Another chunk of Cupitt

"In dogmatic religion of the ecclesiastical kind, religious language undergoes a steady decline. It slowly turns into a series of stock slogans that are used as passwords in order to demonstrate one's own loyal membership of the group and to check other people's credentials. Eventually these slogans become so meaningless and irritating as to be quite unusuable by anyone who cares about language ... the hideous old obsession with using Christian vocabulary to police the frontiers of the community, to divide us from them, and to confirm hierarchies of spiritual power."

From "Theology's Strange Return."

Will Matt be Mad?

Philosophy of Religion? What's that?

Whatever it is, it's associated with Alvin Plantinga and William Lane Craig. It's also a hobby horse much ridden, whip flailing, on the MandM blog, New Zealand's most widely read biblioblog - number 6 on the latest Top 50 ranking - co-authored by Matthew and Madeleine Flannagan.

With names like Plantinga (see my earlier rant) and Craig associated with the discipline you'd have to be a tad leery of what the field was offering anyway. No surprise then that there are those who note "a general tension over the legitimacy of philosophy of religion in philosophy as a whole." The line that divides it from apologetics, for example, seem to range from hazy to non-existent. Now a challenge arises from within the bosom of the beast, so to speak. Keith Parsons has blown the whistle.

Keeping an eye on the truth was also a matter of practical importance for Parsons, who was alarmed by the support for Intelligent Design creationism among philosophy of religion’s most influential names. These include Alvin Plantinga and Peter van Inwagen, who led the subfield’s resurgence in the 1970s and ’80s, and William Lane Craig, an Evangelical who popularizes the subfield’s arguments for God in widely-attended public debates. “One of the things the really active conservative Christians covet enormously, more than anything else, is intellectual respectability. And they think they have found it in some of the arguments from these philosophers of religion,” Parsons said.

Whether or not you agree with Parsons' rejection of theism, he makes a good deal of sense on specific issues. If we're going to talk meaningfully about Christianity, it can't help to have a non-discipline loudly interjecting implausible pretensions into the discourse.

The Prophets as Political Agitators

Those of us who have come out of a fundamentalist background usually by default associate the Hebrew prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah and others, with prediction. In certain circles those predictions are not only infallible, but aimed at our own times which must be therefore, not surprisingly, the End Times. Prophecy, we were told, comes alive in today's world news.

To illustrate this bit of myopia, here's a quote that illustrates this perspective.

An exciting, pulsating, vital third of all the Bible is devoted to PROPHECY! And approximately 90 percent of all prophecy pertains to OUR TIME, now,...

I'd don't know where the author pulled his stats from, though an anatomical explanation may be the most apt. This particular 'expert' then goes on to shoot himself in the foot by adding;

... in this latter half of the twentieth century!

Oops. Quick check of copyright date: 1967.

In more enlightened circles this is all old hat. Of course the prophets weren't talking about today, they were forthtelling, not foretelling, and so on.

The trouble is, those circles of enlightenment are set on 40 watt narrow beam, and they've yet to pierce the darkness down the road at the neighbourhood storefront church. The failure of modern biblical studies is the almost complete lack of "trickle down" to the pews.

So what were the prophets on about? It's not saying anything original to suggest that they were more often than not the political activists of their day. Many of the soaring passages in Isaiah are not only reminiscent of political rhetoric, they are political rhetoric. Did Jeremiah have a political agenda? You bet! You don't have to read very far into the prophets without this reality leaping out at you.

Unless you've been overdosing on popular 'prophecy' material like the book quoted above, in which case it might well be a totally new thought.

Ronald Clements, a fairly conservative scholar, writes:

From the very beginning of modern study of these figures it was evident that their messages had a strongly political content.

Well Ronald, evident to you maybe, but not so evident to the folk who trawl through the shelves at the local Christian bookstore where every unclean and foul fowl finds a roosting place.

In the course of this engagement with a specific set of political judgments and policies they [the prophets] clearly intended to influence the policies adopted and thereby the outcome of events.

Clearly? Does this man not watch Sunday morning television? Well, no, of course he doesn't, which is probably why all this is clear to him.

Ever wonder why the powers-that-be, in most cases the royalty and priesthood of Israel and Judah, were so thoroughly hacked off with the prophets? (One memorable example is Jeremiah 36, the story of King Jehoiakim burning Jeremiah's scroll.) Was it because they were predicting events yet to unfold in the far distant future? Where, in practical terms, was the threat in that?

Of course there is poetry and theology in the Prophets. They wrote in a world where there was little separation between secular and sacred, no concept of democracy and no political parties. If you wanted to beat the king over the head for his questionable alliance with Egypt, for example, which is after all a very political thing to do, you picked up the club of prophecy, gathered your mantle about yourself, and whacked him with the word of the Lord... as you understood it.

Naturally there is apocalyptic writing as well, which does present itself as peering through the mists of time (usually with the advantage of hindsight!) If someone wants to delve into Daniel or Revelation it'd be really helpful to get a grip on the genre of apocalyptic first, before making an egg of oneself.

The incredible thing is that so many Christians, invariably good people with fine motives and an unquestionable commitment to their faith, are still being led down the garden path by the manipulations of modern prophecy merchants with their silly calculations and lurid fantasies about what will happen sometime very soon.

Back to the source of that first 1967 quote. Boldly, boldly, thus did the man of God proclaim:

Events of the next five years may prove this to be the most significant book of this century.

Buzz.

A staggering turn in world events is due to erupt in the next four to seven years.

Buzz.

By God's direction and authority, I have laid the TRUTH before you! To neglect it will be tragic beyond imagination!

Buzz, buzz, BUZZ...

But he did get the last sentence right.

The decision is now YOURS!

References

Armstrong, Herbert W. The United States and British Commonwealth in Prophecy. Pasadena, Ambassador College Press, 1967 [The same points could easily be made with Hal Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth.]

Clements, Ronald E. Old Testament Prophecy: From Oracles to Canon. Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 1996.

What a Diehl!

That wicked but loveable reprobate, Dennis Diehl, has an offer for you! Now is certainly the time, especially for those worried about what is happening in the Untied United Church of God, to do a little upskilling. Sign up your whole congregation.

(Disclaimer: there is such a thing as satire y'know... Thanks Den, great to hear from you! I'll get back to you about the misuse of the holey [sic] name of Calvin later.)

Well, that's interesting

Behold, some nice paperwork that quite likely dropped off the back of a lorry Louisville bound.

Articles of Incorporation, Church of God, a Worldwide Association, Inc.

Heads up to Purple Hymnal.

On the traffic radar...

Twenty nine. That's the December ranking for Otagosh on the Biblioblog Top 50.

In advance of the event much scuttling was heard beneath the floorboards as Alexa-rank-deniers attempted to concoct their own alternative rankings, most notable amongst them the resurrected but yet to be glorified Bishop N.T. Wrong who - bless his subjective but insightful heart - has Otagosh at number 15.

Over at Open Parachute, which ranks New Zealand blogs, the December ranking is 25.

Kiwis cast out

It seems the New Zealand UCG has just imploded with Obergruppenführer Jeff Caudle and his lieutenants, Art Verschoor and Andre van Belkum, all being defrocked.

From the way things are being worded it seems they were pushed rather than joyfully embracing the bungy jump. Tough luck guys. Not a great way to start the new year.

As far as I know that's the entire Kiwi church stripped of its ministers.

Meanwhile, out in East Texas, Ken Treybig has posted this update on his website.

Things are in a state of change right now as many fellow elders and I begin planning for a new organization. A temporary name was chosen to get started, Church of God, a Worldwide Association, to convey the fact that local congregations around the world are wanting to join with those formed in the United States.

An organizational conference is being planned for January 9-11, 2011 in Louisville, KY. At that meeting everything (including the name) are "on the table" as we discuss how we will be organized, whether we want to use a different Church of God name, and as we do preliminary work on planning for Feast sites, preteen and teen camps, and focus on our mission of how to preach the gospel and to teach and care for those God calls. A website is under construction at the following URL: http://cogwa.org/

A temporary name that's up for further discussion? Well, I could think of a few really appropriate suggestions...