tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3581047259314187297.post1180320795180437374..comments2023-11-17T09:22:32.786+03:00Comments on Circumpolar: Cape Town – Day 3 – WarrickWarrick Farahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00389839484261120626noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3581047259314187297.post-21749717719445632922010-10-21T21:07:34.367+03:002010-10-21T21:07:34.367+03:00Guys, I misquoted Piper and corrected this post. ...Guys, I misquoted Piper and corrected this post. The actual quote was, "For Christ’s sake we Christians care about all suffering, especially ETERNAL suffering."Warrick Farahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00389839484261120626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3581047259314187297.post-42796079899368134552010-10-21T14:22:53.131+03:002010-10-21T14:22:53.131+03:00I like what Richard Twiss said about
syncretism:
...I like what Richard Twiss said about <br />syncretism:<br /><br />Syncretism can be described as a way of thinking <br />that says by performing or participating <br />in a particular religious ceremony or practice, <br />you can alter the essential human spiritual condition <br />in the same way that Jesus does, through His death <br />on a cross, burial, and resurrection from the dead, <br />because they are parallel truths and both equally acceptable <br />in the eyes of God; thus can be considered the same thing <br />and combined together.<br /><br />Theologically, syncretism states or implies a Native ceremony <br />can cleanse the soul from sin in the same way the work <br />of Jesus Christ does; or that performing Native ceremonies <br />can heal sickness, perform miracles and bridge the sin barrier <br />separating sinful human beings from a holy God, <br />because they are parallel truths from the same source.<br /><br />Theological syncretism is in direct contradiction of biblical truth, <br />while the blending of cultural forms is a normal fact <br />of everyday life.<br /><br />Though the risk of syncretism is always present as<br /> we attempt to inculturate Christianity, it is a risk <br />that needs to be taken…<br /><br />We must counsel, pray and dialogue with those of different <br />persuasions from our own to prevent syncretism from becoming <br />an emotionally defined standard that will only lead to more <br />confusion and division among us.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04139210129971520512noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3581047259314187297.post-70467076740782013972010-10-21T12:20:30.483+03:002010-10-21T12:20:30.483+03:00Warrick, thanks for your summary of day 3, includi...Warrick, thanks for your summary of day 3, including the C-scale debate. Nice summary of some of the issues.<br /><br />Quick correction: You've got Piper's quote wrong. It should be<br /><br />For Christ’s sake we Christians care about all suffering, especially ETERNAL suffering.<br /><br />May the Lord continue to encourage and strengthen you here in Cape Town.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07776057299013988717noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3581047259314187297.post-29812255973906802562010-10-21T00:45:11.712+03:002010-10-21T00:45:11.712+03:00Warrick - sure seems like if the contextualization...Warrick - sure seems like if the contextualization idea means anything at all, it means you can't come up with one standard for all contexts. What you'd pray and work toward in one place may not be the same things you'd pray and work toward in another. Even as the scriptures lay out plenty of foundations that are universal. Unity and diversity are in tension here? <br /><br />A couple weeks ago I went to a conference where one of the C5-ish guys from Pasadena, focused on Hindus, tried to deconstruct the whole idea of religion as a category of life. Said Hinduism doesn't exist. (oooh, all is illusion!) What he meant was that until rationalism began its ascent, we didn't have "religion" as a category, we had life, and the sooner we move back in the direction the better it will be for seeing people find life in Christ. The "invention" of religion is a bad thing, he said, because it erects false barriers in life, as if most life wasn't part of religion. I was scribbling like mad in order to go investigate more of this stuff later, and then I lost my notebook! So, I may not be representing this well. But as a sociologist I have found it helpful in various situations to step away from "what Muslims believe" at least to "what Muslims =here= belief," but more likely to "beliefs and belief systems here." <br /><br />So as to the hermeneutical hinge, I think one of the things people are struggling with is feeling like it's OK or good to contextualize to culture, but maybe not to religion. But that means taking a close look at what we consider inside and outside the religion "box," doesn't it? Is the religion box a meaningful one?Martihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04492242951732140223noreply@blogger.com