Category: Faith Explorers Recent Topics

We started by considering the DomPost article by asking what are the NZ characteristics that make us who we are, as raised in the article. Generally fed up with rugby – even before the World Cup starts; we agreed that rugby doesn’t represent NZ. Other suggestions were honesty, women’s rights, equality/workers rights, welcome immigrants, multiracial. The flag will not define us – but how we treat people.

The social survey consisted of factual and values based questions – one being characteristics which one feels are important to being a NZer? Some thought ‘being born here’ or ‘brought up in NZ from young age’, others simply ‘to feel like a NZer’ – which would imply that they have lived in NZ for some considerable time.

Another question was how do you see yourself as a NZer or member of ethnic group, or if both which predominately?

Noel challenged the group with 4 introductory questions

1. How would you like to be treated if you develop dementia at sometime in your life? Responses: Compassion, stay (& die) at home, balance stay at home with pressure on family, have a source of ‘happy pills’ to reduce my worry, anxiousness.
2. What would you like to say to your family? Responses: Clear the garage, decide what to do with my ashes, don’t let me become a burden.
3. How would you like to be remembered? Responses: as I was before dementia.
4. What type(s) of songs would you like to be listening to everyday? Responses: Basically one’s from earlier times of our lives.

The common reaction to dementia is fear but with cancer its concern. We compared John Locke’s definition of ‘What is a Person’ that could imply that someone without memory becomes a non-person (a dangerous line of argument); we preferred John Swinton’s as it is more relational. These also touch on Martin Buber’s ‘I – It, I – Thou’ philosophy

We watched part of the movie “Alive Inside” by Michael Rossato-Bennett (2014). This shows the remarkable positive impact that familiar music can have on dementia sufferers. The music seems to stimulate the whole brain; the memories are not lost – they are still there (in the brain); the interaction with the music seems to recreate the pathways to recall! Seems to be more beneficial than drugs so massive resistance from vested interests against providing personal music players.

This is a fantastic presentation by Obama – content, emotion, loud and quiet, fast and slow, encouraging and supportive, displaying superlative presentation skills. The content covers both that of a traditional eulogy and effectively a sermon on ‘grace’.

Points that made a special impact:

• Rev Clementa Pickney combined both ministry and public service (as a Senator) – he saw no distinction between the two.
• His focus was on ‘saving community’ rather than individual salvation
• Obama noted these features of churches such as AME where the shootings occurred: community centres where organise for jobs and justice; places of scholarship and network; places where children are loved and fed and kept out of harms way, told they are beautiful and smart and taught that they matter. A sacred place not just for ‘blacks’ and Christians but all people who care about the expansion of human rights, human dignity, liberty and justice for all. This is what church means.
• When reflecting on grace – grace is not earned, merited or deserved; its a free and benevolent gift of god; (through the shootings) God has visited grace upon us, a chance to see ourselves as we are, make the most of this gift;
• Lets not stop at taking down the Confederate flag (a symbol of racial subjection), but tackle racial injustices in school policy, poverty, hate, criminal justice, police bias, employment, gun violence – by embracing change through God’s grace, not returning to business as usual. [Particularly relevant for NZ] We have, quoted Obama, a deep appreciation of history but we don’t have a deep appreciation of others history!

With grace, by offering grace, by giving graceful, everything is possible!

We saw and experienced the beauty and grandeur of some of the regional and national parks in the central south west of America.

We considered 2 TED talks:

https://www.ted.com/talks/alberto_cairo_there_are_no_scraps_of_men In this presentation the speaker, a Physiotherapist relates how he was encouraged to move beyond his comfort zone by his desire to help others requiring prosthesis. By a series of steps, the consequences of one decision lead to another and yet another to help this group of people. The presenter was encouraged and supported by a colleague, showing the importance of this kind of role. We admired the vision, persistence, empathy and care that the presenter portrayed.

https://www.ted.com/talks/tim_harford This presentation was a little more provocative than the one above. The ‘God Complex’ refers to people who believe their view is the only right and correct one – if you like, behaving as an omniscient, all-knowing god. The presenter’s argument is that the natural world and the situations humans find themselves in are very complex. Humans have a natural tendance to reduce the complexity to a few variables that we can hold at once and hence generate a path to a logical conclusion. We just can’t hold and optimise solutions from many variables. The conclusion the speaker advocates is the practice of trial and error, as has occurred in nature through the process of evolution. We considered that politicians are the most visible group that reduce complexity to simple mantras eg the market knows best, competition and privatisation will benefit all, small Government is good. Could a politician campaign on the platform “I don’t have a definitive answer to ….., but I have these ideas which I would like to try, see what works and then refine those in further trials’ be successful? I think not as we, the public, crave the prospect of apparent certainty in definitive answers, from leaders who (seem to) know! I also suspect that we realise that they do not!

[For the churches in 21^st Century NZ facing falling attendance, some humble ‘don’t know but lets try this and see how it works out’ would be better than trying to replicate programmes which worked a generation ago or sitting on our hands hoping things will improve.]

Adrienne also identified https://www.ted.com/talks/uri_alon_why_truly_innovative_science_demands_a_leap_into_the_unknown Give it a try and see what you think.

A most interesting and personal insight into life in Iraq under Saddam Hussein and after his downfall.

Chapt 11: To love God is to love like God    This is the last chapter in this very interesting and stimulating book and it also has a somewhat different character compared with preceding chapters. Borg seems to be implying a love for an entity that is real and (almost physically) exists; the meaning of love for God is not-unnaturally based on our human experiences – parental, friendship, lovers – ‘of lover and beloved’. He alludes to a lover’s ‘longing’ for God. He relates an exercise in which students were invited to write a passionate love letter and then unexpectedly addressing it to God!

It seemed that this intensity was not the experience of members of the group. We spoke about believing being a prerequisite for a relationship and hence potential for love to develop. We wondered why nuns ‘marry’ God but monks do not. Do we love the concept of God as a loving and all-powerful who will make everything good and eliminate evil? Does loyalty and caring for others equate to loving God? Or what one holds as core values, one holds most dear to oneself and therefore ‘adores’? We acknowledged our mystical experiences; our Christian experiences have lead to a ‘wonderment’ of life and the natural world that is both cerebral and emotional.

We noted that Borg’s fruits of the spirit – compassion, freedom, courage and gratitude are not the same as Paul’s in Galatians 5:22. Are these possible without centring on God? Perhaps the greatest ‘gift’ is to be able to live and face death without fear. This is the gift of ‘liberal’ theology.

To round up Cristina notes: Consider loving what God loves – the human and non-human world (John 3:16), friends as well as enemies, righteous and the unrighteous (Matt 5:44 – 47). Consider Micah 6:8 – What God requires of us is to do justice, love kindness and walk humbly with your God.

Chapt. 8 The Bible & Politics This chapter faces the issue of the DOMINATION system which has bedeilled human society since large scale population groups began about 5,000 years ago. The political context of the Bible Borg says is “the ancient domination system” characterised as rule by the few, exploitation of the rest; controlled by violence; legitimised by religion. The rulers and their supporting bureaucrats represented less than 10% of the poulation and lived relatively well; the remianing 90%+ of the population lived in poverty and the powerful kept them that way. The powerful invoked God to justify their (inhumane) actions

We thought that the relative inequality in ancient Israel became steadily worse from Moses to Jesus’s time, but since then general worldwide inequality had reduced – there is a large middle class. However there are still far, far too many real poor. The excessively rich are a direct result of ‘the market’ – which now controls us, not the other way around.

Borg gives 3 texts which have been used to justify separating Christianity and politics: Mk.12:17; John 18:36;  and Roms.13:1. The last was used in the German church under the Nazis; by the opponents of the civil rights movement;  support for the American invasion of Iraq (by 80% of the evangelical Christians in U.S.A.) and in N.Z. during the issue of playing rugby against apartheid Sth. Africa. However a more careful examination of the Greek text in v2 indicates that it more accurately reads ‘ …he who violently rebels against the authority …is rebelling against .. God …’ so it is the violence that is decried not the opposition itself. Now with so little trust in Governments and the exposure of corruption at all levels, the concept that somehow Governments or politicians speak with the authority of God is ridiculous.

Borg gives the political issues of the Bible as “economic justice and fairness, peace and non violence” ie in Jesus’s terms these are characteristics of ‘the Kingdom of God’. Jesus challenged the evil of the powerful – Rome and its local cohorts – but was not advocating revolution.

We thought the message for today was that Christians need to emerge from the safety of the Church and connect with those in society that are espousing our values whether political parties, scientists or social welfare organisations, to lobby for “economic justice, fairness, peace and non violence” on behalf of community.

Chapt 9 Justice   This chapter draws on the book of Amos as the primary source for the call to economic justice. Amos was brave and focussed on ‘speaking truth to power’. Micah and Amos were contemporaries: Amos in Judah and Micah in Israel. Amos challenges the economic system that also challenges some religious traditions as well – the rich religious people who did little to help others. So who are today’s Amos’? Suggestions included Liberation theology in Sth America, Malala Yousafzai, Jim Wallis, Nelson Mandela, Bishop Tutu, Dali Lama, Ghandi, Salvation Army, Bryan Bruce, Pope Francis, Ian Harris.

Conservatives, and especially those in the US, see no obligation (or benefit) in creating a just society and to work for the common good, instead are content with charitable acts by individuals. At present the majority of first world governments are on the political right and hence this individualism is a common theme. Is it significant that many of the same countries have a strong Christian heritage or proclaim to be ‘Christian’? We noted that roles involving helping people are far less valued (ie less well paid) than those roles aimed at making money. The rich are powerful and so can ‘manipulate’ the systems to further increase their advantages. Amos would have plenty to say about our economic systems today.

Chapt 10 Peace   Borg outlines 4 attitudes to peace and violence: non-violence/passive resistance, just war as a last resort, Holy war – anything goes and Conventional acceptance – the Government knows best. ISIS provides an example of a huge stumbling block in for those supporting non-violence; ISIS would seem to support a ‘just war’; others and ISIS themselves see the situation as a Holy War – our god is bigger. Paradoxically, there has been a steady decline in the number of wars and numbers killed/injured over the last 500 years – NZ’s nuclear ban being a small contributor. The overall trend is positive but regional conflicts are still very destructive and the level of suffering for those affected as serious as ever.

This chapter focuses on and questions the substitutionary understanding of Jesus’s death. His death was a ‘payment’ to God for the sins of humankind. We noted that ‘confession’ was and still is a significant part in Christian rites and rituals. The substitutionary understanding was part of the ~1905 Fundamentals. The originator was Anselm in 1098 based on how a feudal lord treated his subjects. Wrongdoing couldn’t be tolerated, so some payments had to be made. Interestingly, the split with the East Orthodox Church took place ~1054 ie before Anselm, and so it doesn’t have this payment understanding. We recognise that the concept of being ‘forgiven’ can be very powerful and liberating in people in difficult circumstances. However ‘sin’ blocking entry to heaven is not espoused in the Bible.

We found Borg’s 4 theological arguments against the substitutionary understanding compelling. Could God not think up a better plan? Why not let Jesus live a little longer? Borg compares a headline ‘Father dies trying to save his son’ with the payment view of ‘Father requires death of his son’ that very neatly sums up Anselm’s theology. Jesus’s death was political (hence the use of the cross), aided and abetted by the Roman appointed Priests and rulers, who had to continually demonstrate allegiance to the Roman authorities/power. Jesus’s claim that the kingdom of God is coming was a political statement and a challenge to the Romans and their local stooges. Imagine how history would be different if Jesus had died of the plague while helping others; much of the power of his death on the cross is lost and the message of The (different) Way neutered.

For Borg ‘Salvation’ is ‘Transformation’. It is for us too.