PMs and the Bible

[Randy McRoberts]

Scot McKnight discusses (http://www.jesuscreed.org/?p=3355) how postmoderns are reading the Bible:


De-throning science as the sole Story.
En-throning a subjectivity as part of the real Story.
Embracing a local story as part of the real Story.
Epistemic humility about what one concludes from the Bible.
Acceptance of myth and fiction as capable of truth-telling.
Admission of cultural influence on all texts, even the Bible.


Number four is important; most of us have not shortage of chutzpah in our application of what we read. Number six should be a universally understood truth, but apparently it isn't.

[Jeremy D. Scott]

Scot McKnight discusses (http://www.jesuscreed.org/?p=3355) how postmoderns are reading the Bible:


De-throning science as the sole Story.
En-throning a subjectivity as part of the real Story.
Embracing a local story as part of the real Story.
Epistemic humility about what one concludes from the Bible.
Acceptance of myth and fiction as capable of truth-telling.
Admission of cultural influence on all texts, even the Bible.


Number four is important; most of us have not shortage of chutzpah in our application of what we read. Number six should be a universally understood truth, but apparently it isn't.

Although I'm not sure what is meant by "myth", #5 has been huge to me lately, and a concept I'm trying to help others understand about myself and the Bible in general.

[James Diggs]

Although I'm not sure what is meant by "myth", #5 has been huge to me lately, and a concept I'm trying to help others understand about myself and the Bible in general.

Yea, I think modernity has stripped some of the meaning from this word and has largely changed its primary use in our culture as meaning "not true." The show "myth busters" comes to mind (great show- but uses the word "myth" purely from a modern cultures standpoint).

The word "myth" comes from the Greek word mythos, which means "story" and the word should not be confused with words like legend, fiction, fairy tale, folklore, or fables. The point is that scripture tells our story, regardless of the type of writing parts of it may be (historical, poetic, symbolic, ect.) it is our mythology, and it speaks truth because it tells us who we are as a God shaped people.

[Billy Cox]

Acceptance of myth and fiction as capable of truth-telling.




So I don't have to repent for imagining that I saw a christ story portrayed in 'The Matrix'?? :eek:

J.D. Salinger doesn't have to quote scripture ad nauseam to communicate truth? :eek: :eek: !!

[Jeremy D. Scott]

So I don't have to repent for imagining that I saw a christ story portrayed in 'The Matrix'?? :eek:

J.D. Salinger doesn't have to quote scripture ad nauseam to communicate truth? :eek: :eek: !!

That's true, but I read the description as one in light of scripture. For instance, the question is not "Was Jonah swallowed by the whale?" but rather, "What does it mean for Jonah to be swallowed by the whale?"

Or better yet, the question is not "Is the story of Jonah and the whale 'true'?" But rather, "What truths do we see in the story of Jonah and the whale?"

[Genevieve Boller]

Number four is important; most of us have not shortage of chutzpah in our application of what we read. Number six should be a universally understood truth, but apparently it isn't.

Well, for some people, to believe cultural influence exists is akin to saying that Scripture isn't from God, and therefore a very slippery slope (I heartily disagree, of course, but I know many of these people).

I also agree that number four is immensely important. Before I was a Christian, nothing more made me want to barf than hearing some preacher on tv or radio proclaiming that the truth he was teaching was directly from Holy Scripture (like a blood-transfusion, apparently--with no intermediary thought on his part involved) and therefore should be accepted, period.

About number five - there are a ton of resources in Christian book stores for aiding parents and teachers in demonstrating the gospel via The Lord of the Rings and the Narnia books. I would guess that a lot of people who claim to be anti-post-modern have no problem with this.

[Randy McRoberts]

I also agree that number four is immensely important. Before I was a Christian, nothing more made me want to barf than hearing some preacher on tv or radio proclaiming that the truth he was teaching was directly from Holy Scripture (like a blood-transfusion, apparently--with no intermediary thought on his part involved) and therefore should be accepted, period.

Yes, and how many singer-songwriters have you heard say, "The Lord gave me this song....", and then the song turned out to be a stinker? I wouldn't blame God for that.

About your comment on the cultural setting of the scripture, historic Christianity has always realized that the writings are occasional and not dropped from heaven like the Book of Mormon or the Koran. I believe it is a relatively new phenomenon to view the Bible that way. It is probably a reaction to the modernist controversies of a century ago, which is ironic (as someone has already noted).

[Jamie Wayne]

Yea, I think modernity has stripped some of the meaning from this word and has largely changed its primary use in our culture as meaning "not true." The show "myth busters" comes to mind (great show- but uses the word "myth" purely from a modern cultures standpoint).

The word "myth" comes from the Greek word mythos, which means "story" and the word should not be confused with words like legend, fiction, fairy tale, folklore, or fables. The point is that scripture tells our story, regardless of the type of writing parts of it may be (historical, poetic, symbolic, ect.) it is our mythology, and it speaks truth because it tells us who we are as a God shaped people.

I think, also, to add to what you've said, that it's important to differentiate between mythos and logos, because both have similar meanings. Mythos is a "story", while my understanding of how to contrast it, is that logos is an "account." There's a big difference between a story and an account. I may tell a "story" after fishing that does, indeed, tell the "truth" of the matter, by getting the "story" across to someone, but my "fish story" may not be an accurate "account." Sometimes the "story" reveals better the truth than the "account" does, I'd think.

Regardless, I would also look at mythos in terms of, for example, a culture thinking that thunder was "caused" by Thor dropping his hammer - it was an explanation for reality...a "story," but we now know that the story, while it offers an explanation, is very different than the factual account which, in the case of thunder, can now be determined by science. I wonder, then, what parts of the OT - if they occurred today, could be explained with a factual, reasoned "account" (remember that logos is also connected to the notion of a universal reason - think of the pre-Socratic philosophy of Heraclitus).

In this way, one could call the Garden a myth, though perfectly revealing the truth that God is maker of heaven and earth, and in this way, I think that it is not necessarily a contradiction of modern scientific theories of "creation," which are theories which posit "accounts" - not "stories."

Does that make sense?

[Ryan Scott]

Does that make sense?


Surprisingly, yes.

[Scott Sherwood]

PMs and the Bible

Ohhhh, Postmoderns. I hadn't read this thread yet, because I misunderstood the title.

I'm glad I checked it out. I see Bultmann's influence is still alive and well. I'll try to catch up with everyone's posts.

[Randy McRoberts]

Ohhhh, Postmoderns. I hadn't read this thread yet, because I misunderstood the title.

Oh, did you think it was "PMS and the Bible"? Sorry about that.

[John Kennedy]

My hearty thanks to Scott Sherwood. The first time I looked at the heading I didn't pay much attention to the 'PM' in caps and the lower case 's', so I came to the same erroneous conclusion.

It's always nice to find others who agree with you - even if both of you are mistaken.
I see it as a new facet of being in community - those who are together in their understanding and those who have found commonality in their misunderstanding.

[John Kennedy]

Oh, and while I'm thinking about it, does anyone have any Scripture references that might have even some superficial relationship to PMS?

[Genevieve Boller]

Oh, and while I'm thinking about it, does anyone have any Scripture references that might have even some superficial relationship to PMS?

I wish... :gen03

[Randy McRoberts]

Well, there's the lady who put a tent stake through a man's temple, but other than that...

[Billy Cox]

Oh, did you think it was "PMS and the Bible"? Sorry about that.

Since I have worked mostly in a corporate environment, my quizzical first thought was that the thread was about 'Project Managers and the Bible.'

[Billy Cox]

That's true, but I read the description as one in light of scripture. For instance, the question is not "Was Jonah swallowed by the whale?" but rather, "What does it mean for Jonah to be swallowed by the whale?"

Or better yet, the question is not "Is the story of Jonah and the whale 'true'?" But rather, "What truths do we see in the story of Jonah and the whale?"

Well, I first thought biblical myth too, but then realized that the statement did not limit its scope to the Bible.

[Anne and Dwayne Hood]

Has it ever dawned on anyone, that probably many people
over the years have ask questions in ways that the PMs seem to think of as new methods. I guess I don't understand why things like this are being considered post modern. Maybe, it is because, it is just now new to them.

There have, surely always been those methods of saying, Now what did you get out of this scripture---? or what truths to you see in this scripture, etc? This is no where near new. What am I missing? Please, explain, in a kind way.

[Gina Stevenson]

Yes, and how many singer-songwriters have you heard say, "The Lord gave me this song....", and then the song turned out to be a stinker? I wouldn't blame God for that.


Not to distract from a thread re the Bible, I just had to say something when you mentioned someone saying, "The Lord gave me this song ...." As a songwriter, I've written some that were 5-minute songs, b/c of such inspiration (2-3 verses & chorus, w/melody, in a snap). Others have been long labored over. Anyway, there are some that I've mentioned, "I surely can't give the Lord credit for this one; I need to take all the blame myself!" or similar words ... He does get "credited(?)" with quite some rubbish at times, huh? :cool:

Oh, and while I'm thinking about it, does anyone have any Scripture references that might have even some superficial relationship to PMS?

Well, perhaps a couple of verses in Proverbs relating to living with little, rather than with a mouthy [nagging, think it might say] woman ... which one can get, occasionally, during PMS (not saying all do, understand).

Actually, tho', rather than PMS, I noticed the small "s," so was thinking, "PMs" ... Private Message(s)? What's the message system here got to do with the Bible, and then it dawned on me what it was ................ :basic05

[Charlotte Mercer]

I think, also, to add to what you've said, that it's important to differentiate between mythos and logos, because both have similar meanings. Mythos is a "story", while my understanding of how to contrast it, is that logos is an "account." There's a big difference between a story and an account. I may tell a "story" after fishing that does, indeed, tell the "truth" of the matter, by getting the "story" across to someone, but my "fish story" may not be an accurate "account." Sometimes the "story" reveals better the truth than the "account" does, I'd think.

Regardless, I would also look at mythos in terms of, for example, a culture thinking that thunder was "caused" by Thor dropping his hammer - it was an explanation for reality...a "story," but we now know that the story, while it offers an explanation, is very different than the factual account which, in the case of thunder, can now be determined by science. I wonder, then, what parts of the OT - if they occurred today, could be explained with a factual, reasoned "account" (remember that logos is also connected to the notion of a universal reason - think of the pre-Socratic philosophy of Heraclitus).

In this way, one could call the Garden a myth, though perfectly revealing the truth that God is maker of heaven and earth, and in this way, I think that it is not necessarily a contradiction of modern scientific theories of "creation," which are theories which posit "accounts" - not "stories."

Does that make sense?

I know this is a short statement for such a long quote, but as I read this, the word "parable" came to mind.

[James Diggs]

Has it ever dawned on anyone, that probably many people
over the years have ask questions in ways that the PMs seem to think of as new methods. I guess I don't understand why things like this are being considered post modern. Maybe, it is because, it is just now new to them.

There have, surely always been those methods of saying, Now what did you get out of this scripture---? or what truths to you see in this scripture, etc? This is no where near new. What am I missing? Please, explain, in a kind way.

Yes Ann, what you are saying is true on two levels. First of all the shift from modernity to post modernity has been taking place slowly for a long time so than their have been people who have said many of these same things even during the most modern of times. However those views at the time were squarely in the minority and may not have been as widely accepted as they are becoming now.

Also post modernity has a lot in common with pre-modernity so many of the things that are being said now as "new" actually are far older than our modern ideas.

I think all these things are only "new" in light of our own context, and for those that are thoroughly entrenched in modernity are unable to see the truth of these "new" things because they can not escape the limits of an exclusive modern context.

[John Kennedy]

The initial confusion some of us had about the content of the "PMs and the Bible" thread was brought to mind the other day when I was stopped behind a white van. It had a bumper sticker on it that read 'HAVE PMS......ALSO HANDGUN!"

[Dale Cozby]

for those that are thoroughly entrenched in modernity are unable to see the truth of these "new" things because they can not escape the limits of an exclusive modern context. Such arrogance and stereo typing.

Sounds just like a fundamentalist who says you don't see because you walk in darkness but I have been revealed the light from above.

No wonder so few moderns stay in this forum more than a few posts before moving on with comments like this one.

Perhaps a better approach would be to say "I cannot see absolute objective truth because I'm unable to see escape the limits of my own relative point of view." At least it would be more humble.

[James Diggs]

Such arrogance and stereo typing.

Sounds just like a fundamentalist who says you don't see because you walk in darkness but I have been revealed the light from above...Perhaps a better approach would be to say "I cannot see absolute objective truth because I'm unable to see escape the limits of my own relative point of view." At least it would be more humble.

Wow Dale...ouch...I am sorry that you felt that my statement was so arrogant, but I meant no self elevation by pointing out that sometimes people can not see past their own lens. I was not speaking of those with a modern lens in general but only those that are so "entrenched" in it that they simply are not able to see life from any other perspective.

What is, oh so, incredibly ironic though is that your suggested sentence of -"I cannot see absolute objective truth because I'm unable to see escape the limits of my own relative point of view" - is essentially what post modernity says. And yes those who are saying this feel it is a more humble approach.

The weird thing is for those who think they know "absolute objective truth" when they hear this humble statement you suggest, it usually makes them extremely uncomfortable, sometimes upset, and occasionally leads to calling those with such humility heretics for saying that exact kind of thing. Kind of weird isn't it?

Peace,

James

[Dale Cozby]

Wow Dale...ouch...I am sorry that you felt that my statement was so arrogant, but I meant no self elevation by pointing out that sometimes people can not see past their own lens. I was not speaking of those with a modern lens in general but only those that are so "entrenched" in it that they simply are not able to see life from any other perspective.

What is, oh so, incredibly ironic though is that your suggested sentence of -"I cannot see absolute objective truth because I'm unable to see escape the limits of my own relative point of view" - is essentially what post modernity says. And yes those who are saying this feel it is a more humble approach.

The weird thing is for those who think they know "absolute objective truth" when they hear this humble statement you suggest, it usually makes them extremely uncomfortable, sometimes upset, and occasionally leads to calling those with such humility heretics for saying that exact kind of thing. Kind of weird isn't it?

Peace,

James Exactly.


I find that we all are very myopic sometimes and it is easy to cast stones, especially when we don't fully understand what someone is saying that sounds off base to us.

I think that if we are going to move forward together as Christians..both moderns and post-moderns, we must first realize that:

1. No one has all the answers and even the answers we have can always be called into doubt BUT it doesn't mean we have no viable answers.

2. That post--modern doesn't mean anti-modern, just the next step in the journey that modernism, along with all the other cultural and theological thought through the ages that has brought us to this point.

3. That modernism and post-modernism can be wedded into a "via media" approach which as of right now is not clear but will be (God willing :o) in the near future as we all dialogue.

I think Wesley would, had he been alive today, sought to find the ground between the two and stood there. That is what I hope to do.

[James Diggs]

I think that if we are going to move forward together as Christians..both moderns and post-moderns, we must first realize that:

1. No one has all the answers and even the answers we have can always be called into doubt BUT it doesn't mean we have no viable answers.

2. That post--modern doesn't mean anti-modern, just the next step in the journey that modernism, along with all the other cultural and theological thought through the ages that has brought us to this point.

3. That modernism and post-modernism can be wedded into a "via media" approach which as of right now is not clear but will be (God willing :o) in the near future as we all dialogue.

I think Wesley would, had he been alive today, sought to find the ground between the two and stood there. That is what I hope to do.

Thank you Dale. I very much appreciate and agree with all three points. I also seek after common ground in these conversations and I am confident that we have unity in Christ. Thank you again for your thoughtful response.

Peace,

James

[Anne and Dwayne Hood]

Maybe, I am simple, but I did have scholarships for college. But, they did not teach some of the things we discuss on here. I have yet, to see what the big deal is. couldnt new and young pastor's just gradually implement changes they wish, without it having to be labeled, and acting as ifit is something new, and different than we have ever had before. The labeling is about the only new thing, to it, other than the trying to chnge how you express to others, something thst is in the Bible, that doesn't make it any plainer than it already was.
Drop the labels and just work for the Lord, in whatever wa;y ;you feel certain that he is leading you. More time is consumed in trying to get something, that is old, but ever new, across, than is spent just doing it.

[Hans Deventer]

I find that we all are very myopic sometimes and it is easy to cast stones, especially when we don't fully understand what someone is saying that sounds off base to us.

I think that if we are going to move forward together as Christians..both moderns and post-moderns, we must first realize that:

1. No one has all the answers and even the answers we have can always be called into doubt BUT it doesn't mean we have no viable answers.

2. That post--modern doesn't mean anti-modern, just the next step in the journey that modernism, along with all the other cultural and theological thought through the ages that has brought us to this point.

3. That modernism and post-modernism can be wedded into a "via media" approach which as of right now is not clear but will be (God willing :o) in the near future as we all dialogue.

I think Wesley would, had he been alive today, sought to find the ground between the two and stood there. That is what I hope to do.

Wow, Dale! Now I remember why I generally still keep communicating with you. When I've totally had it with the sarcasm, you come up with a post like this that makes me realise it is still possible to communicate meaningfully. This is a very, very constructive post. Thanks!!!

I guess I'm too quick to write people off. My apologies. This is something that I need to work on.

[Dale Cozby]

Wow, Dale! Now I remember why I generally still keep communicating with you. When I've totally had it with the sarcasm, you come up with a post like this that makes me realise it is still possible to communicate meaningfully. This is a very, very constructive post. Thanks!!!

I guess I'm too quick to write people off. My apologies. This is something that I need to work on.
Hans pardon my badgering sarcasm mood swings in my posts.:basic03
I guess I am entering into that mid-life crisis stage of life, at least according to CNN I am.

They put on a piece about a survey of happiness and the age of the most unhappy people was well.... they hit me right on the head perfectly.

Fortunately they also named the top four groups that are the happiest in life and I was in all four of those groups!

Miracles never cease.....