Last year, I posted on Greek Mythology and Western Christendom. At the end of that post, I asked for any resources regarding the connection between Greek thought and Western theology. No takers.
Well, I just recently discovered the motherload, and this rabbit hole goes way deeper than I had previously imagined. I highly recommend watching the following video series in its entirety. This series is titled "What is the Good News?" and it explores the influence of our cultural grid upon our explanations of the gospel, and deconstructs its deficiencies. There are three sessions in total, each session being broken up into smaller video segments for youtube. This is really foundational stuff, and I am convinced that it has very costly ramifications on our walk of faith.
I would love to hear your reaction or feedback, if you are so inclined to share.
Saturday, November 06, 2010
It's all Greek to me
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
This is great stuff Sarah. I have finished the first four videos and am anxious to see where he goes. I will probably finish watching them tomorrow.
Hope you are well these days.
Blessings, Bob
I am wondering how he will deal with John 3 and the new birth. Hopefully he will address it.
Hi K-Bob! Good to hear from you! We're doing well over here. I should post a personal update soon.
Yes, he does address John 3 specifically. It's fascinating!
Thanks! I am starting session 2 and enjoying the series. Good to know that John 3 will be addressed.
I have watched the previous videos and have gotten to video 7 of session 2 and it seems that he is saying that all of creation was born again when Jesus was resurrected. I have heard similar things from Christian Universalists (CU).
The issue is that Jesus told Nicodemus that "he" needed to be born again before the resurrection. I have a difficult time reconciling Wauchope's teaching with the born again teaching from John 3.
Just noticed that there is a session 3 in the teachings. I may watch some more later or tomorrow (beginning with S2/V8).
My recap so far is that Wauchope seems to be teaching a form of CU. The concerns that I have with at least part of his teaching are similar to the ones that I have about CU.
I'd be interested in your take on his teaching Sarah and whether you see a bit of CU in the teaching.
Have a Happy Sunday!
I am still processing..
Another lesser concern about the teaching is how it tiptoes close to a Pantheistic point of view when it integrates the uncreated with the created.. but I may be misunderstanding what he is saying.
Glad he's got you thinking. He addresses both concerns (CU and pantheistic worldview) in the third session. He's probably accustomed to hearing those questions as a result of the teaching, so he addresses them directly.
Finally got through all three sessions and it seems that session 4 is not posted on YouTube. Maybe they ran out of tape. :)
Maybe it is because of my week long lapse in viewing but I do not understand how, in his paradigm, a person comes to know God. If all were born again at the resurrection then is knowing God simply a turning from the dark to light?
And why would Jesus speak to Nicodemus about being born again the way that he did? Jesus seemed to be saying to him that being born again is something that a Pharisee should already know about - not something that would happen in the future.
All that said, I did enjoy the series even though I felt that it was cut short. Wauchope does a good job in showing the influence of Greek thought on the gospel.
I am still interested in your take on the series Sarah and if you have any questions about Wauchope's teaching. What did you like most and what did you struggle with?
Happy Sunday!
-Bob
Good questions. How does a person come to know God (other than the Greek pagan paradigm of taking the steps to get oneself back to God)?
What's interesting is that God came to us. Jesus was God incarnate, but He didn't start out by telling everyone that from the get-go. Nor did he even lay out a systematic teaching of who God is and how we are to come to know Him.
Interesting. Instead, Jesus created a sweet aroma that stirred a hunger in those who were open to Him. And then eventually, he said, 'If you've seen me, you've seen the father.' So He provided a living embodiment of who God is for us - very material, very flesh-and-bones, this-is-what-God-looks-like manner of interacting with people. I believe his followers came to know God that way. And it's possible for others to come to know God by observing us living out our lives as the hands and feet of Jesus, creating the same aroma and stirring the same hunger by the way we love and serve the world and one another.
The other thing I see is that 'coming to know God' doesn't appear to me to be a destination (as in 'I didn't know God before, now I do), but rather, an ongoing process. This is what I see in the life of the disciples. After Jesus was crucified, they were distraught and trying to figure out what just happened. And this was after a couple years of living with Jesus. Over time, the picture became clearer. And this was an ongoing process (like Peter's experience with the vision and seeing the Holy Spirit come on the gentiles - He hadn't understood or known God in that way before).
As far as my reservations, it's been too long since I watched the whole thing. The organic church I'm part of here is going to go through the series together, so maybe I can comment on that later.
One thing I did struggle with is how come it's taken us so long to question the influence of classicism and Greek philosophy on our theology? But I guess that's the nature of 'orthodoxy' - it cannot be questioned.
"'coming to know God' doesn't appear to me to be a destination"
I like that Sarah! Reminds me of my transition from a bounded to a centered set paradigm.
Hey Sarah,
Here
http://bit.ly/ejLarn
Page 171
That's from the german philosopher Hegel. Pretty mind blowing.
The evolution of Spirit in religions.
Sorry sweety, but this guy pretends to be a "philosopher", but philosophy has its rules and they haven't change since the beginning of its existence; and I do not think he has enough intellectual scope to pretend changing that.
To speak about Trinity and ask people to get away from the "dualistic frame" is a bit strange to say the least.
As far as I am concerned, Christ is History* and it is about time that Spirit be the One we talk about.
Read that book and it will all make sense. The only book that gives rationality to the all religious process (including the greek incomplete notion of God.)
The unfolding of the true Notion, (of the Truth) that Christ fulfilled is a historical process. A divine history with a very clear process that took place in man's consciousness, then self-consciousness, then reason and finally spirit.
Now let's talk about the synthesis of this dualistic process that is creation, namely the Spirit of Reconciliation. The Third One. For the great blasphemy would be not to see Him as such.
* It does not mean that you should underate Him.
Good is the abscence of bad
You lost me at "Sorry, sweety." Feminists don't respond well to that sort of thing. Good luck with your super-intellect and complete lack of social graces. Have a good one! :)
The speaker is Bruce Wauchope (works with Perichoresis Ministries and C. Baxter Kruger). If you search him on youtube, you can watch all the parts in this series.
Post a Comment