 131-132)

But the view that puts divine causality on the same plane as physical causality is necessarily limited. It leads to a limited view of God and of his action, or room for action, in the cosmos. One example Poe and Davis use to illustrate there point is the incarnation.

At the heart of the Christian faith lies the ultimate expression of this conflict: the incarnation. Was Jesus fully man or fully God? We ask God to show himself in ways we can perceive, but when he does, we say he is just a man. The central event of Christian faith demands that Christians employ a metaphysic that allows for multiple levels of experience. Any activity of God in the world that can be observed can necessarily be described according to the categories of nature. Does this make divine activity and natural laws mutually exclusive? (p. 132)

I would refer the reader to consider the hypostatic union of Christ as discussed in the Athenasian Creed found here at this link discussing the creeds of the church (about midway down) - http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2012/05/short-history-of-church-creeds-and.html. It can be seen that because various forms of pelagianism and gnosticism had occurred in the early church we were then able to get to a more complete understanding of Jesus' divinity and humanity as a result of those egregious errors. It is an important doctrine to understand as it is trotted out again for review in the breeches and bellows of science. This same can also be said of Jesus' virgin birth found here at this link - http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/search/label/Virgin%20Birth. But one I found less than satisfying when reviewing John Polkinghorne's scientific understanding of it (as discussed in that article), though he is a favorite of mine. - res

Intelligent design – looking for empirical evidence for divine causality separate from physical causality – is a search for a God-of-the-gaps. This doesn’t mean that the world is not designed, all Christians believe that God designed the world intelligently and for a purpose, but that divine causality and physical causality can and do coexists in the same phenomena.

I think what is here trying to be said is what we've described in a Biologos article of God's involvement in evolution - even until now, and even into the futures of mankind and the Earth. More probably b/c Calvinism's Sovereignty of God worldview has such a strong hold on evangelicalism has this kind of thinking arisen to further explain an austere God's presence in humanity's and Earth's subsequent "evolvement...." - res

I will list below at the end of this article five (5) links to articles that I think better bridges the "gap" in the God-in-the-gap kind of thinking. They come from an evolutionary perspective but they better describe the closeness of God's Sovereignty from the perspective of scientific discoveries. And thus make for a better integration between theological observations about God involvement with man and the Earth than I can find here in this type of thinking.... - res

Beyond the God-of-the-Gaps

Poe and Davis proceed here to muse a bit about topics like methodological naturalism (for which they have some negative comments); naturalism of the gaps (by which they mean the imposition of philosophical naturalism beyond the limits where science can speak); and the ability of humans to manipulate nature (heat or cool our houses, build dams, harness electricity, fly to Australia, and so forth). Some of the discussion gets a little off track (for example I would say that we have not learned to overcome the laws of nature, and we certainly don’t violate the laws of nature, but we can and do utilize the laws of nature to achieve a desired goal). By and large, however, the point is a good one. The human mind can conceive of ways to manipulate nature. Certainly the mind of God can do the same and more.

The more intelligent we become, the more we realize just how open the universe really is. As Polkinghorne has observed, “science’s description of physical process is not drawn so tight as to condemn God to the non-interactive role of deistic spectator.” God is at least as free and able as humans to interact with the universe. (p. 137)

A Trinitarian God

Poe and Davis consider the nature of God as a relational being, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, to be significant for a proper understanding of the God who acts in his creation. Taking any one of these alone as a model for the interaction of God with the cosmos will be limited and flawed.

Theological systems from classical theology to Calvinism to process theology have in common the tendency to conceive of God as acting in the same way at all times, a view unsustainable from Scripture but perfectly consistent with a philosophical approach to faith. Polkinghorne has argued that “God’s utter perfection lies in the total appropriateness at all times of the Creator’s relationship with creation, whether that creation is a quark soup or the home of humanity.” (p. 137)

The Trinity allows for this appropriate interaction at all times. God can be in time, transcend time, localized in space, and everywhere at once. The Father is, they suggest, “constantly aware yet forever removed from the world of space and time.” Transcendent, eternal, perfection, absolute holiness are attributes of the Father. The Father interacts with his creation through the Holy Spirit and through his messengers (angels). The Holy Spirit is the most significant here as it proceeds from the Father as part of the Godhead. The Holy Spirit extends into time and space and exercises the power of God in time and space. The Holy Spirit is extended, wave-like. The Son on the other hand is particular. The Son entered into space-time in the incarnation.

In God’s incarnation, however, God comes to grips with a fundamental problem posed by a universe in which people can have freedom: theodicy, or the problem of suffering. A trinitarian God experiences this problem from the inside and not merely from the vantage point of ultimate wisdom and knowledge. As Father, Son, and Spirit, the trinitarian God becomes part of his own physical creation as the Son while never ceasing to be distinct from it as the Father. God experiences the pain and suffering through participation in the cosmos. (p. 141) [Again, this is better said, or un-said, through reference to this link here on the church's creeds and confessions within the lower body of that article - http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2012/05/short-history-of-church-creeds-and.html. - res]

The Holy Spirit interacts with the universe, the material creation from quark to black hole and everything between in its openness and process. The Son interacts personally with humans created in the image of God by becoming one of us. The Father transcends space and time. [Affectively, the Trinity as a whole does all this together or, interacts with all of this together. It is not necessary to artificially divide the Trinity into these type of qualifiers. Please refer to the sidebar under Trinity for further discussion of this subject. - res]

The chapter finishes with a brief reflection on the world to come – the eschaton [please refer to the sidebar under Trinity again as well as under Kingdom Eschaetology. - res]. This will be something new and different with the disappearance of the apparent contradictions between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and a new physics allowing for resurrection, new heavens, new earth, in continuity with the resurrection of the Son of God.

Does this trinitarian view of God’s action in the world make sense to you?

Do you agree that theological systems limit the role of God, and thus inevitably miss part of the picture?


If you wish to contact me directly, you may do so at rjs4mail[at]att.net.

If you have comments please visit Beyond the God of the Gaps at Jesus Creed

 

 

* * * * * * * * * *

 

 

BELOW WILL BE FOUND BETTER WRITTEN ARTICLES TO HELP

THE SEARCHING CHRISTIAN BETTER UNDERSTAND THE ROLE BETWEEN

SCIENCE AND THE BIBLE KNOWN AS EVOLUTIONARY CREATIONISM.

 

 

* * * * * * * * * * *

 

 

 

God's Role in Creation

Is God Just Playing Dice?

How Could God Create Through Evolution?

What Is Evolution?

Misconceptions about Evolutionary Theory and Process

For Even More Information

Go to the "Science" sidebars -->

And to http://biologos.org/

 

Select Comments

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2012/05/17/beyond-the-god-of-the-gaps-rjs/#comment-333297

No.3 - JJ says:

May 17, 2012 at 10:19 am

As a Whiteheadian, I must say that the authors do not seem to understand process theology all that well (although we are used to being misrepresented/misinderstood, especially by fellow Christians). There is more to process theology’s theory of divine action than what is presented here.

First, the statement “action by God would deny the universe the freedom to become” is false. It seems to be saying that God doesn’t really do anything in process. Not so. Just because freedom is inherent in all levels of creation does not mean that divine action is insignificant in any way. Without it, nothing would be able to become. God provides various possibilities for each moment of becoming, lures toward a particular possibility that aligns with the divine vision, and responds accordingly depending on which possibility is chosen.

Also, the author’s statement that the process God can only act one way is very misleading. For one, depending on the level of complexity of a particular actuality in creation, divine action may indeed be basically deterministic while at other levels (e.g., human consciousness) be highly indeterministic. And process thought affirms variable divine action, contrary to what the authors seem to be implying (see David Ray Griffin on this point).

Lastly, there is also a statement in the post saying God’s nature changes like everything else. Yes and no. Process theism is famously dipolar. While I will skip the technical details here, one pole of God changes in response to the world while the other is the eternal divine vision that provides the world with infinite possibilities. Because of this dipolar structure, God becomes like everything else but in another sense remains the same: God is always creative, loving, persuasive, redemptive, etc.


No. 7 - Tripp Fuller says:

May 17, 2012 at 1:01 pm

I haven’t read the book yet but I do wonder what scientific argument there is against some kind of consistent relationship between God and the world. The critique above of Process thought (& determinism) seems to imply it’s problematic – why? Aqunias, Calvin, & John Cobb reject the notion. Seems weird to have that as a the main criticism.


No. 10 - Russ says:

May 18, 2012 at 11:04 am

Poe and Davis show evangelicalism’s belated relization of modernity’s affects upon the church and its doctrines but don’t go far enough, if at all, with postmodernity’s relevance to the church. I was thoroughly unimpressed by their analysis of process theology.

And their God in the gaps philosophy cannot even begin to bridge the “gap” between the evangelical understanding between science and faith. As has been observed in the comments above, there is just too much here that is not spoken well. By their estimation good evangelical science is quasi-science at best.

Overall, this book impresses me with evangelical theology’s benighted state of affairs. In terms of a sports illustration, "unless a team can see itself for what it is there can be no improvement to what it can become." Which means for evangelicalism, that it cannot become a better interactor with today's contemporary societies without first understanding its own deficencies. Which is what postmodern Emergent Christian is all about – first deconstruction, then reconstruction. Evangelicalism’s foundation has become thoroughly fragmented by today's postmodernism, and is no longer orthodox except in its own opinion of itself.

Generally, this has been a poorly written topic by Poe and Davis to which the reviewer RJS has allowed too many discrepancies.


 

The Death of Poetry by 20th Century Modernism, Part 1/2

Many of the ideas and comments contained in the following article are not new to this website. We have discussed each one at length and have so notated those discussions per the sidebar index to the right side of this site. This would include Deism, Darwinism, Augustine-Aristotle-Reformation, Creedal Development and Church History, the Literature of the Bible, and even Process Theology.

However, being a poet who likes to write with a prose style, I did find the last section contained in this article quite interesting... that poetry has died due to no small influence by that of 20th Century Western Modernism. It's an observation that I myself have felt these many years will listening to formulaic assertions about God, my faith, the church, our human societies, and just about anything else that our Western rationalism has affected and maintained to the death of our present modernistic culture.

In fact, through postmodernism's enhanced philosophic paradigms has come a (post)structural framework that can remove modernism's philosophical gaps and restore more of an integrative approach and balance (or symmetry) to all human and scientific disciplines. Some few of those approaches have also been discussed at length including:

• the gradual detachment of Christianity from Calvinism's more systematic forms of theology (as well as other forms of systematizing Church dogmas and creedal assertions);
 
• the assimilation of language and culture back into our reading of Paul (described as NPP, the New Perspective of Paul approach via Sanders, Dunn and Wright);
 
• the re-connection of science to faith, and faith to science;
 
• the heightened awareness of our human journey and its importance to the reading of the Bible giving back to it an authority and authenticity (contra the doctrines of inerrancy's rationalisms on the one hand and blatant Christian mysticism on the other);
 
• the re-absorption of human anthropologies, sociologies, linguistics into the text of Scripture;
 
• the re-awakening of our ecological responsibility to the care of both the Earth and humanity through ecologically sound practices;
 
• and finally, the renewal of justice and compassion as a general human endeavor as based upon the practices of Jesus' ministry to the poor, the oppressed, and the neglected.

Through postmodernism's promise we are being led towards a participatory and authenticating form of faith and worship to our Creator-God-Redeemer which thusly provides hope for humanity's dreams by enabling and empowering increasingly connected civilizations towards peace, good will among all men, many forms of consensus leadership, and a formative sense of responsible world citizenship.

R.E. Slater

May 16, 2012

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Death of Poetry?
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2012/05/15/the-death-of-poetry-rjs/

by RJS
May 15, 2012
Comments

I was recently sent a copy of the new book by Harry Lee Poe and Jimmy H. Davis God and the Cosmos: Divine Activity in Space, Time and History. Harry Lee Poe (Ph.D., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is the Charles Colson Professor of Faith and Culture at Union University in Jackson TN, Jimmy H. Davis (Ph.D. University of Illinois) is University Professor of Chemistry at Union University.

In God and the Cosmos Poe and Davis explore the interaction of God with his creation. There are two parts to their approach. Part One explores ideas about the kind of God who interacts with the world and the ways humans have considered this across cultures, religions, and time. Part Two turns this around and asks about the kind of world that allows God to interact.

Part One: What kind of God interacts with the world?

This section of the book does not address this question directly – but rather asks questions about the way humans have conceived of God and the way this impacts ideas concerning God’s action in the world. Poe and Davis begin with a survey of the way that God or divinity is understood in major world religions including Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, and Islam. This is an interesting survey – although the discussion of Judaism makes such a break with Christianity that it left me scratching my head at times.

How do we think about God?

How does this affect the way we think about God’s interaction with the world?

Turning primarily to the West and the development of science in Europe, Poe and Davis put forth a few ideas that drive much of the discussion in the rest of this section. The notion of a God who is rational combined with a break from the Platonic philosophical underpinning derived from Augustine gave rise to the reformation and the scientific revolution. Poe and Davis see the key developments and conflicts as more philosophical than theological.

Thomas Aquinas set the stage by breaking with Augustine and his reliance on Plato, turning instead to Aristotle. This allowed a view of nature more conducive to the development of science. But even Aristotle had to fall. Philosophical underpinnings that found the ground of knowledge in rational thought without [scientific] experimentation, not “the God Hypothesis,” had to fall before the scientific revolution could flower. The conflict over Galileo was not theological but philosophical – a rejection of Aristotle.

Question Authority

Poe and Davis also suggest that the reformation, including the cultural changes that preceded the reformation, led to the scientific revolution.

In the Reformation the principle issue at stake was one of authority.… The University was a monastic community. All disciplines were subdisciplines of theology. Theology was the “queen of the sciences” and philosophy was her handmaiden. The Protestant reformation was not only a debate about authority in matters of religion but also authority in politics and all areas of scholarship, including what we now call science.

Scripture and tradition. The change of mind that we call the Reformation began to take place at least 150 years before Luther’s posting of his ninety-five theses, and it would continue to unfold 150 years afterwards.… this way of conceiving authority had begun at least by the time of John Wycliffe (d. 1384) , long before the observations of Copernicus (d. 1543). (p. 60)

The revolution in the view of authority enabled the scientific revolution, which required something of an open view toward tradition and traditional authorities. This also led to a view of scripture as the authoritative foundation for faith [and not the state - res].

Either-Or

According to Poe and Davis, with the publication of A Golden Chain (1590) William Perkins (1558-1602) set into motion a process that led to an either-or dichotomy describing God’s work in the world. A Golden chain is a text that popularized the theology of Calvin with a famous diagram that outlined the causes of salvation and damnation.

The idea of conceiving theology as a massive dichotomy represents a major innovation by Perkins to the earlier theology of Calvin.

Like Plato’s hierarchy or Aristotle’s chain of being, Perkins’s Golden Chain provides his audience with a way to conceive of God’s causal involvement in the world. God is the King who issues decrees, and from these decrees there issues forth an unbroken chain of cause and effect. (p. 79)

The problem with Perkins and the theology that followed Perkins is that it keeps the Holy Spirit safely in heaven or eternity. There is no real role for God or the Spirit in the day to day processes in the world. This either-or mode of thinking became the dominant assumption as men thought about the nature of God’s role in the world.

By the end of the eighteenth century, William Perkins’s model of reducing things to two alternatives [dualism] had become the dominant way of thinking in the English-speaking world.… 

In the natural world observed by scientific investigation, scientists were faced by the two alternatives that their worldview allowed them: (1) phenomena occurred by the direct action of God, or (2) phenomena occurred as the result of the laws of nature. 

The idea that God could be active within nature was not an alternative allowed to them by their prevailing worldview. (pp. 87-88)

Poe and Davis trace this development through Newton, Boyle, Laplace and other early scientist to Darwin. In the thinking of Darwin, and in the way evolution has been thought of since Darwin, we see a full flowering of the idea. If there is a natural explanation then God was not at work. He is relegated to some deistic first cause or eliminated from the picture entirely.

The Death of Poetry

Poe and Davis see the loss of poetry as another major piece of the puzzle in understanding the modern conflict between science and the action of God. In fact they put it rather bluntly: “Modern Western culture is unique in world history for having lost its poetry. All cultures, except modern Western culture, appreciate poetry.” (p. 96) This they see as a unique development of the 20th century … and it is not only poetry, but the arts as well that we have lost: painting, sculpture, opera, ballet, classical music. These no longer belong to the broad western culture. The loss of poetry goes hand-in-hand with a literalism that permeates our reading of scripture and our understanding of God. And this devastates the ability to understand God.

Humans have no frame of reference for understanding God because the language of the bible uses analogy, comparison, and poetry. Only by using creative license in the form of poetic language can we even begin to describe God and his action in the world.

Without a sense of poetry and the way analogies work, people lose the ability to use models, whether in theology or in science. The model, whether scientific or theological, is not the reality. A theological system is never more than a human constructed model of God. It may be useful for understanding an aspect of God that it affirms, but it is always woefully inadequate as a total understanding of God. (p. 100)

The last two chapters in Part One consider with process theology and God-of-the-Gaps-thinking. These chapters delve more deeply into the question that frames this portion of the book – what kind of God interacts with the world – and how does he interact. I’ll turn to these two in the next post on this book – but today I would like to stop here and consider the scenario that Poe and Davis have outlined.

Do you think that Poe and Davis are right in the time-line they’ve sketched?

Does the either-or dichotomy represents the common view of the action of God in the world?

And perhaps most important of all:

Have we lost the ability to appreciate poetry and thus to think constructively about God?


If you wish to contact me directly, you may do so at rjs4mail[at]att.net.

If interested you can subscribe to a full text feed of my posts at Musings on Science and Theology.

Part 2 continues here -

The Death of Poetry by 20th Century Modernism, Part 2/2

http://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2012/05/death-of-poetry-by-20th-century_18.html

Surviving College, Part 1: The "Game Plan" for Christians Desiring Practical Wisdom

 

Bonhoeffer Wasn’t the Answer

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2012/05/16/bonhoeffer-wasnt-the-answer/

by Scot McKnight

May 16, 2012

Comment

 

This post (and series) is by my friend at Christ Church of Lake Forest, Syler Thomas....

 

I was talking with a friend recently about my new book Game Plan: Practical Wisdom for the College Experience (co-written by Nic Gibson, foreword by Scot McKnight) and he shared a story about the book he received to prepare him for life in college. He had just come to faith through an experience at a Young Life camp the summer after he graduated from high school, and his faithful leader handed him a book intended to help him with his new-found faith and the struggles he would surely encounter in college. It was Bonhoeffer’s Cost of Discipleship.

If you had one Christian classic to give to a friend who was a newer believer, what would it be and why? You can even answer with Bonhoeffer.

Now there’s no question that the book is a classic. Bonhoeffer should be read, and has plenty to offer in many situations. And given Scot McKnight's deep love for - and physical resemblance to - the great German theologian, I’m on thin ice even bringing this up. The issue is that Bonhoeffer didn’t live long enough to comment on the challenges of living a faithful Christian life on the college campuses of the 21^st century.

This is why Nic and I wrote this book: to provide practical wisdom for the unique challenges and opportunities that students face on today’s college campuses. It was born out of a desire to share with our graduating high school seniors all the stuff we felt like they needed to know, that we couldn’t possibly tell them in one conversation.

Our chapters are on topics ranging from surviving a secular school, a Christian school, looking at the dating scene, dealing with temptation, integrating your faith and your major, and a whole lot more. Plus one of my favorite parts of the book is a “My Story” section after every other chapter: seven first-person testimonies from recent college grads about their own experiences, that serve to reinforce the messages we’re sharing.

Over the next few posts, I’ll invite you to think back to your college days for your perspective, and those of you currently in college or high school—we’d love to get your perspective, from those who are experiencing it right now.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

... to be continued in the weeks ahead ...

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

A Christian Debate About Gay Marriage

It is this author's opinion to support LGBT civil union through state channels and charters so as to allow the legal recognition and entitlement of protection to all individuals under the American Constitution.

It is this author's further opinion to allow for the church, synagogue, and other faith institutions to declare individually whether to recognize, perform, or sanctify LGBT "marriages' within their congregations. Thus making the distinction between a "civil union" that is legally protected as versus a "heterosexual marriage" as commonly understood by the usage of the term.

For further review and discussion please refer to the sidebar under Gay Rights and Marriage.

R.E. Slater
May 16, 2012

		View	A Christian Debate About Gay Marriage				5/16/12	by RE Slater
		View	Equal Rights for Gay Marriage and How It Affects C...				5/13/12	by RE Slater
		View	Where Christianity Stands on Welcoming and Affirmi...				5/8/12	by RE Slater
		View	The Damage We Do When Not Accepting and Loving Gay...				4/3/12	by RE Slater
		View	Homosexuality: Paul and the Narrative of God's Lov...				1/23/12	by RE Slater
		View	Tripp Fuller on "Welcoming & Embracing"				11/14/11	by RE Slater
		View	Things Traditional Christians and Gay Christians C...				11/13/11	by RE Slater
		View	RE Slater - In Noble Pursuit of Peace				10/18/11	by RE Slater
		View	A Gay Christian Responds to Christ and Culture				9/25/11	by RE Slater
		View	Encountering the Monster That I Am				8/17/11	by RE Slater
		View	New York Approves Gay Marriage				6/28/11	by RE Slater
		View	Gay Marriage in New York				6/27/11	by RE Slater

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

A Christian Debate About Gay Marriage
http://www.relevantmagazine.com/life/current-events/features/29201-a-christian-debate-about-gay-marriage

D.C. Innes & Lisa Sharon Harper

May 15, 2012

Two experts discuss why they do - or don’t - support gay marriage.

This time last week, voters in North Carolina were heading to the polls to weigh in on Amendment One, a constitutional amendment that defined marriage as a union solely between a man and a woman, effectively shutting the door on same-sex marriage for the state. It passed—with more than 60 percent of the vote.

But you know all of this already, because the nation spent the rest of the week arguing about the outcome in North Carolina. Social media spheres erupted in hot debate. And then the president joined in. Though he'd expressed his support of civil unions, President Obama had long hesitated to make a conclusive statement about the legality of same-sex marriage. But on Wednesday, he became the first sitting president to publicly declare his support.

Amongst Christians, the same-sex marriage debate becomes even more intense, proving divisive in both policy and theology spheres. Even President Obama cited his Christian faith in his decision but acknowledged, "This position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others." So, what does Scripture say about homosexual unions? And what bearing, if any, should Scripture have on the law? On both sides of the issue, believers are striving to determine how their faith should inform their political beliefs.

Today, Christians from either side of the aisle share their views.

A Christian argument against same-sex marriage:

the family is fundamental

D.C. Innes is an associate professor of politics at The King's College in New York City.

Redefining the nature of the family is like trying to restructure the human body. No good can come of it. Underlying every good that we derive from society is the proper understanding and functioning of the family. Where family structure and authority weaken or disintegrate, these goods melt away. That’s why God instituted not just reproduction, but specifically marriage. God gave Eve to Adam to be his wife. She was “suitable” for him. God made no provision—whether in the garden or in Israel or in the church of Christ—for homosexual pairing. None. Indeed, He calls it an abomination (Lev.18:22).

Extending marriage to homosexuals destroys it for everyone. If two men can marry, or two women, what exactly is marriage? Is marriage just close friendship between any two people? Is it the solemnization of any two best friends in a sexual relationship? What’s solemn about that? Is the solemnity in the permanence of it? Surely it is people’s own business how long they want to remain friends and intimate. Why is the state involved? Why is the Church involved? Why are there weddings at all?

Same-sex marriage suggests all of these questions because it is a relationship that, in principle, has nothing to do with the begetting and moral formation of the next generation on which all of life depends. We have weddings as community events because every marriage, God willing, is the community’s lifeline to the future. It’s how we beget and train the next generation. The community has a stake in the permanence and health of the marriage. This is not true of homosexual couples by the very nature of the relationship.

Recognizing the homosexual relationship as a marriage, then, reduces everyone’s marriage to essentially that relationship. Sexual complementarity and childbearing would become optional add-ons, not an essential feature and a natural fulfillment. There would be nothing solemn, therefore, about anyone’s marriage, and no expectation of permanency. The indiscriminate sale of birth control and our easy divorce laws have already taken a heavy toll on our understanding of marriage, though the old ideas persist because of the nature of the union. But equating homosexual “marriage” with heterosexual marriage destroys the basis for those ideas.

It is tempting to bracket the moral question and view same-sex marriage as simply an issue of equal protection of the law. But that begs the question whether a homosexual relationship can, in principle, be a marriage at all.

Of course, nothing justifies personal cruelty toward people who, perhaps through tragic circumstances, are confused in their sexual desires. They are made in the image of God. Like any sinner, they need the love of God’s people if they are going to see the gracious way back to the Father through Christ. But justifying and dignifying sin, and calling something marriage that is not, is no way to love a sinner.

A Christian argument for same-sex marriage:

the end of discrimination

Lisa Sharon Harper is the director of mobilizing at Sojourners.

To be honest, as an evangelical who values the Scripture and justice, this issue has presented me with more biblical, constitutional and just plain practical conundrums than any other political issue. I’m comforted to know I am not alone. But for the purpose of this discussion, I will focus on one thing: same-sex marriage and the question of its legalization in the United States of America—not whether homosexual acts are sin or whether same-sex marriages should be sanctioned by the Church.

Divorce and remarriage after divorce are clearly sin, according to Jesus. Yet no party is rushing to introduce legislation to outlaw divorce. In fact, according to a 2008 study conducted by George Barna, born-again Christians are slightly more likely to have experienced a divorce (32 percent) than atheists and agnostics (30 percent).Thus, even by our own standards, the biblical sinfulness of a private act does not determine whether legislation should be levied to outlaw it.

Given the fact that we live in a pluralistic democracy with a spectrum of experiences and deeply held convictions at play, how then shall we live together?

I agree with Tony Campolo, the prolific evangelical preacher and evangelist who, in 2003, stood in the shadow of the Federal Marriage Amendment and stated in a public debate with his wife, Peggy, a staunch advocate of gay rights, that, “At this particular point, we have to agree on one thing: [gay and lesbian people] are entitled to an end to all forms of discrimination. There should be no legal system that gives rights to heterosexual couples that it does not make available to homosexual couples.”

Are lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people human? If they are human, then they, too, are made in the image of God. If they are made in the image of God, then they, too, in Genesis 1 were given free will—the right to exercise liberty over their bodies and their lives. This right applies even when I disagree with the liberties they take. What’s more, the fact that gay and lesbian people are made in the image of God endows them with intrinsic value and the same basic rights and protections afforded to any other human being. To legislate anything less is to set up a society that formally declares a certain class of people as less than human.

The truth is that institutions of marriage and family have been on an ever-changing journey since the founding of our nation. The institution of marriage is not static. It is dynamic—and as a woman, an African-American woman, I say thankfully so.

The Church and society are still splitting over the rightness or wrongness of homosexual acts. But we can know that we are talking about people—people made in the image of God. And as long as we maintain a dehumanizing legal system that gives fundamental rights and protections to some and not to a class of others, our society is in sin.

Excerpted from Left, Right and Christ: Evangelical Faith in Politics by D.C. Innes and Lisa Sharon Harper, © 2011. Published by Russell Media, www.russell-media.com. Used by permission.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Americans’ Views on Same-Sex Marriage

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/05/14/us/americans-views-on-same-sex-marriage-poll.html

Published: May 14, 2012

60

17

21%

57

26

16%

33

33

24

22

40

39

22

38%

34

33%

24%

38%

Mar. 2004

May 2012

Aug. 2008

There should be no legal recognition of a gay couple's relationship.

Gay couples should be allowed to form civil unions but not legally marry.

Gay couples should be allowed to legally marry.

7

2

24

67%

10

7

9

11

62%

Don’t know/No answer

Both equally

What is right

Political reasons

Other/Don’t know

Same-sex marriage

Health care

Federal budget deficit

Economy and jobs

Don’t know/No answer 2%

No effect

Less likely

More likely

Don’t know/No answer 1%

No effect

Less likely

More likely

Does Mitt Romney's opposition to same-sex marriage make you more or less likely to vote for him?

Does President Obama's support of same-sex marriage make you more or less likely to vote for him?

Do you think Barack Obama publicly supported same-sex marriage mostly because he thinks it is right, or mostly for political reasons?

In deciding whom you would like to see elected president this year, which issue will be most important to you?