Could this be true? Study shows atheists know more about religion than professed believers.

Boing Boing is reporting the findings of an American study which shows that atheists have greater knowledge of some elements of religions than the followers of those faiths.  Boing Boing's report makes for interesting reading! However, what it fails to mention is that that while atheists may have far greater knowledge about certain elements of various faiths (by virtue of the fact that they would justify their stance by having reasons to support their lack of belief), surely they cannot have a better general, or overall, understanding of the subtleties of a particular religion?

For example, while many atheists may know some interesting facts about the creation narrative (I have even heard some atheist friends quoting words and portions of verses from the original Hebrew text to make a point), it is unlikely that they would have equitable 'technical' knowledge about others elements of a particular faith, e.g., the emphases of compassion, goodness, or love as expressed in those faith traditions.

Regardless, this is a an interesting article.  What do you think - is it true, do atheists know more about religion than professing believers?

A new Pew survey on religion in America finds that atheists and agnostics are more likely to be well-versed about different religions' beliefs and practices than people who profess a belief in those religions. For example, atheists and agnostics are more likely to know that during Communion (Catholicism's central rite), the wafer and wine are meant to transubstantiate into the literal flesh and blood of Christ -- they aren't merely symbolic, as 40% of Catholics believe. Atheists and agnostics are also more likely than Protestants to know that Martin Luther sparked the Protestant Reformation (the majority of Protestants could not identify him).

Interestingly, Mormons are, on average, better versed on the traditional New Testament Bible than evangelical Christians and mainstream Christians, many of whom consider Mormonism to be apostasy.

American atheists and agnostics tend to be people who grew up in a religious tradition and consciously gave it up, often after a great deal of reflection and study, said Alan Cooperman, associate director for research at the Pew Forum.

"These are people who thought a lot about religion," he said. "They're not indifferent. They care about it."

Atheists and agnostics also tend to be relatively well educated, and the survey found, not surprisingly, that the most knowledgeable people were also the best educated. However, it said that atheists and agnostics also outperformed believers who had a similar level of education.

The groups at the top of the U.S. Religious Knowledge Survey were followed, in order, by white evangelical Protestants, white Catholics, white mainline Protestants, people who were unaffiliated with any faith (but not atheist or agnostic), black Protestants and Latino Catholics.

The Bible and Christian Ethics - lectures at the University of Stellenbosch

This week I had the privelage of teaching at the University of Stellenbosch on two days.  The topic of the lectures was Scripture and Ethics.

The Bible is a critical source that informs our moral and ethical decision making processes, and helps us to justify why we have taken a particular course of action.  My lectures were based on two chapters that I have written.

“Reading the same Bible and reaching different ethical conclusions:  The Bible and Christian ethics" by Forster, D (2009:131-156) in What is a good life? An introduction to Christian Ethics in 21st century Africa. Kretzschmar, L; Bentley, W; van Niekerk, A (eds). Kempton Park, AcadSA Publishers.

And,

"Why you can't simply trust everything you read" by Forster, D (2008:25-46) in What are we thinking? Reflections on Church and Society from Southern African Methodists. Forster, D; Bentley, W (eds). Cape Town.  Methodist Publishing House.

When we need the Bible most... Complex ethical dilemmas and Christian scripture

Sadly, the Bible is often abused in moral and ethical decision-making processes.  I often hear people quoting a single verse to justify a stance on something (whether it be politics, sexual choices, wealth etc.)  An overly simplistic approach to ethics and an ignorant application of the scriptures can be extremely hurtful and damaging in complex ethical decisions.

In this set of lectures we began by examining the complexity of ethical decision-making.  We used a story that a student shared with me when I was still a lecturer in Ethics and Systematic Theology at the University of South Africa (UNISA) some years ago:

Moral problems tend to have straigthfoward answers (right or wrong), whereas ethical dilemmas seem to have a mix of both good and bad.  No matter what choice you make it will not be entirely good or entirely bad.  The complexity is to work out what decision is best under the circumstances.  This process of deciding is often complicated when one asks the question 'What would God want me to do in this situation?', or 'What does the Bible say I can and cannot do in this situation?'

The example used in class came from a student that I taught at UNISA.

Example:  Is it ever right for a son to have sexual intercourse with his mother?  What does the Bible say?  The answer is, no, it is not acceptable for a son to have sexual intercourse with his mother.  The Bible will not allow that.  This is a clear moral problem.  It is easy to resolve since the choices are either right or wrong, good or bad.

However, in this instances the young man was at home with his mother.  A gang of thugs burst into their home, stole various items and then held a gun to the young man’s mother’s head.  The told him that if he did not have sex with his mother they would kill her.  What should he do?  Does the Bible make some allowance for him to break a law on sexual purity because the value of his mother’s life is more important in Biblical terms?

This last point is an ethical dilemma.  There is a conflict of values – the value of sexual purity in conflict with the value for life.  Which is more important in Christian ethics?  How does one use the Bible to inform such an ethical decision making process and choice?

Well, here are the slides from the lectures.  You can download the original Microsoft Powerpoint slides from this link (5MB).  These slides have notes and references in them. 

However, if you simply want to click through the slides then please use the slideshare window below.

The bible and ethics st143

View more presentations from Dion Forster.

In order to illustrate the complexity of using the Bible in Christian ethics we used a very contentious subject, the Christian (Biblical) perspective on persons with a same sex orientation, and in particular persons in an active homosexual relationship, to consider an approach to ethical decision-making.

I would highly recomend that you read the chapters referenced above.  They give a detailed technical outline of both the content of the lecture, but also the Analyse, Ask, Evaluate and Act model that is presented here.

The body of Christ has HIV AIDS - an update

Some weeks ago I posted and entry entitled 'Christian and positive - when the body of Christ has HIV AIDS' A short while before writing that post I had recorded a brief video describing my thoughts on this matter. I only managed to upload my video last night. So I am posting it as an update here. Please see the video towards the bottom of this post. God bless, Dion Here's that original post with the new video inserted towards the bottom of the post:

Today my friend Grant Russell alerted me to an article posted in the Guardian Online Newspaper entitled Pastor's 'Jesus had HIV' sermon angers South African Christians by David Smith.

I can understand why the preacher in question, Xola Skosana, would preach such a sermon.  However, I can also understand why South African Christians may take offense to both the title of his message and the sermon's title.

First, let me say that I agree with Rev Skosana - the body of Christ does have AIDS!  

In an article that I have just published in the Epworth Review, Vol 32, No 2, 2010 (a theological journal that is published in England) I made exactly the same point.  You can read the article here: The Church has AIDS: Towards a positive theology for an HIV+ Church.

Here are two excerpts from my introduction to the article:

One of the most controversial statements in the contemporary Church is surely the assertion that ‘The Church has AIDS’! This statement challenges Christians to recognize that it is impossible to do theology and engage in Christian life and ministry without taking into account the impact of HIV and AIDS on the world...

Within the Church – the Body of Christ – there are many persons who are HIV+. This reality changes not only who we are as a Church, it also changes how we are the Church. In our creeds we affirm that the Church is ‘One’ – this unity is more than just a structural unity. Solidarity is central to the unity of the Church. It was out of this reality of true solidarity that the Methodist Church of Southern Africa adopted the following statement at its annual conference in 2005: ‘The Church has HIV/AIDS: We care. “When one part of the body is affected the whole body suffers” 1 Corinthians 12:26.’

This image is a photograph of a poster that was circulated in Methodist Churches in Southern Africa.  It bears the bold, and true, statement "The Church has HIV/AIDS - we care".

The point is this, Christians believe, according to Paul's theology, that the Church is the "body of Christ" (see for example 1 Corinthians 12:12, Colossians 1:18).  If there are members of the Church that are HIV positive then the Body of Christ is HIV positive.

That is controversial, but it is true.  If one part of the body suffers the whole body suffers 1 Corinthians 12:26.

In my article I argue something similar to what the Guardian reports on Rev Xola Skosana - we are responsible for one another, and as such the whole Church (all across the world) must consider itself HIV +.  The HI virus infects the whole of the body.  Unlike cancer one cannot remove the ailing part of the body.  The virus affects every part of the body.  

Here are some statistics about HIV from the article in the Epworth Review:

South Africa’s HIV/AIDS statistics are fairly well known.6 Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest precedence of HIV infection in the world. Where it is left completely unchecked the HIV infection rate has risen to as high as 1 in every 2 persons (50 per cent of some population groups in Botswana).7 Of the estimated 33.2 million persons living with AIDS globally, more than 22.5 million live in Sub-Saharan Africa – that amounts to 68 per cent of all HIV+ persons in less that 10 per cent of the world’s geographic land mass. Each day more than 1,600 persons are infected with the virus. In most government hospitals more than half of the patients are HIV+. By 2009 the life expectancy of a person living in Swaziland8 had declined from 60 years of age to just 32 years.9 Compare this to the United King- dom where the life expectancy of the average person born in 2009 is 79 years.10 Approximately 4,500 people in Sub-Saharan Africa die of HIV/ AIDS-related medical causes each day.

In a chapter that I wrote for a forthcoming book entitled Alienation and Connection: Suffering in a global age. (edited by Lisa Withrow and Joerg Rieger) I developed this argument in a slightly different way.  The chapter is entitled Empire, economics and apathy: A theological reflection on suffering as a result of HIV AIDS.

I introduced the concept with another rather controversial statement, saying that any Southern African Church that does not have an HIV AIDS ministry cannot be a Christian Church!  [yes, I know that I will get into trouble for this one!]

My contention is this - if 68% of all HIV+ persons in the world live in this region, then the Church has a massive responsibility to see that God's loving will is brought to bear on this situation.  God cares about every person!  The Church is God's instrument, the instrument of the mission Dei (the mission, or work, of God).

So, yes, I agree with Rev Skosana - the Body of Christ is HIV+.  Perhaps I would have titled the message slightly differently.  Instead of saying 'Jesus had HIV', I would say that 'The body of Christ is HIV+'.

As a result I can understand how Christians may respond with shock at the statement that Jesus HIV.  That statement is not accurate.  But, I do believe that the point is well made.  As Christians we need to understand that we have a critical role to play in ministering to God's World.  And since this world includes HIV positive persons it is not a matter of 'us' and 'them'.  Rather it is a matter of 'us'.

Here is a video reflection that offers some further thoughts on this very important issue!

The body of Christ has HIV AIDS from Dion Forster on Vimeo.

I'd love to hear your thoughts, reflections, and ideas!

You can find the Guardian article on Rev Skosana here.

Update on Monday, September 20, 2010 at 11:06AM by Dr Dion Forster

I'm not sure if my comments show up on google searches.

So, please forgive me for reposing a comment in the follow up section as well Thomas!  Your question is so important that I would truly want others to consider the points below.

Rich blessing,

Dion

My response to Thomas copies form the comments:

Hey Thomas,

Thanks for your comment on this! First, let me say how blessed I am that you have the care of HIV infected persons and our surrounding community within your ministry! That is precisely what I am praying and working for - that every Christian, and certainly every Church, would have some strategic and significant Christian response to this matter.

Of course in this instance the post is not directed at you, but rather at the majority of Christian Churches (and Christians) who have not formed an appropriate response to HIV infection in their midst.

In the article that I wrote, which was published in the Epworth Review, I quote some empirical research on how Churches (and individual Christians) in Southern Africa have chosen not to respond to HIV infected persons in their ministry. Some have taken a condemnatory stance, rejecting and further stigmatizing infected persons and their families. Mainly this is because of a poor theological position on HIV. In particular my research has shown that the most common theological position in relation to HIV infection is that sickness is a punishment from God for some form of direct sin (or the sins of parents or other family members). Now, naturally this is a complex cultural phenomenon, but popular theology shapes popular response (or lack thereof).

I wrote a chapter for an American book (referenced above) in which I record an interview with a young HIV + girl (barely a woman) which shows the immense suffering that she and other HIV + persons face because of the rejection and lack of compassion (let alone care) they get from communities that indicate overwhelmingly (80% in the last census) that they are Christian.

In the book Church communities confronting HIV & AIDS (edited by Gideon B. Byamugish) I wrote up a chapter in the form of a case study. The case study is called 'Nosipho's story - no greater love'. It tells a mixed tale of marginal care and tragedy of a child headed household in KZN (see pp.5 forward). Nosihpho was a 13 year old girl. She was not HIV+ at the time of the story. Her 8 year old brother was not HIV+, but her 5 year old sister was infected through mother to child transmission. Both her parents had died of AIDS, she (13 years old) was caring for her brother and sister.

The complexity of situation is this: She could not get enough food to feed her little sister (who was receiving some treatment via a local Church based clinic) and her brother. She had to pay the 'aunty' who looked after his little sister while she was begging and her brother went to school. As a 13 year old she chose not to eat so that her little sister could take her midicine and survive, she could feed her brother and pay his school fees, and give the remaining money to the 'aunty' who, although she was cruel to her little sister, at least looked after her.

Nosipho had been offered a chance at a better life - all she had to do was engage in sexual acts with the men she met at the side of the street. At the time of the story she was wondering whether she should take up this offer, get more money and care for her siblings... Her fear, however, is that she would also get HIV. The story ends with her anticipating a meeting with the community social worker who cares for children like her and her siblings at a local Church in their informal settlement.

This story made me realise just how little the majority of Churches are doing to care for our own people... People like Nosipho who love the Lord, need just a little bit of practical care and loving guidance to 'make their way in the world'.

So, the point of this post is to challenges every person who would read it, listen to to the video, and pray about doing something (no matter where they're located in the world, no matter how many, or how few HIV+ persons they have in their Church or community). This is our problem, and unlike you and your Church, very few of 'us' are doing something substantial about it.

Please pray with me and spread the word! We have work to do!

Bless you in your ministry,

Dion

Christian and positive - when Christ's Body has HIV AIDS

Today my friend Grant Russell alerted me to an article posted in the Guardian Online Newspaper entitled Pastor's 'Jesus had HIV' sermon angers South African Christians by David Smith.

I can understand why the preacher in question, Xola Skosana, would preach such a sermon.  However, I can also understand why South African Christians may take offense to both the title of his message and the sermon's title.

First, let me say that I agree with Rev Skosana - the body of Christ does have AIDS!  

In an article that I have just published in the Epworth Review, Vol 32, No 2, 2010 (a theological journal that is published in England) I made exactly the same point.  You can read the article here: The Church has AIDS: Towards a positive theology for an HIV+ Church.

Here are two excerpts from my introduction to the article:

One of the most controversial statements in the contemporary Church is surely the assertion that ‘The Church has AIDS’! This statement challenges Christians to recognize that it is impossible to do theology and engage in Christian life and ministry without taking into account the impact of HIV and AIDS on the world...

Within the Church – the Body of Christ – there are many persons who are HIV+. This reality changes not only who we are as a Church, it also changes how we are the Church. In our creeds we affirm that the Church is ‘One’ – this unity is more than just a structural unity. Solidarity is central to the unity of the Church. It was out of this reality of true solidarity that the Methodist Church of Southern Africa adopted the following statement at its annual conference in 2005: ‘The Church has HIV/AIDS: We care. “When one part of the body is affected the whole body suffers” 1 Corinthians 12:26.’

This image is a photograph of a poster that was circulated in Methodist Churches in Southern Africa.  It bears the bold, and true, statement "The Church has HIV/AIDS - we care".

The point is this, Christians believe, according to Paul's theology, that the Church is the "body of Christ" (see for example 1 Corinthians 12:12, Colossians 1:18).  If there are members of the Church that are HIV positive then the Body of Christ is HIV positive.

That is controversial, but it is true.  If one part of the body suffers the whole body suffers 1 Corinthians 12:26.

In my article I argue something similar to what the Guardian reports on Rev Xola Skosana - we are responsible for one another, and as such the whole Church (all across the world) must consider itself HIV +.  The HI virus infects the whole of the body.  Unlike cancer one cannot remove the ailing part of the body.  The virus affects every part of the body.  

Here are some statistics about HIV from the article in the Epworth Review:

South Africa’s HIV/AIDS statistics are fairly well known.6 Sub-Saharan Africa has the highest precedence of HIV infection in the world. Where it is left completely unchecked the HIV infection rate has risen to as high as 1 in every 2 persons (50 per cent of some population groups in Botswana).7 Of the estimated 33.2 million persons living with AIDS globally, more than 22.5 million live in Sub-Saharan Africa – that amounts to 68 per cent of all HIV+ persons in less that 10 per cent of the world’s geographic land mass. Each day more than 1,600 persons are infected with the virus. In most government hospitals more than half of the patients are HIV+. By 2009 the life expectancy of a person living in Swaziland8 had declined from 60 years of age to just 32 years.9 Compare this to the United King- dom where the life expectancy of the average person born in 2009 is 79 years.10 Approximately 4,500 people in Sub-Saharan Africa die of HIV/ AIDS-related medical causes each day.

In a chapter that I wrote for a forthcoming book entitled Alienation and Connection: Suffering in a global age. (edited by Lisa Withrow and Joerg Rieger) I developed this argument in a slightly different way.  The chapter is entitled Empire, economics and apathy: A theological reflection on suffering as a result of HIV AIDS.

I introduced the concept with another rather controversial statement, saying that any Southern African Church that does not have an HIV AIDS ministry cannot be a Christian Church!  [yes, I know that I will get into trouble for this one!]

My contention is this - if 68% of all HIV+ persons in the world live in this region, then the Church has a massive responsibility to see that God's loving will is brought to bear on this situation.  God cares about every person!  The Church is God's instrument, the instrument of the mission Dei (the mission, or work, of God).

So, yes, I agree with Rev Skosana - the Body of Christ is HIV+.  Perhaps I would have titled the message slightly differently.  Instead of saying 'Jesus had HIV', I would say that 'The body of Christ is HIV+'.

As a result I can understand how Christians may respond with shock at the statement that Jesus HIV.  That statement is not accurate.  But, I do believe that the point is well made.  As Christians we need to understand that we have a critical role to play in ministering to God's World.  And since this world includes HIV positive persons it is not a matter of 'us' and 'them'.  Rather it is a matter of 'us'.

Here is a video reflection that offers some further thoughts on this very important issue!

The body of Christ has HIV AIDS from Dion Forster on Vimeo.

I'd love to hear your thoughts, reflections, and ideas!

You can find the Guardian article on Rev Skosana here.

Re-Appropriating the term Evangelical - is it worth it?

My friend Jenny posted a great reflection on her blog about an 'evangelical' gathering that she attended.  I am reposting it below because it raises some very interesting points for consideration, however I would encourage you to visit her blog to see the discussion related to her post.

I've just spent the weekend at the Methodist Evangelical Renewal Movement consultation - or countrywide gathering. It was such an encouraging experience. I must admit that I went along with some hesitancy as I have struggled to fully understand what this fairly new movement is all about. I hoped to catch a sense of their vision - and I did. I am still trying to process and absorb everything and I hope that I will blog about it all eventually.
What I think at the moment- it's ok to believe the Bible is the word of God. It doesn't mean I am a fundamentalist (I don't read it word for word literally).
It's ok to believe in a 'whole salvation'. We speak of both personal salvation and social salvation. Personal holiness and social holiness.
The Bible informs us of these salvations and 'holinesses'. I go to the Bible to discover how to live in order to bring about the kingdom of God.
Sometimes people understand the word 'evangelical' differently and even negatively - that doesn't mean I am like their understanding!
The Methodist Church has always had a missional ecclesiology and we should reclaim that.
There is too much more and I really need to process it properly.
I came away believing that there is real hope for the Methodist Church and the God truly is a God of love and action.

My response to Jenny's post is below.  In particularly I am keen to re-appropriate the term / descriptor 'evangelical'.  I feel, rightly or wrongly, that it has been missunderstood in popular society and theology, and hijacked by a conservative element in the Christian tradition. As a result it has a fairly negative connotation in popular theology and even in social and theological discourse.

Here are my thoughts (reposted as a comment on Jenny's blog):

Hi Jenny,

Thanks for this reflection. I am so pleased to hear of your experience - I too have been on a journey to 're-appropriate' the term 'evangelical'. In my understanding the common usage has been far too narrowly applied to the act of 'evangelical preaching'. However, in the Bible we see that Jesus' 'good news' (Luke 4:19 ff) was very social. He not only wished to describe the state of 'good news', his intention was to establish God's good news as a life changing reality for those whom he encountered.

I am passionate about journeying with people towards a personal encounter with Christ. But that is only the starting point, not the end. Once the encounter has taken place the results of Christ's transforming love must flow out into society. You cannot love Jesus without loving His ways - and his was are just, merciful, inclusive, empowering and renewing. The ways of Jesus set people free from sin and the structures that enslave (some clear examples are Jesus' encounter with unethical business people in the temple, and false religious leaders with the woman and man caught in adultery. Jesus cares about the rights of children and the fate of the oppressed).

For me, the whole Gospel for the whole world means precisely that! Not just a narrow personal salvation from individual sin.

In this sense I am evangelical!

With regards to Wesley's theology of personal holiness and social holiness it is always worth remembering the context in which he served. Not unlike us, he faced some massive social challenges around his ministry. Slavery, the abuse of labour, unjust governing authorities, a Church that was disconnected from the needs of society etc., it was into this situation that he came to understand that personal piety (my prayers, my acts of worship etc.) is meaningless unless it is expressed socially.

As South Africans I think we can understand this relationship very well. For many years Christians would worship on Sunday's declaring the Glory of God in Church, reading our Bibles and praying. Yet, we lived in a society that was fundamentally unjust. 

Such a disconnect between faith and belief invalidates belief (as the Epistle of James clearly says).

You may be interested in the paper that I presented at the Oxford Institute of Methodist Theological Studies at Christ Church in Oxford in 2007. It deals with a history of social holiness (Wesley's 26th sermon, plus his theology around that), and in particular relates it to the South African Christian Church. You can find that article here: Dion Forster Oxford Institute - Social Holiness.

The chapter was later reworked and published in the book Methodism in Southern Africa: A celebration of Wesleyan Mission. Some of the stuff that was cut out of the chapter for the book was also published in 2008 in Journal of Church History Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae.

Thanks for sharing this reflection! I am grateful to be an evangelical!

I would love to hear your thoughts on the use of the term evangelical.  Is my approach to this term appropriate, or should I seek some other descriptor?  Or, is the term so strongly 'branded' with negative religious and social connotations that we should move beyond it?

Pentecost - power to change!

This pentecost I have been challenged, once again, that the purpose of faith is to love God, and the purpose of religion is to serve God's will of transforming the world.

This quote from Karl Barth was quite challenging in that regard:

"The Holy Spirit establishes the righteousness of heaven in the midst of the unrighteousness of the earth and will not stop or stay until all that is dead has been brought to life and a new world has come into being." - Karl Barth, from his book The Word of God and the Word of Man

As an undergraduate in Theology at Rhodes University our Systematic Theology Professor (Brian Gaybba, an expert in pneumatology who wrote the book The Spirit of Love) would pray the following liturgical prayer at the start of each lecture:

V - Come, Holy Spirit, fill the hearts of your faithful.

R - And kindle in them the fire of your love.

V - Send forth your spirit, Lord, and they shall be created.

R - And thou shalt renew the face of the earth.

Let us pray,

O God, who by the light of the Holy Spirit did instruct the hearts of your faithful; grant that in the same Spirit we may be truly wise and ever rejoice in his consolation. Through the same Christ, our Lord. Amen.

This prayer has often been a source of encouragement and strength when facing challenging tasks and difficult people.  So, today I want to encourage you that we have a task, the task is transformation.  It is a difficult task, but we do not face it alone.  God empowers us by His Spirit, the Spirit of Life, truth and love.

When they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken; and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God with boldness.

- Acts 4:31

Let us be filled with God's Spirit that we may have joy in proclaiming God's loving word with boldness.

Connected by the strong bonds of God's grace - Sivin Kit a good friend.

I am blessed with many wonderful friends!  I relate to many of them because we share at least one common interest.  There are a few others with whom I feel a closer affinity because we share some deeper and more significant common values.  Then there are those among whom I am privileged to be counted, because we share a common approach to our faith in Christ.

My friend Sivin is one such friend.  

Since we first met in Malaysia in 2007 we have stayed in good contact.  Here's what I wrote in reflection of our first meeting:

Yesterday I made a new friend, Rev. Sivin Kit, he is a theologian, and pastor, and to our amazement we found that we have so many things in common! Rev. Kit kindly collected me from Kuala Lumpur at the end of the MPC to bring me to the 'Seminari theoloji Malaysia'. He is a past graduate of the seminary, and now serves as a Lutheran pastor in KL.

As Sivin and I talked I was amazed to discover just how many things we have in common as persons (for one thing we're the same age, but for another we are both avid bloggers! Please take a look at Sivin's blog here: Sivin Kit's Garden. Sivin is also the co-ordinator for 'emergent Malaysia', a network of pastors and laity that are engaged in the conversations of the emergent Church movement. He knows so much more about both the theology, and the ideals, of this movement than I do! What is more, Sivin hosted Brian Mclaren on his visit to Malaysia (I even got to eat in the same restaurant as they ate!) Thanks Sivin for your hospitality, friendship, and patient engagement with me!

Sivin and I remain close.  We have a common desire to follow the person and ways of Jesus.  

Of course there are as many ways to following Jesus as there are people, since true discipleship of Christ is expressed and discovered in a loving relationship with Jesus as savior and Lord. For each of us this journey has meant that we've had to go beyond some of the boundaries of conventional expressions of the Christian faith.  Of course the aims of these careful explorations in faith are pretty similar to those of conventional Christian communities, i.e., to forge loving obedience, to seek true transformation, and to encourage authentic and courageous living with Jesus and those who Jesus loves (in that last part of the sentence you can read 'Jesus loves everyone, not just Christians 'like you' or Christians 'like me'.  Heck, Jesus has a special love for people who do not yet recognized His love!').

Many find such a radically inclusive Christian position offensive.  Others feel unsettled at attempts to discover new depths in authentic Christian living.  For some the thought of uncertainty that is brought about by change is simply too much to bear.

And so, there are times where we are misunderstood.  There are other times where we face rejection for our approach to the Christian faith. I have come to expect this.  As I've said elsewhere, I don't expect people to be able to understand my theology in its entirety - even I don't understand myself fully!

Thankfully, we are not alone on this journey.  There are millions of believers, all across the globe, who are not satisfied with 'mere Christianity'.  There are many faithful servants of Christ who are serious about servanthood.  Many believe that it truly is God's intention to transform the world, and not only to fill the Church. And so we stand together in a loose affiliation of discovery.  We are bound less by a common set of truths than by a recognition that God's gracious love for the world is mystery of grace that requires a tangible response.  We are frail and imperfect servants of a gracious and powerful God!  Our contexts differ, and so do our responses - but our desire is largely the same; faithfulness to Christ and His Kingdom.

Here's a wonderful video of my friend Sivin Kit at the Transform conference (with Brian Mclaren). It gives a great overview of Sivin's ministry and context.

From this video you'll see that Sivin and I have one other thing in common...  the ability to film while driving!

Please visit Sivin's blog here - you will find hours of wonderful reading.  Many incredible resources, and enough challenging thoughts to sustain both your mind and your soul!

African relational ontology, individual identity, and Christian theology

Yup, the title of this post is a mouthful... It happens to be the title of an academic article that I wrote some time ago that is being published.  

The article will be published in the July / August edition of the SPCK Journal 'Theology'.  This is by far the most prestigious journal in which I have had the privilege to publish an article.  I am truly amazed that it was accepted, and humbled to have it there.

Perhaps the title was so obscure that they thought it was worth a chance!?  The full title of the article is

African relational ontology, individual identity, and Christian theology: An African theological contribution towards an integrated relational ontological identity (Theology, July/August 2010 Vol CXIII No 874 ISSN 0040-571 X).

The article comes from a body of research that I conducted over a period of some years in which I investigated the problem of individual identity (what does it mean to be 'me').  How is my identity formed in relation to other persons and my context?  And what aspects of the Kosmos can be relied upon to validate who I truly am?  Do I rely on my appearance, or my experiences, or is there something more concrete and substantial to 'true identity'?

 

This article focusses on the importance of relationships and intersubjective identity as the locus of understanding who we are as human persons. It relates these important social aspects of our identity to three prominent Christian doctrines (the doctrine of God, the doctrine of Christian anthropology and the doctrine of soteriology (salvation) - it is something of a systematic approach).  

I have another article from this same body of research that contains more of the neuroscience and psychology of identity that will be published in the South African Journal HTS later this year.  And then I am still working on the book 'Why you may not be who you think you are.  Adventures in neuroscience, artificial intelligence and philosophy' (I am under contract to Cambridge Scholars Press for this book).

Here's the abstract for this article in 'Theology'.

African theology has a great deal to contribute to the theological discourse on human identity. Relationships are central to the formation, expression and understanding of who an individual person is. The African philosophy of ubuntu, more accurately expressed as umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu (a person is a person through other persons), affirms the critical under- standing that identity arises out of intersubjective interactions between persons. This paper discusses how concepts of identity in African philosophy and religion can enhance our theological understanding of individual identity. Hence this research presents an African theological approach to identity that is systematized in relation to the doctrine of God, the doctrine of Christian anthropology and the doctrine of salvation.

If you're interested in reading more about my research in this area, and various other thoughts on neuroscience, identity and Christian theology please follow this link.

Even if they call me mad! Keeping it together.

Over the years I have had the opportunity to do many personality profile tests, skills inventories, and aptitude measurement tests.  Of course each one of these has had some form of bias built into it. However, there have also been some common threads that run throughout all of the results.

Let me share some of those here:

1.  I am a people's person.  The Meyers Briggs test suggests that I am strongly extroverted - I get my energy from people (and in my case more people give more energy).  I love being with people!  I love to hear all about them and share myself with them in return.

2.  I am an 'activist' in the sense that I get behind causes and try to get others in joining me to get things done.  Some tests call this kind of personality an 'influencer' - someone who discovers movements, causes or ideas and then influences others to follow the same path.  Whether it is a social cause, an event, an idea or some new technology I am constantly acting like an 'evangelist'.  I am far more likely to see the positive elements of persons, movements and technologies than others, and I will extol those virtues to others.  Over the years I have encouraged people to join Churches, accept Christ's love and grace, use Apple Macs, take up cycling, start blogging, attend events, start writing, fight for causes, read certain books... I'm an activist at heart!

3.  I am non-conformist by nature.  I tend towards the 'thin spaces' in my thought life and choices I am not afraid to be 'out front on my own'.  I know others who feel insecure when they are not understood, or if they feel that they don't fit the prevIling mindset.  I prefer to think, dress, talk, act and live a little differently.  Sure, this can lead to bring misunderstood or judged.  But, it's the way I'm wired!  It has also been a great blessing.  There is much less competition for space where I am!  Most people clamour for the middle.  I have had many blessed opportunities as a result writing, thinking and acting upon uncommon things.  I am thankful for this trait.

4.  Another aspect of my personality that frequently features is that of 'bridge building'.  I often connect people, ideas, groups etc., from very different perspectives with one another.  It is a joy to see new opportunities emerge for others, new ideas come to the fore, and new relationships form where persons may not have connected or met.  It takes some effort to do this - often people distrust one another, or hold such rigid convictions about their point of view, or the perspective of another that it takes some time, grace and effort to facilitate a safe engagement and a trusted space for encounter. But in the end it is worth it.

In short, I have come to understand that part of my ministry - an aspect that runs throughout most of my life regardless of the task I'm performing, the place in which I work, and the persons among whom I work, is this:  I am radically inclusive.

I have a strong desire to bring people together in Jesus Christ - there are none of us that do not require grace.  There are none of us that are free from weakness.  There are none of us who are not loved by God.

And so, while some try to exclude I have discovered that I have a natural propensity to include.  While some try to build up walls, I have a supernatural desire to deconstruct them.  Whether you are liberal or conservative, a proponent of the social Gospel or an evangelical, it doesn't matter, there is enough space for all of us in Christ's love.  

This is something that I can live for!  I'm wired for it!  I am radically inclusive!

One of the things that I have noticed is that we tend towards accepting people who are like us and look away from those who are different.  Liberals are inclusive of those who share our views, whilst conservatives are inclusive of those who share their views.  This is not the way of Christ!  It is only a few steps from rejection the position of another, to rejecting the other.  We have so many examples of this in history from which we can learn.

Even when they call us mad, when they call us subversives and communists and all the epithets they put on us, we know we only preach the subversive witness of the Beatitudes, which have turned everything upside down.
- Archbishop Oscar Romero, an advocate for the poor and marginalized, was assassinated thirty years ago today while giving Mass in El Salvador.

So, I want to invite you to allow the grace of Christ to give you love for those who are different from yourself.  Ask God to help you to love those persons, even as God loves them.  

Today I heard that the President of El Salvador has apologized for the assassination of Arch Bishop Romero.  The visuals of El Salvador showed how this Christian man has inspired Catholics, evangelicals, politicians, and even people of different faiths.  There is something of the Spirit of Christ that is at work through his legacy of love.  I find him truly inspiring.  I first came to hear about Bishop Romero when my friend Dr Larry Kaufman (the head of the Redemptrist order in South Africa) gave me the book 'Romero' when I was doing some graduate study at Rhodes University.  I read it during lent 1996 - it transformed my theology and my life!

Here I am in Malaysia, a different geographical location, a different culture(s), a different climate, and even some different expressions of Christianity - it is my joy to work towards building an inclusive Christian community! [citation needed] ;-) It is wonderful!  Thank you for the hospitality - I LOVE being back in this place among these wonderful people.  

We're here for two days and then head to Singapore for some speaking engagements and meetings, and then to Hong Kong before heading home!!

Dealing with critical people

I don't know about you, but I don't particularly like to be disliked!  How do you deal with people that are critical of you?  Moreover, if you know that you will never be able to 'win' the person over to your point of view do you spend time and energy on them anyway?  What is the Christ-like thing to do?

This QIK video (the first in a while!) explains some of my feelings about being understood by others (or not needing to be understood by others).

I have come to make peace with the fact that not everyone will like, or understand, me.  Heck, there are parts of my own personality that I don't like or understand, and parts of my theology and spirituality that are unique and inconsistent.  But, I am sincere in my love of Christ and my desire to honour Him and His ways.  Most often that is enough!

I'd love to hear your insights and thoughts.  How do you deal with critical people?

Liam the great and the mystery of undeserved grace

I have often wondered about the nature of God's grace.  I realise that by its very nature grace is something that is a blessing which is not earned or deserved.  This is what makes it grace!

However, it becomes particularly puzzling when it moves from the theoretical to experiential.

Yesterday Megan and I took our little miracle boy, Liam, for his session with the occupational therapist.  It is always an emotional time for me, and I don't mind admitting that I shed a tear.  I did so with a mixture of joy, thankfulness, and also with a little guilt.

You see, when Liam was born he was very ill.  He spent three months in the neonatal ICU.  We prayed for him day and night.  There were many other parents with their children praying in the same ward.  Sadly, some of those children died.  I often struggled to understand why my son lived and their children did not.  Every now and then that nagging feeling returns.

I am so thankful for all that God has blessed us with!  I am thankful for knowing Christ and being known by Him.  I am thankful for the privelage of loving my family and the immeasurable joy of being loved by them.  I am thankful for the challenge and opportunity of my ministry.  I am thankful for the city in which I live - Cape Town is surely one of the most beautiful places on earth!  I am thankful for my health, for the opportunities I have had to travel, for my formal and informal studies... I have so much to be thankful for!

When I am honest I have to admit that none of these things is deserved!  They are all elements of grace.

I found the following quote extremely helpful.  It sums up some of understanding of the mystery of God's grace.

I do not at all understand the mystery of grace -- only that it meets us where we are but does not leave us where it found us.

- Anne Lamott, from her book, Traveling Mercies

So, let me ask you, why am I so blessed when many others are not?  What is it that makes some people's lives better than others?  I would truly appreciate any insights, wether profound or simple, on this matter.  Perhaps you have discovered something on life's journey that can help.  Maybe there is a passage in scripture, or some other aid that can help me as I grapple with grace.

What is certain is that I live in unmerited grace.  It is a mystery to me.  I am thankful to God for all of God's grace.  It has changed me profoundly and continues to do so.  But, I would love to understand it a bit more! 

Ancient laws, contemporary controversies

My friend Prof Cheryl Anderson, who I first met at Garrett Evangelical Seminary in beautiful Evanston Illinois - right on the Northwestern University Campus, in 2005, has just published a fantastic book entitled 'Ancient laws, contemporary controversies:  The need for inclusive Biblical interpretation.' (Oxford University Press, 2009).

Cheryl is a Professor of Old Testament who has done some wonderful work on contextual hermeneutics.  Her approach to reading the Bible responsibly is well worth studying!

Cheryl, thanks for sending me a copy of the book!  It looks fantastic!  I can't wait to read it!  It will help me to gain a better understanding on how we treat the text with integrity when there are so many elements of it that we no longer accept as morally or theologically binding (e.g., slavery, incest, polygamy etc., are no longer deemed acceptable because of shifts in culture.  We can't simply dismiss them without having some clear reasoning for passing over these elements while holding on to others)!  Anyone who is serious about the Bible, as I am, should read this book!

Here's the link to the book if anyone reading this blog would like to buy a copy.

Here's a description of Cheryl's project:

The Ten Commandments condone slavery, and Deuteronomy 22 deems the rape of an unmarried woman to injure her father rather than the woman herself. While many Christians ignore most Old Testament laws as obsolete or irrelevant-with others picking and choosing among them in support of specific political and social agendas-it remains a basic tenet of Christian doctrine that the faith is contained in both the Old and the New Testament. If the law is ignored, an important aspect of the faith tradition is denied.

In Ancient Laws and Contemporary Controversies, Cheryl B. Anderson tackles this problem head on, attempting to answer the question whether the laws of the Old Testament are authoritative for Christians today. The issue is crucial: some Christians actually believe that the New Testament abolishes the law, or that the Protestant reformers Luther, Calvin, and Wesley rejected the law. Acknowledging the deeply problematic nature of some Old Testament law (especially as it applies to women, the poor, and homosexuals), Anderson finds that contemporary controversies are the result of such groups now expressing their own realities and faith perspectives.

Anderson suggests that we approach biblical law in much the same way that we approach the U.S. Constitution. While the nation's founding fathers-all privileged white men-did not have the poor, women, or people of color in mind when they referred in its preamble to "We the people." Subsequently, the Constitution has evolved through amendment and interpretation to include those who were initially excluded. Although it is impossible to amend the biblical texts themselves, the way in which they are interpreted can-and should-change. With previous scholarship grounded in the Old Testament as well as critical, legal, and feminist theory, Anderson is uniquely qualified to apply insights from contemporary law to the interpretive history of biblical law, and to draw out their implications for issues of gender, class, and race/ethnicity. In so doing, she lays the groundwork for an inclusive mode of biblical interpretation.