Wow - Pop Goes Theology
Too much of theology is badly overdubbed Russian bootleg DVDs of marginal movies....um, the funny thing is, I get what you're saying.
I had another (pretty-conservative) pastor in my office and he was thumbing through my copy of Searching the Scriptures: A Feminist Commentary and looked at me like, "Why in the world would you ever have this book in your office?" The thing is, while I don't agree with feminist theology in it's entirety, this commentary and a handful of other feminist and womanist (yes, there's a difference, but don't ask me to try to explain it) sources have helped to shape my theology. Michael would probably be booted from TCS just for having the book in his library, but I think he should have it - and some good liberationist theology, process, neo-orthodox, wild right-wing, wild-left wing, even some of the off the wall theology (thank you Benny Hinn) in his library.
I have yet to quote from Searching the Scriptures but I've used it as a resource for sermons. Having another perspective can only help to open your own perspective.
For example, I just opened the book to page 383 - which is part of Elsa Tamez' article on the book of James. She writes:
A feminist reading of the letter recognized James's patriarchal language. Jas. 1:17 refers to God the Father of lights; 1:14, 15 relates concupiscence (seduction, sin, and death) to woman's pregnancy; to conceive (syllambano), to give birth (tikto), and to engender (apokyeo). By contrast, in 1:18 the Father of lights engenders (apokyeo) with the word of truth...
...and it continues. Now, I don't dispute that the Bible was written in a very partriarchal culture and that most of the writers were, as we would call them in our contemporary culture, sexist. And, while there may not be anything new in what Tamez wrote, reading it makes me again aware that the language I use, and the language that the Bible uses, can be a barrier to people hearing what God is saying. And I MIGHT even make reference to the fact that James equates pregnancy to sin...not sure what concupiscence is (better not use it in church, it sounds like a dirty word...heh).
My point (oh, there is one?) is that you are absolutely right. We need to experience God in 3-D (heh, maybe in 10-D?) - not just one aspect (which is what every theological movement seems to do - focus in on one aspect of God's character or one issue) but the whole breadth and depth of God - take in as much as we can...
I had another (pretty-conservative) pastor in my office and he was thumbing through my copy of Searching the Scriptures: A Feminist Commentary and looked at me like, "Why in the world would you ever have this book in your office?" The thing is, while I don't agree with feminist theology in it's entirety, this commentary and a handful of other feminist and womanist (yes, there's a difference, but don't ask me to try to explain it) sources have helped to shape my theology. Michael would probably be booted from TCS just for having the book in his library, but I think he should have it - and some good liberationist theology, process, neo-orthodox, wild right-wing, wild-left wing, even some of the off the wall theology (thank you Benny Hinn) in his library.
I have yet to quote from Searching the Scriptures but I've used it as a resource for sermons. Having another perspective can only help to open your own perspective.
For example, I just opened the book to page 383 - which is part of Elsa Tamez' article on the book of James. She writes:
A feminist reading of the letter recognized James's patriarchal language. Jas. 1:17 refers to God the Father of lights; 1:14, 15 relates concupiscence (seduction, sin, and death) to woman's pregnancy; to conceive (syllambano), to give birth (tikto), and to engender (apokyeo). By contrast, in 1:18 the Father of lights engenders (apokyeo) with the word of truth...
...and it continues. Now, I don't dispute that the Bible was written in a very partriarchal culture and that most of the writers were, as we would call them in our contemporary culture, sexist. And, while there may not be anything new in what Tamez wrote, reading it makes me again aware that the language I use, and the language that the Bible uses, can be a barrier to people hearing what God is saying. And I MIGHT even make reference to the fact that James equates pregnancy to sin...not sure what concupiscence is (better not use it in church, it sounds like a dirty word...heh).
My point (oh, there is one?) is that you are absolutely right. We need to experience God in 3-D (heh, maybe in 10-D?) - not just one aspect (which is what every theological movement seems to do - focus in on one aspect of God's character or one issue) but the whole breadth and depth of God - take in as much as we can...
posted by Pastor Bill at 10:28 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home