Disembodied Knowledge

What follows is a first draft section of my upcoming book: “Truth & Knowledge: A New Biblical Paradigm for Christian Education.” This header will be removed as the draft is finalized. Feedback is welcome – leave a comment!

The problem of Being described in the previous section only emerged as philosophy turned inward upon itself seeking to discover its own truth rather than to discover something outside of itself. In doing this, it lost its power to point the individual toward a better way of being, and confused the individual with endless questions about whether there was even such a question. This emphasis took at least one intermediary step between the Greek philosophers, who sought out how to live lives of virtue and those enlightenment philosophers who gave up on the quest altogether. This intermediary step was probably the end result that Socrates feared would happen if ideas were captured in books instead of people. Truth became a disembodied concept that could be poured from the mouth using words that belonged to another into the listening ear of anyone who could be attracted to its sound. Similar to the sophists who began to use rhetoric for the sake of rhetoric and fame, the philosophers (known for their love of wisdom), began to use philosophy for the sake of philosophy rather than for the sake of truth. It was possible to demonstrate a way of life that completely contradicted the creed one claimed to hold sacred.

The Medieval Church bears much blame for the walking contradiction that it became in the dark ages of history, but this is due less to an inaccurate collection of truth, than to an acceptance of its disembodiment. To chop off the head of someone who disagrees with your opinion about the nature of God is to prove knowledge of something other than the nature of God. Words and religious practice are meaningless if they do not spring from the proper source. “If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal” (1 Corinthians 13:1). “Has the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice and to listen than the fat of Rams” (1 Samuel 15:22). It is the double-minded man who is unstable in all his ways that should not expect to receive wisdom from God even when he asks for it (James 1:6). “How long,” asked Elijah “will you go limping between two different opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him, but if Baal, then follow him” (1 Kings 18:22). Holiness requires a full commitment to one way of being. A house divided against itself cannot stand (Mark 3:25).

If it is possible to think of knowledge as a collection of information rather than as an intimate acquaintance, then it is possible to claim knowledge without putting forth a single shred of effort. Think of all the college graduates who have certified knowledge in everything under the sun except what they really know. As any student can tell you, the true knowledge of college is the art of getting by or getting laid. Those who truly attempt to seek a state of knowledge in anything other subject are too often stifled by a process that provokes more frustration than learning. (This is, of course, too much of a generalization, but its reality is far too apparent to ignore). My objective in such a harsh critique is not to blame the faculty, among whom I count myself, but to ask how we found ourselves in such a dire situation where those who want to learn and those who want to teach face such an impossible challenge.

In the first place, a majority of people are not even aware of the possibility of knowledge, and if they have heard of the concept and desire to find it, they begin with the wrong approach: collecting the data that is so readily accessible. Drowning in facts is perhaps the commonest way to stifle the flame of a young seeker. Too much information too fast is impossible to relate to. Instruction that focuses on this end of the process will tend toward one of two directions: pride in the person’s ability to remember and pretend to embody, or shame in the apparent inability to measure up. Thus, churches and schools are filled with those who pretend knowledge and fear lest the light of wisdom and truth should shine upon their broken and empty hearts. These have looked to the fig leaves of the surrounding world to cover their nakedness as they hide from that which could bring them life (Genesis 3:7-8). Unfortunately, the easier option is pretending there is no problem at all and making the claim that knowledge cannot be found, does not exist, or is of a different nature than a relationship between the knower and the known.

Thus, the separation of humanity from its source of Being leaves two options: to claim that Being doesn’t matter/doesn’t exist, or to seek to rediscover the connection between ourselves and that which is. For the ancient Hebrews, this looked like a pursuit of wise living in accordance with the commandments of God.

Leviticus 18:4-5

You shall follow my rules and keep my statutes and walk in them. I am the LORD your God. You shall therefore keep my statues and my rules; if a person does them he shall live by them: I am the LORD.

For the Greek philosophers, this looked like the practice of a virtuous life. The pursuit of virtue could guide the person seeking to live in the way of wisdom. The pursuit of virtue is a predefined pathway of restoring that connection. In this way, religion offered the same solution as philosophy. The love of wisdom is not a pretense of knowledge, but rather an attempt to find life. For virtue is only apparent in its demonstration. One does not consider a person generous until something is given. The beginning of the process of transformation is the humble recognition that one is not virtuous – as long as I think myself to be a wise person, I will have no incentive to acquire wisdom. Aristotle supposes that one must be trained in virtue because it is not a natural practice for the human person. By nature, we seek to conform the world we encounter to ourselves rather to respond to what the sages have discovered is true. We would rather settle for what is easy than to work for what is worthwhile, and the transition from one choice to the other is what requires education.

In part, this reflects the Biblical view in which humanity was given the commission to have dominion over the earth (Genesis 1:28). This does not appear to have changed throughout the biblical narrative. Rather, Paul says that “creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God” (Romans 8:19). The blessing given to Noah repeated the blessing given to Adam, except it added a note that the fear and dread of mankind would be on all of the creatures (Genesis 9:2). If by nature of his identity as one bearing the image of God, Adam was supposed to rule, the men who stepped off the ark were so far removed from this image (in spite of being saved) that all the creatures lived in dread. Even today, it is only with careful attention and great amount of time that humans and the creatures we consider tame can form the bond of relationship that it seems they must desire. Thus, it is by nature that we seek to rule, but unless we learn to find our identity in the image of God rather than in our own image, the result of our rule will not be a restoration of peace. I believe it was to address this problem that Aristotle proposed that training in virtue was necessary.

Proverbs 20:3 – Good Advice for Facebook

“It is an honor for a man to keep aloof from strife, but every fool will be quarreling” (Proverbs 20:3).

It must be recognized that conflict has its place in the development of healthy opinions and relationships. The Proverb here does not suggest that a man never engage in conflict, but that when he does, there is honor to be found in holding oneself aloof. Those who take arguments personally and identify themselves by the position that they hold prepare themselves for an ongoing quarrel that can have no resolution. It is a foolish thing to do and a fool can be identified by this approach to conflict. On the other hand, to hold an idea at arm’s length and discuss it modestly with the intention of clarity, understanding, and stronger relationships is to engage in an honorable pursuit. The wise person must seek to develop this ability and until that point may prudently refrain from engaging in a conflict through the foolish art of quarreling.

An application of this Proverb to the facebook comment section might be appropriately welcome. Far better to hold oneself aloof from strife and maintain a posture of honor toward self and others than to obliterate a reputation by the pursuit of strife in a quarrelsome manner. As the writer of Proverbs proposes, only a fool does this.

Power Through Purity

What is the key to a revival of the dead hearts that wander through so many of our churches and Christian education communities?

Bill Johnson at Onething spoke about the commission that Jesus gave to His disciples. It was through this commission that they were given authority to do what He had commanded them. This commission still applies and those in the church have authority to do all that Jesus asks of us. However, even after giving them authority, Jesus did not immediately have the disciples go forth. He had them wait to receive power in order to make this happen (Luke 24:49). Johnson says that, similarly, we do not have an excuse to be powerless people in our generation, but rather it is our responsibility to acquire it.

How?

Through encounter that flows from a life of purity (or a single-minded pursuit of one thing).

Power Comes From Encounter

Do we want to wake up the people around us? Johnson spoke from Luke 10:13-15 and Luke 11:30-32 to show that Jesus expected the people in Israel to be awakened or persuaded by the powerful signs and wonders that were done there. He called them perverse because they could not be persuaded and said that the kingdoms of old like Sodom and Tyre would be their judgement because if the healing and miracles had been done there, the people would have repented. Furthermore, Ninevah repented at the preaching of Jonah, and the queen of Sheba at the wisdom of Solomon. We can walk in the same kind of authority in our fields of influence so that others are drawn to the solutions released by our lives. The first time the Holy Spirit is mentioned in the Old Testament was connected to the wisdom given to Bezaleel for the construction of the tabernacle (Exodus 35:30-31). “The level to which we accept the mission that Jesus gave us is the level to which we walk in authority,” said Bill Johnson.

Let us begin to embrace this authority by reason of the commission Jesus has given to us. However, we cannot stop there. We must also demonstrate the gospel with power, and this only comes through encounter. On the day of Pentacost, the disciples were gathered to pray when the power came upon them to fulfil the commission and begin to act on their authority. They had already received the Holy Spirit (John 20:22), but there was some element in which they needed to be filled up by the Holy Spirit “coming upon” them in power as described in Acts 2:1 and again in Acts 4:31. Jesus told them to “wait in the city” until they had received “power from on high” (Luke 24:49).

I think that the observation of how much prayer and intimate encounter with God takes place can reveal how much power we can expect to see demonstrated in our lives. We have nothing when we try to do this kingdom thing on our own as it was meant to take place in the context of intimacy with Jesus (John 15:4-5). Even He did nothing of his own, but only what he saw his father doing (John 5:19-20).

Johnson described power as the ability to see what God is doing and participate in it: to ride the wave. Power comes through encounter as we have already seen. However, for many of us, this is going to look like a severe challenge.

The Key to Encounter

In the parable of the sower, Jesus tells the story of seeds of the word that grew up in the soil (human hearts) they were planted in, but other seeds grew up also that choked out the work that God was doing. “The cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word and it proves unfruitful” (Matthew 13:22). It is not easy to fight with these things, especially when the entire world around us is dedicated to their pursuit. However, we are called to be in the world, but not of it, to dedicate our lives to the pursuit of one thing at the cost of all others. If we are divided within ourselves we cannot stand (Mark 3:25). It is not possible to serve both God and money (Matthew 6:24).

Jeremiah 29:11-13 is a promise to Israel that the LORD will restore what had been lost while they were in captivity: “For I know the plans I have for you declares the LORD, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future an a hope. Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will hear you. You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.

Jesus said, “blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God” (Matthew 5:8). David also gives a warning that those who wish to encounter God must “have clean hands and a pure heart” (Psalm 24:4). The reason that we do not see the power of God in spite of our asking is that we do not first let our hearts conform to holiness (James 3:4-8). What kind of evil father would give a child power before they were ready to use it well? Until there is a purity of focus and a single-minded pursuit of God (one that is not distracted by the mindset of the world), encounter will be limited and power will not flow through the Spirit that is in us as it could.

When we think we can have both God and the world, we miss out on what God has for us, but are we willing to give up everything to go and find it? The kingdom is like a treasure in a field which when a man found, he went and sold everything he had to buy it (Matthew 13:44).

By: Michael R. P. RagazzonCC BY 2.0

In Pursuit of One Thing

If we want to see our college campuses and church communities awaken to life, we must be prepared to engage in the process of leaving behind our old way of thinking and replacing it with something new. Jesus said to “Ask and you will receive, seek and you will find, knock and it will be opened” (Matthew 7:7). This indicates a requirement of action by those who want to demonstrate the power of the gospel to a broken world, and “we do not have the luxury of living a powerless gospel” (Bill Johnson).

We do not have the luxury of living a powerless gospel. – Bill Johnson

It is certainly possible for God to work through broken people, but why would we want to stay that way? What would keep us from pursuing restoration and holiness so that the Spirit can shine through our lives with a greater brilliance? Joshua 1:6-9 showcases the promise God made to do some amazing things through Joshua alongside a warning that this man would have to “be careful to do according to all the law that Moses my servant commanded you. Do not turn from it to the right hand or to the left, that you may have good success wherever you go.” This is repeated twice and indicates the idea that the power of God at work through a person requires them to be consistently exposed to the word of God. It is through the renewal of the mind that a person is transformed to reflect the image of God instead of the image of the world (Romans 12:1-2). We cannot act or become pure on our own in order to see God, but we can embrace the process of humility by which the broken areas of life are exposed to the light of truth and transformed into something beautiful! Intimate encounter with God is necessary for those who want to demonstrate power. This was true even for Jesus, who is renown for how much time He spent in prayer.

The message that Bill Johnson wanted to communicate to the young people at Onething was this: to see the restoration of our lives and communities (to wake up the people around us), we must pursue purity of heart and a single-minded focus that enables us to encounter God in a way that produces powerful demonstrations of the gospel through us. As seen in the mystery of Christ and the church revealed through marriage, encounter and intimacy are only possible in the context of purity. If we want the power of the gospel to be evident in our lives, we must choose to pursue this holiness or dedication to one thing. As Elijah said to the people of Israel, “How long will you go limping between two different opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him, but if Baal, then follow him” (1 Kings 18:21). We all know which God answered with fire, but I think sometimes we forget that the same choice belongs to our day. If we want to see the power of God in our lives, we must give ourselves completely to Him.

The pursuit of power (which is essential to the Christian life) is at its core, a pursuit of purity!

We cannot have the one without the other.

“…choose this day whom you will serve…”

-Joshua 24:15

A Majority Vote

“Does anyone realize what just happened?”, I wondered silently from the sidelines as the crowd in the auditorium slowly rose to their feet. Within minutes the applause had died down and the audience resumed their happy Sunday morning chatter. Nobody seemed to realize the decision they had made as a community to stay true to certain ideals would be just one small piece of an argument slowly assembling to challenge and perhaps change the political scene in their city and perhaps their nation. For a moment, the majority voice shouted a unison of ayes and no one dared speak up to question the decision. No one opposed the movement. In a decision so momentous shouldn’t there some question about the proper direction, said me disagreement, some sense of uncertainty?

I felt like I was the one person among hundreds that questioned the wisdom of the decision, but knew that my voice would be instantly discredited if I chose to dissent. I wasn’t a member of this group anyhow. If I was, perhaps I would think no differently than the others.
What worries me is not the logic of the decision. The rationale behind the vote made sense given the immediate context. What worries me is that it completely overlooked the negative implications that will come to light once the group recognizes the larger context in which they may no longer comprise a majority.
Outside of the building, how does the decision impact the image of the church? Does it undermine the core message and doctrine by choosing to emphasize a certain argument? Will people who disagree respect the process by which the corporate decision was ratified? Can the validity of the decision be supported simply on the basis of majority belief? Most importantly, though, what will be the impact of this decision?
 James Baldwin Quote

Race and Education

I think that in dealing with the subject of race most of us will run into the problem of defining our terms at some point in time. It is clear that there are differences between people, whether this is skin color, height, or age. Whether or not it is possible to argue that they are a result of genetic history or geographical history, physical variations do exist. The issue under question is one of how we respond to these differences.

This is a difficult task for individuals who inherit a historical and cultural context in which wealth and opportunity are often divided along the lines of certain physical features. For example, certain studies have shown that taller men have greater earning potential. Tall men who make more money and are able to afford a healthy lifestyle will most likely give birth to more tall men and pass on this genetic advantage. Similarly, individuals whose families have lived in cold parts of the world and adapted to this environment over the centuries will probably have an advantage in outdoor sports like skiing where their bodies can focus on performance and not simply on staying warm. If we lived in a society where skiing was the only mode of transportation and it was always cold, individuals with a certain genetic history would probably end up in control of resources and opportunities. Does this mean that people who don’t know how to ski are in some way less human? No. However, they are at a disadvantage to participate in a society that revolves around skiing.

I would like to suggest a logical transition from this scenario to one of our own. Individuals who grew up in a tropical jungle may find it difficult to adapt to the corporate jungle. This does not make them inferior, but if they attempt to compete in an environment they are not familiar with, they are at a disadvantage…and vice versa. The corporate individual would be at a disadvantage trying to survive in the jungle. Does this mean that there is a problem with the jungle or with corporate America? Not necessarily.

The problem comes when individuals have no opportunity to learn how to survive and compete in environments they were not necessarily prepared for. This is where education comes into play: offering individuals the opportunity to overcome the natural disadvantages they inherit that are beyond their control. How can a short man learn to stand tall? How can a jungle native learn to develop a fashion sense and table manners? Through education. Education is the key by which these individuals can open access to experiences beyond their reach. But if education as a system is designed to only serve the needs of individuals who are properly prepared, it has failed in its responsibility to society. It has become an inaccessible outcome rather than a process of preparation. The question I am left with from this week is how to create an environment of education in which individuals from any background can prepare to succeed in the real world?