Generally my life is pretty normal, Classes, lectures, readings and that sort of deal. Basic student living which makes me very happy is the norm of my days. This past week has been hard hitting for work and lectures as next week is the Mid-Term Vacation. This past weekend I had to write two papers, and I have been pretty entrenched in readings for the last couple of weeks. But I have loved the readings.
The readings have been relatively emotionally laden. That probably requires some unpacking. The courses that I am taking here are all deeply involved in the realities of the world. That being said the readings can be heart breaking and yet at the same time leave me feeling with a great deal of longing for better things. It leaves me with the deepest sense of hope. Not just that fluffy light sort of hope, but the real hard-core deep hope that mourns, and is angry, and frustrated. The hope that something better can be found. Most recently the hardest class in that regard is my Biblical Theology 310 class. We have been deeply wrestling with the issues that surround HIV/AIDS and the Church. During the course of one week, I read 4 articles and went to one theological café where we learned about different problems that the church was facing in regards to that. The same week in Industrial Mission we started looking at issues of the Politics of Food, and focusing on why there is hunger in our world. The more I start looking at these issues the more the realities and the possibilities set in for how to do theology in a productive and world shaking sort of way. Wednesday morning of that week I was busy reading some scripture and I opened up to Ecclesiastes, and as I was reading the first chapter verse 18 leapt out at me and hit me over the head. It reads as follows:
For in much wisdom is much vexation,
And those who increase knowledge increase sorrow.
And those who increase knowledge increase sorrow.
That is extremely true. Sometimes things like that pop out, and stop you in your tracks, and that is incredible. For me especially I was just so exhausted from reading about how many communities of Christians struggle against the Church claiming that HIV/AIDS is a punishment, or is a retribution for their sexual lifestyle, or more over their sins. Even in a nation like South Africa Theologians are struggling to disconnect the notion of HIV/AIDS from Sin. Especially as the most at risk group currently here in South Africa are Heterosexual married women.
Beyond the depth of longing and pain that my studies are bringing (though very healthy life altering pain) it is presenting me with a model of theology that instead of being from a White Ivory Tower, where the knowledge and the discourses only serve to build the tower higher and higher, I am able to view a theology that hits the streets. Yes when the tires hit the pavement the tires may feel some pain, but it gets the theology moving and helping. Theology becomes a force of liberation, healing, and restoration. Not the thing which is used to oppress and keep people away from life.
I guess though that hasn’t been all of my experiences though, throughout the weeks of studying I have many wonderful beautiful things which punctuate my experiences. I think a couple of weeks back now to where I spent time at a conference here on campus called Press Play. The thing that was most amazing was what happened after the conference was done. So it was a weekend conference that went from a Friday Night to Saturday Night. I went down the first night with Kate (from St. Mary’s) and we had a wonderful time, got to chill and hangout with so many wonderful people. They spent some time leading worship and praise songs prior to a speaker, and that was an odd experience. They were worshipping to House music (for my Canadian non-music cultured friends, think electronic club beats...) which was not easy for me to worship to, yes it was fun to dance to and move to, but perhaps not quite my style of worship. We also had a speaker that night, who preached on the Older brother in the parable of the two brothers (For those of you from more classical approaches to the scripture it is also known as the Parable of the Prodigal Son, but the parable has more to it than just the one brother, there is the second one who is given considerable focus check it out in Luke 15:11-32). The preaching was pretty solid, though a bit individualistic focused. Basically the key point was that if we are being the Older brother (acting religious, actively serving God but not actually spending time with him and knowing him as our father but as our Task-master) then we need to repent and come to the Father through the Son. Yet somehow it had very individualistic overtones which were a bit off putting for me (probably it came more from the parts that the worship was very ‘I’ focussed). Especially when it comes down to salvation, it isn’t about our choosing, but our submission to God’s grace. Not us choosing God’s grace in our lives, (or hopping on to the back of Jesus to get into heaven) but to allow the overwhelming flood of God’s grace poured out for us by Jesus on the Cross, and mediated to us through both Baptism, and Holy Communion, as well as freely flowing out from God, that is what saves us. Not through our choosing, but allowing it to overcome our choosing. (I also hold that in debate and tension, to some degree we can resist God, and try to swim in his flood of free grace, and as such we do have freedom to choose the alternative, but at the same time, God is the one who does all the acting, he leads the dance, not us leading the dance, difficult to hold in tension, but good to pull things back and forward). The second night (I slept through the morning session) it was much more of the same style of worship which was enjoyable but not really close and intimate worship with God. Again there was a sermon preached on right Christian living, the practical application points about what a Christian life should look like. It was a pretty solid preaching but I struggled with a couple of points. For the most part I really struggled with the theology of Sin that was extremely shallow. Consider the following question, why is sex before marriage sinful? If your only answer is that the Bible says so, you are probably not able to convince a friend that is non-Christian, or currently engaging in sexual activities to stop doing it. Really the reason is that Sin is evil and that evil is able to be seen as it changes who we are and how we view ourselves, other people, and God. With sex prior to marriage it is wrong because it is objectifying the people who are involved and even other women. Because there is not a covenantal relationship that guarantees the longevity and the exclusivity of the relationship sex before marriage opens up lustious desires, and at its core is a misconception of God, because it believes him to be in capable of satisfying your desires for you. (Just my brief thoughts on the matter, I could probably write an essay examining sin and sex but you know, I am a theologian).
The best part of the conference for me was actually after the conference in the evenings. On Friday night Kate and I spent until late (like 2am) chatting about faith stuff and life stuff in reflection on the first night of press play. On the second night we got hanging out with a wonderful girl from the Wine Lands (our part of the Denison residence) Nonto and she helped to illuminate the political dimensions of how this campus is functioning sort of. It was incredible and just wonderful to chill out with people. Drink tea, eat rusks, and just chat.
Other really cool things that I have gotten up to, one Sunday last weekend I think (not this past one but the one prior), I went again to Church on the Ridge and I got hanging out with people afterwards, It seems to happen quite frequently (I don’t know If I talked about the first time but it has happened twice now. Which is just wonderful). So after church I got hanging out with Nonto and Kate, and Margaux, and her sister Milly and Hillary (man I am such a great feminist I really get along well with Women... I need to find some gender balance eh?) which was wonderful. Nonto and I went over to Margaux’s house (John’s Diggs), to hangout for the evening, and when we got there we were the only ones up and about, so Nonto and I just chilled out in the Kitchen and chatted, Eventually Milly came and joined us so that she could do some school work, but she got dragged into our conversation eventually, which was really cool. Nonto and I share very similar views on theology (relatively progressive and liberal rather than legalistic and orthodoxical) as she comes from an Anglican Background (with probably a good healthy dosage of evangelical spirituality), and I am from an Anglican College, Lutheran Background, and a healthy dosage of evangelical spirituality mixed in. Yet Milly had some views that were relatively divergent in particular around the issue of Women in positions of leadership over men, in a Church based setting. But that is healthy to disagree over as when we disagree we can seek to understand better each other’s view points. That evening we went out and picked up Nono (a friend of Margaux from work and school) and we went out and got a movie (Trevor Noah, a South African Comedian) and Chinese food. We were being goofy and perhaps a wee bit loud, but in the Chinese Restaurant there was an older couple. We were waiting maybe 10-15 minutes for our food, so we sat at a table and just chatted around the table. On our way out the door, (as I found out later from Margaux) that older couple said something that sounded like “thank the lord” which is just so hilarious. That we, a group of intermingled 20 some-things could really offend a couple that much by just hanging out and chilling with each other. So we joked around about them in a very loving way for a bit as we ate our Chinese food back at the Diggs.
Other Crazy conversations that I have had have ranged from deeply passionate debates that perhaps were a bit too argumentative. Good chill chats with a fellow theology student about certain trends that she has noticed within her friends and their involvement with certain churches. Having lunch with another theology student and just having a wonderful time hanging out and talking about theology, and life (it is really refreshing to be able to talk theology with people who actually understand what you mean by realized eschatology, or who you mean when you start discussing the practical application of Bultmann’s eschatology, or how his eschatology impacted upon liberationist theology, while remaining deeply existentialist in its outlook as the particular draw back. If I lost you don’t worry send me an e-mail and I might be able to explain it better). Other really cool conversations have been about diverse and cool topics like the role that the church has to play in justice. Or hanging out in the kitchen discussing what the top young minds in South Africa picture as being the best solutions to Inequality in South Africa.
Cool and crazy random story from this past week. Tuesday Night it must have been (crazy good night I tell you), and I was walking back to my dorm block and on the way I passed by a group of women busy discussing over something. I was only catching glimpses of what they were talking about but as I was walking by they stopped me and asked if I was a theology student (I figure I must have met one of them before but not by name, or they could easily Identify men, White guy long hair beard, and he does theology) So I stopped by to chat with them. They were busy trying to figure out whether or not Judas was going to betray Jesus regardless of his own desires (Predestination vs. Free will) or if Judas did not betray Jesus then if anyone would have. Just big questions like that. I can’t remember exactly what I said, other than that understanding our freewill is very important (as it keeps us responsible for sin, or at least it seems to be a Good part of God’s creation, as the Groundling and the Woman were created to be Good, not to be perfect, and the goodness of it included the ability to choose their own direction, Therefore they were not to be robotic creations). But what they said after the fact was really cool once I was done expressing my thoughts, they said something along the lines of, “It is amazing how God sends people in to help answer our questions and struggles.”
Mind blowing. I guess that leaves me with a question for you guys: Are you willing to be used by God in your day to day life to step in and help? Or equally are you open to receive a stranger or a person you sort of know to speak some truth into a situation?
You never know, perhaps like the two disciples walking on the road to Emmaus you might start chatting with someone as you are travelling, or when you are entertaining them in your home, or when breaking bread with someone in communion, or sharing the cup, you might discover that really you are doing it with Jesus there. (More accurately you often find Christ in other people by spending time with them),
Well more later on this week, I am hoping to get you all up to date by next Sunday before I leave to backpack around Lesotho for a week (hooray for the ten day Vacation!)
By the way I hope that your Cup of tea lasted for the full length of this blog post my cup of Red Bush tea just emptied out a while back, but I am glad to sit and share stories, but it should be a two way street, Please forgive me when I don’t respond quick to e-mails I love you guys for sending them so please do keep on sending me stories and telling tales if you want to do so please send them my way to andrewkuhl1@gmail.com
More to come this week!
Peace and God Bless!
Here's something to be consider re: free choice and responsibility.
ReplyDeleteAs a compatibilist, I'm fairly certain you can be responsible for an act even if you will isn't free in the following sense: (1) an act is donely freely if and only if you could have refrained from performing that act.
Consider the following case, Jim is trying to decide between voting for candidate A, or voting for candidate B. Suppose that there is a neuroscientist who is aware that Jim is undecided on this issue, and that the neuroscientist has a device with the following functions: it keeps a record of whether or not it has been activated, the device activates only if Jim decides to vote for candidate B, and the device will alter Jim's brain states such that Jim will vote for A regardless of Jim's mental states.
Now suppose that Jim makes it to voting day, and decides to vote for A. Afterwards we check the log of the machine implanted in Jim, and it turns out that it hasn't fired. It seems to me that Jim is responsible for voting in the way that he has, but that he had no other option than to vote A.
Certainly if he had chose to not vote A, it would have been the neuroscientists responsibility that Jim voted A. Now I think that there is a further case to be made about responsibility, and cases where we do not freely choose due to other factors, but to break those apart requires a pretty lengthy post.
To undermine my case for compatibilism a little bit, you can take the following thought experiment to be good reason for rejecting (1) as a condition on free action.
Oh Kevin, you are wonderful, and definitely a philosopher, yet it seems to me that Jim is unable to make a choice other than A) is impossible even if he feels that he is free to make said choice. yet really who actually as a neuroscientist would implant a device to do such a thing. I guess I think as a theologian that a absolute determinist view (that God plans absolutely everything and determines a persons salvation state prior to their creation), yields the possibility that our God creates forced robots. The view that God could know and has a plan for each of us (like that neuroscientist in your thought experiment) and will change our mindstate still seems like he made us to be robots programmed to work only on one set path (though free to pick that path). It makes most sense and allows for a theology of sin and human action to exist if God creates and allows for there to be a freedom of will to pick either A or B either way (though capable of Knowing the results of A or B either way)as the freedom to choose is significant. (Speaking theologically). Yet I do think there are significant factors which always contribute to our actions, both structurally and otherwise!
ReplyDeleteYet lengthy and deep discussions could fill books on these subjects, you know though! Cheers!