One of the reasons why I started this blog was for a class requirement. As the class has progressed, so has my understanding of the influence and interaction between our evolving culture and our everlasting Christian theology.
Something must change.
Here's how.
The class I'm in is part of a conference that I hope that you can attend. It is called Theology After Google. There's no need to link to it, because there's a huge link to the right of this blog. Click on it, and you will see a lot of people both in the emergent Christianity realm and in the emerging technology/networking realm.
It will cover ideas and thoughts about:
Having the church catch up in a social-networking, blogging, and tweeting world
Emergent theology for mainliners
Blogging Basics
Emergence through biology and theology
One word spiritual reflection
Energizing your church with social media
Film making from a theological standpoint
Web 3.0: the human evolution of technology and theology
This is the second part of trying to uncover what Brian McLaren has done in his book, A New Kind of Christianity. This post goes into depth the last 5 questions that his book covers. Before that, please
Question 6: What do we do about the church? – My classmate Min Ho did an awesome job about writing on this question from the book, which you can read here.For those who would call themselves Mainline Protestant, I suggest you read some of the comments on that post.Min Ho’s blog just puts it bluntly: how do we turn our presently broken churches into a house of Christ-like love?
Question 7: Can we find a way to Address Human Sexuality?Simple, have classmate Bob Rhodes blog about it here.I won’t lie, the first page or two of these chapters will catch you offguard, but how can you not like this:“Fundasexuality is rooted not in faith, but in an orientation of fear” (175).Why not put the two most personal things together in dialogue within the church: God and Sex.
Question 8:Can We Find a Better Way of Viewing the Future?I hope so.In simple terms, I can’t see Jesus and the rapture being the “way to go” in 2012.Rather, can we understand that God and the universe are in relationship with us.Mclaren, have you ever heard of process theology and John Cobb Jr.?You get hints of it from the first chapters, but there is this line that I think you hit the nail on the head: “God is like a parent guiding a child with a will of her own.” (196)… “The future is open, because the compassion and care of God are unconstricted, open wide for us to turn and find a better life than we’re now experiencing by taking a better path than we’re now walking.” (203)
Question 9:I think my classmate Jan Thomas can give the best perspective, because she is an advocate for inter-religion and unity.There’s a book written by Paul F. Knitter who describes how Christians have/will relate to other religions.I suggest you read it so that you can at least identify where you are.But like McLaren, interacting with other religions has more than just religious importance (208).I personally have came to my own conclusions through my own family: although I may not fully understand or agree with those who are not Christian or a derivation of it, I know that they are family (both personal and under the umbrella of “human family”) and will love them indefinitely.
Question 10:How Can We Translate Our Quest Into Action?Classmate Angelina Duells’s blog posts describe the how Brian McLaren writes about the different quests of Christianity. Please take a look at her rainbow diagram, which by the way, is awesome J.What I liked most is what she quoted:“When the head, heart and hand come together...then faith, reason and tradition will come together too, and personal and social holiness will be for us two expressions of one great love.” (227)
Angelina made one last blog post about this book, commenting that this book doesn’t really bring a new Christianity.To some extent, I agree: we still use the same tools of Christianity we were given before.However, I would like to add that Brian is redefining a new relationship: something that is in the process and will never finish unless we (as people, religious leaders, and Christian shepherds/pastors/leaders) actually engage in it.Maybe McLaren is not posing something new about Christianity, but something new in relationship to Christianity: redefining our relationship with God, Jesus, the Bible, with Christians and other religions, with ourselves, with our worship, with life.He started the book saying that we are Christians living in a “comfortable captivity” (31).I think its time for all Christians to start engaging in dialogue: not one-sided or gender/racially/socially-biased, but to bring to light what the rest of the world has been feeling for years.The kingdom of God is near: let us all bring a new relationship of Christ into full light.Amen.
Before doing any homework assignment, I do what I (and what I believe anyone younger than I) would normally do: look for anything that I can find about it online.We were asked to read Tom Beaudoin’s book, Virtual Faith, where Beaudoin explores Christian theology from the standpoint of GenXers.A very brief review of the book can be found here, as well as an article of Beaudoin can be found here.Currently, Beaudoin is teaching as a practical theology professor at Santa ClaraUniversity.
I write to you not about to write a review, as I have not read a majority of the book.I do want to post midway into reading to engage my thoughts and my peers.In this case, I carry more of a stance with James’ opinions, but receptive to the ideas that Beaudoin brings to the table with his book and with his life.
Although this book has nothing to do with my generation, I believe there are many things to note:
Generation-defined culture is only one genre of culture.It’s safe to say that the world is multi-cultural by age, ethnicity, gender, geography, social/economic status, etc.As future religious leaders, we should be aware of the various cultures associated with GenX to engage in a more effective ministry.Furthermore, there is a need to understand the relationship between cultures.In this case, there may be a need to understand where GenXers came to be from the Baby Boomers, as Bedouin goes into detail of the origins of GenX.There should also be an equal need to understand where the next generation is being pushed by those who come from GenX.
Relative to any form of reading, it is important to make the world relative to your frame of view – in this case, your cultural identity.I realize that I am not part of the GenXers, but the struggle to identify the differences between the theology from the Baby Boomers and the GenXers is something to reflect upon my own generation and the generation prior.
Technology extends our senses.In a recent blog video posted by Callid Keefe-Perry for our class expresses the writings of Marshall McLuhan, explaining that “the medium is the message.”GenXers as described by Beaudoin do not see the world the same way as the generation before them.Pop culture has been their viewing window into the world.They have been witnesses of a generation of good leaders who were assassinated, and they kept their sadness in.I bring all of this in because the culmination of technology of that time period gave them this view.MTV was a major influence upon the GenX culture.I Googled/wiki’d what other factors defined GenX: home computing, internet, video games, and birth-control pills, to name a few. To believe that all of these things had no effect on GenXer views of Christianity is to hide underneath a veil of unconsciousness. I think there may be some usefulness to describe how technology extends our theology, which is the core belief of Beaudoin’s book.
I am very aware that culture does affect the frame reference of Christianity, whether it is intentional or not.Agreed, Christianity has this built-in understanding that we can change the world through the transformation of the Holy Spirit.These two articles (one written by my professor, Phillip Clayton, and the other written by Pastor Chad Holtz) dialogue on the emphasis of Christianity on culture or visa-versa. It is my understanding that Christianity from a missionary point of view was most effective by adapting and emerging from the native culture. Many countries have been assimilated into Christianity with this method.If that is the case however, the world will always change because of Christianity, and Christianity will always need to acclimate to whatever culture it is immersed in to be effective.Yes, another chicken and the egg routine similar to James’ blog comments, but also promotes the need of new age theologians who can incorporate new technology and new culture.
I hope that Christianity is affected by technology, because Christianity needs to be more influential in the technology used today.I do not mean this in any evangelistic notion or anything, but rather, to ask how modern technology has affected Christianity so that we as Christians can develop theologies and theological practices for emerging generations/cultures, whether physical or virtual.Here are some weird notions you can all play around with:
What are the latest technologies that have been made or exploded in popularity within the last 10 years? Do they have any relevance to the changes/trends on Christianity or religion in general?
Some things to consider:cell phones, laptop/touchpad computers, ipod and other MP3 players, Kindle readers, Toyota Prius (Gen. 2 and 3), multi-core computer processors, digital cameras, Wikipedia and Urban Dictionary, Facebook, Twitter, etc.
More random things to consider:YouTube, Farmville, Xbox 360, Wii, doppelganger week, etc.(also, the emergence of nanotechnology in the various fields of science.History goes back as far as 1960’s but has been more mainstream within the last 10 years.)
There have been people who have emerged in amazing popularity within the last 10 years who have played a role in our culture and Christianity as well.They may have also affected Christianity in more ways than none: Barack Obama, Taylor Swift, Star Wars Kid, Beyonce Knowles, Osama Bin Ladin, Miley Cyrus, Dave Chappelle, Manny Pacquiao, Sarah Palin.
Technology now seems to be in a place where new technology does not extend the senses farther, but extends the senses faster.What does that mean to Christianity?
Can Christianity be just as effective in virtual communities like Facebook, twitter, Myspace, blog communities, and other virtual environments like instant messaging, chat rooms, etc.?This is the big question to where my TAG class revolves around, but I mean it is worth noting if a person could take all the various aspects of Christianity and create a theology that is relative to the current generation, maintains a level of practicality, and has the capacity to hold onto past theological doctrines/commitments.
I’m reading this book called What Would Google Do? by Jeff Jarvis, who writes the about the phenomenal business “rules” of Google.As a class assignment, we were to read the book and post our thoughts.
I only have read about 1/3 of the book, but I have read what has been posted online about this book.Jarvis challenges the reader to see what was said about your company, so it seemed fitting to see the google-juice that has been posted about this book (which our TA-instructor Trip Fuller has graciously collaborated!).I will try to summarize my thoughts below:
It is quite remarkable to see many things come to life as I read them in the book and what is happening on-line.Not only do I see a post from Trip Fuller, but I see a reply from Jeff Jarvis (and btw, I wish you were here in the class).The connection of the internet under the “google-rules” seems to be that there is literally nothing in the way between me the writer and you the reader; everyone and everything is at your fingertips.
What makes the transformation of the world so powerful is the effect of multiplicity.It has been theologized in Christianity/Bible (“When two or more are gathered…”) as well as been incorporated into many other religions, but has also been used as an effective business tool by Google and other companies.Donations to Haiti have sky-rocketed due to the effects of multiplicity, having common people like you and me donate $10 every time I send a text message to Red-Cross.Multiplicity gives power back to the people in an institution.Multiplicity gives control back to the people.
What would Jesus do in a Generation-G world?Jesus lived a private and a public life.He liked to pray by himself and he also liked to teach people and heal others of sickness.In a modern context, he represents a facebook page where he can set his identity both private and public.As Christians we are to live a life like Christ, spreading the Word of God and transforming the world with love.I feel like the internet gives that platform to do just that.As Christians we can “surf” into uncharted territories, we can give our opinions, and we can help the world in much simpler ways than ever before.
What would I do in a Generation-G world?Everyone has at least one picture they were happy to not get posted online, and usually at least one picture they wished they could take offline.How do I stay public to the world around me and maintain an identity that keeps me pastorally above reproach?The answer to me is simple:be a human that filled with flaws but sincere to the love in Jesus Christ, publicly displaying your identity in Christ to show a spiritual journey that you had to take to get to this point in your life.
I wonder what kind of business the church would be described.It’s not a big wonder to consider the church as a business:there are consumers who pay for services, and the church provides necessary services to the consumer in the form of worship services, pastoral care, blessings, etc.I’m not saying that this is Christianity (I hope this is not Christianity) but what a business model would look like if it was overlapped with it.However, as Jarvis makes us ask the question: what business is the church in?It definitely cares and serves the people.It brings the presence and love of Christ.It serves the community on any platform or context.We bring faith and hope to those who have lost their way.The church thrives of the generosity of the community that gives back.
I think there is some truth to the polar opposites of Apple and Google when compared to Christianity.Historically speaking, there is a built-in hierarchy in Christianity that we cannot ignore; certainly having a “Google-Christianity” would mean that the people themselves would be the source of the power.The church is built on 2000 years of tradition; the internet is anything but tradition.Then again, doesn’t the church function because of the laity?Doesn’t the transformation of the world begin with the people?The love of Christ comes from top-to-bottom but also from bottom-to-top.
Pastor Stu’s Blog is something to highly consider.The church is in decline, sad to say.We are trying to lure people into our church instead of going out and providing services to them.The internet provides all of the resources for us as clergy/theologians because it provides the people with the problems and the people with the opinions/criticisms/affirmations/hope that life will get better.
I think that’s all I will blog for now, I still want to finish the book!Peace and love, Amen.
