Welcome to the world of my indecisive postmodern epistemology! I've grown up dutifully learning to tear apart all the "ways of knowing" that philosophers, teachers, theologians, parents, scientists, artists, politicians, programmers, pastors, friends, and acquaintances have used. But now, because I'm aware of the limitations of whichever model I use, I'm stuck with an inability to use my own sense-making capacity. Justified? Probably. Dehabilitating? Definitely.
So here we are in a school trying to connect the dots between the gospel and the world... how are we to do it? Yes, with a model (note tone of amused sarcasm). Using categories and steps, lists and compartments. I hate putting things into a category. If it really is an accurate description as best I know, great. But when I know an issue is more complex and multi-faceted, it feels dishonest, presumptuous, and frequently very destructive.
Ahem. Anyway... we call the model we're using the "360 degree model" because it looks at "all" aspects of society (painful, I know). Basically it breaks society down into eight domains: family, education, government, arts and entertainment, science and tech, church, economics, and communication. The whole point isn't to try to describe the universe in one sentence, but to create a common vocabulary to bridge between scripture and the world (as a matter of practicality, we're operating on the assumption that the cannon of Protestant scripture is divinely inspired and relevant to us now). The idea behind using this model, is how it allows us to look at a Biblical text and say "hey this is talking about governance" and then to read an article in the The International Herald Tribune and say "hey, this is talking about governance too." From here our challenge is to line the two up and see how they connect.
Personally this is painful. If you attempt to find truth by reducing scripture to "principles," it seems that you're left with just that--principles. Maybe they're good, maybe not. But Jesus said "I AM the Truth." Not, "I can lead you to principles that are the truth." So truth isn't a sum of abstract ideas we're meant to discover. Rather it's a living person (organic, alive, dynamic, changing, unchanging) with flesh--complete with love, infatuation, jealousy, wrath, pain, and joy. Whether something is true gets aligned with the person of Jesus. I'm not sure all the implications of what this means, but when we say, "God says... about government" and believe we've found "truth" I sense we risk loosing something great.
More painful than the idea of the 360 degree model, is how it has been rocking me--in a good way. Maybe this is just another situation of good vs. best, where this is something really good, even with it's limitations. Two assignments in particular where's it's been revealing to me are my papers on the Old Testament books of Proverbs and Deuteronomy. For each, we went through and marked which domain(s) were associated with each verse through the entire book. When we were finished, we wrote a paper summarizing the key thrust of the themes related to our topic. I wrote about family and relationships in Proverbs and communication in Deuteronomy. I'm not particularly proud of them as pieces of writing (your sure to still catch some glaring typos), but each case I found the personal revelation and understanding deeply rewarding. If your curious, you can read both my Proverbs paper and my Deuteronomy paper online.
I can't say I'm in love with the model, but it has been really fruitful so far. If I'd thought it up, I think I would have thrown it out because of its limitations. I think I'm learning something...
The second weekend I was here, we had an incredible snowfall. While I was out taking these pictures I listend through the book of Revelation on my iPod. It was pretty surreal. Enjoy!































