Culture

Theology

We’ve explored two specific marks of the missional church over three different posts. This leads us to the last mark of the missional church — a theologically educated laity. As one approaches the general laity in his or her congregation, he or she can quickly assess whether or not the local church has properly served its congregants by providing some type of theological education for engaging everyday life. In the trend of seeker-sensitivity, many churches have neglected theology believing that “seekers” individuals have no interest in such training. However, Tim Keller suggests that missional churches need to theologically train laity for their vocations when he explains, “In a ‘missional’ church, the laity needs theological education to ‘think Christianly’ about everything and work with Christian distinctiveness…lay people renewing and transforming the culture through distinctively Christian vocations must be lifted up as ‘real kingdom work’ and ministry along with the traditional ministry of the Word” (p. 2). As seminaries continue to close their doors and biblical illiteracy increases, theological education of laity must be of utter importance in the Church’s call to disciple-making.
The twenty-first Church continues to struggle with its identity in the current context. However, there are numerous things, which the Church should continue to focus upon, if it is to be a peculiar people. The Church has and must continue to be shaped by the Great Commission, specifically surrounding the area of discipleship. As stated, discipleship is the most important task for the twenty-first century, missional Church. In light of this, the Church must paradoxically engage culture while at the same time promoting a counter-cultural mentality. These are difficult to balance, but the Church must be able to do both. The missional Church is counter-cultural specifically by promoting multiracial communities and rejecting consumerism and nationalism. In the end, it is important that laity be theologically trained in order to participate as missional people in daily life. The Church for so long has relied on Christendom to assist its efforts for making disciples. However, Christendom overemphasized conversion and not discipleship; thus, neglecting the Great Commission. The people of Christ are to be a peculiar people. If the Church forgets this and falls into the trap of overemphasizing something like relevance, it forgets its identity. If the Church focuses strictly on conversion, it forgets its identity. If the Church becomes racially homogeneous, it forgets its identity. Thus, the Church is a peculiar people, and a peculiar people that have forgotten their identity can never fulfill Christ’s words to “make disciples of all nations.” These things must mark the missional Church in order to do ministry in a twenty-first century context.

There is not enough time to cover all the “marks” so what “marks” would you add?

+++++++

Conclusion of series on “The Marks of the Missional Church”

Read Part 1 on Discipleship here. Part 2 - (Counter)Culture 1 here. Part 3 - (Counter)Culture 2 here.

Citations for all posts:

1. DeYoung, C. P., Emerson, M. O., Yancey, G., & Kim, K. C. “All Churches Should Be Multiracial”, in Christianity Today 49 (April, 2005).
2. Emerson, M. O. & Smith, C. (2000). Divided by faith: evangelical religion and the problem of race in America. New York: Oxford.
3. Hirsh, A. (2006). The forgotten ways. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press.
4. Keller, T. (2001). “The missional church.”
5. Walsh, B. J. & Keesmaat, S. C. (2004). Colossians remixed: subverting the empire. Downers Grove: IVP.

Consumerism

Thoughts on a multiracial church lead to the second way in which the Church must be counter-cultural. The Church must be counter-cultural by standing against the overwhelming consumerism, most prevalent in American culture. Emerson and Smith suggest that evangelicals are not immune to consumerism when they state, “The organization of American religion is characterized by disestablishment, pluralism, competition, and consumer choice. This organization is partly shaped and often capitalized on by evangelicals. And as a consequence of sociological and social psychological principles at work, congregations become and remain highly racially homogeneous” (p. 151; emphasis mine). The racial homogeneity of Christian congregations is a by-product of the emphasis of the surrounding culture.

(more…)

Culture

For the people of God to “make disciples of all nations,” they must be not run from culture but engage it. Keller suggests that Christians engage the stories of the culture in order that they might restate the stories in light of the gospel. Christians will be faced with a strong temptation to fall into sectarianism, but they must never yield to this. Engaging the culture marks the missional Church, as Keller states that “to ‘enter’ [the culture’s stories] means to show sympathy toward and deep acquaintance with the literature, music, theater, etc. of the existing culture’s hopes, dreams, ‘heroic’ narratives, fears” (p. 2). The missional Church must familiarize itself with its surrounding culture.

The Church has always been tempted to over-engaged culture that it becomes the culture’s bedfellow. Paradoxically, the missional Church must engage culture and be counter-cultural at the same time. If the Church is not counter-cultural, it ceases to be a peculiar people and abandons its calling. The Church has often neglected its calling by overemphasizing the desire to be relevant in order to reach the culture for Christ. However, in many situations, the Church fails to look different from culture since the people of God were so concerned with looking like society.

(more…)

The Marks of the Missional Church

Over approximately two millennia, the Church has continually struggled with its mission to be the people of Jesus Christ to an ever-changing culture and society. The task has not always been an easy one. As the Church has entered the twenty-first century, the question of what makes the Church the people of Jesus Christ still lingers. The Church seeks to be ekklesia, a “called out” people, and becomes a peculiar people. This peculiar people must live in the twenty-first century seeking to fulfill the mission of Christ and dialog about what specifically marks the Church in its current context. These people are sent to the world as agents of Christ’s kingdom and should continually self-evaluate to see if it is living out its mission.

(more…)

This video has me cracking up:

This past weekend my brothers and I took the trek to Revelation Generation–a music festival involving bands with Christian members. Although I am thoroughly annoyed with the evangelical subculture with its t-shirts like “(front) God is not a conservative Republican (back) But he’s DEFINITELY NOT a liberal Democrat,” or the fact that similar t-shirts will never be worn outside of an evangelical setting (as I hope they aren’t!) and only if trying to offend someone, or the $1,000,000 bill Bible tracts with Ronald Regan’s face on it, or its simplistic “Gospel” messages such as “If you were the only person on earth, Jesus would’ve still died for you;” although all those things bother me for various reasons, Revelation Generation is one of the premier Christian music festivals around (and I’ve been to quite a few). Some Christian music festivals need to pick it up (*cough* Creation *cough*), but the plethora of talent of the bands at Revelation Generation is superb. There are two main stages–New York (alternative music) and Philadelphia (hard or harder rock)–and three smaller stages–Nashville (solo acts), Urban (hip-hop and the like), and Come & Live (new record company with more underground bands).

I spent most of my time at the Philadelphia stage with the “harder” bands. My favorite band The Devil Wears Prada (not the movie) was there, and that’s saying something! August Burns Red with their cornucopia of breakdowns are always inspiring. Underoath, which are big in all circles, were the finale on Friday night. Derek Webb (who I was able to talk to for 5 minutes; and, yes, he did drop the word “s***” in that one song) was the finale at the Nashville stage, which he was surprised to see he was after Jon Foreman (from Switchfoot). The New York stage invited the audience to the sounds of Relient K and Switchfoot, who both have had success outside of Christian circles. Thus, Revelation Generation did an awesome job with the lineup this year so kudos to them.

If you haven’t seen it yet, check out The Devil Wears Prada’s new music video of their song “Danger: Wildman” below.

This series is an ongoing reflection on quotes from the New York Times article “Scientists Worry Machines May Outsmart Man.”

“Despite his concerns, Dr. Horvitz said he was hopeful that artificial intelligence research would benefit humans, and perhaps even compensate for human failings.  He recently demonstrated a voice-based system that he designed to ask patients about their symptoms and to respond with empathy.  When a mother said her child was having diarrhea, the face on the screen said, ‘Oh no, sorry to hear that.’

“A physician told him afterward that it was wonderful that the system responded to human emotion. ‘That’s a great idea,’ Dr. Horvitz said he was told. ‘I heave no time for that.’”

Being anti-technology, especially “helpful” technology, runs the risk of being labelled a Luddite.  But, alas, wherever robots are used to create synthetic human empathy in time of sickness and need I will be against it.  An empathy robot goes against many of the central teachings of Jesus and the Christian faith, and gives a big old smack in the face to our belief that humans are made in the image of God.

Christians should always be counted in the pro-human category.  We don’t see humans as failing in anything but sin and evil.  All other “failings” are not true failings, but are necessary characteristics of who we are as sentient beings.  We don’t live underwater or fly or communicate via telepathy for reasons, reasons we may not like, but reasons nonetheless.  So to conquer our “failings” we create machines.  That’s the anti-Christian part of machines, that they are too often viewed as necessary to overcome human failings.  Machines may be helpful, useful, or practical, but they certainly don’t bring humans closer to perfection.  Only living as renewed images of God makes us approach glorification.

As Scot McKnight notes in Community Called Atonement we are all cracked eikons looking to be made whole again.  We are cracked images of God.  We are in the image of God nonetheless.  We are just a bit tarnished.  Not failures.  Just tarnished.  A rusty dollar coin is still worth a dollar.  A cracked human is still worth a human.

In Karl Barth’s commentary on the image of God, he surmises that the image of God necessitates community.  We are made male and female to be in community with one another.  We are not human unless we are in community.  Our existence as images of God necessitates that we are empathetic with one another, for without empathy there is no community.

Specific to the medical empathy the Horvitz robot was designed to employ, Jesus teaches us that we are to be his body for others.  We are to bear one anothers burdens, to be present with one another, to care for the sick, the orphan, the widow, the spiritually poor, the financially poor, the homesick, the heartbroken, the suicidal, the average.  We must care for all, we must empathize with all, or the community vision of the kingdom of God is knocked a bit off its tracks.  An empathy robot is not a bad idea because it takes human jobs away or breaks down the physician/patient hierarchy.  An empathy robot is a bad idea precisely because it impedes our ability to be eikons of God.  We must hold onto community wherever we can find it, for that is where God begins to fix our cracks.

There is an astonishingly beautiful yet tragic scenario at work in Wall-E when a man and woman first notice each other, their romance parallel to Wall-E and Eva’s.  They touch hands.  They break away from the synthetic empathy of their robot-dictated existence and join in community with one another.  The power of human love overwhelms them, and they will not let go of it.  When a robot tries to break up their play in a reflection pool they get rid of it. Their love is a subversive love.  It serves as a mirror image of Wall-E’s subversion.  Salvation happens when community happens, when two humans stop at nothing to enjoy one another.  There in lies the image of God.

This series is an ongoing reflection on quotes from the New York Times article “Scientists Worry Machines May Outsmart Man.”

“Something new has taken place in the past five to eight years,” Dr. Horvitz said. “Technologists are replacing religion, and their ideas are resonating in some ways with the same idea of the Rapture.”

The idea of religion, from a secular point of view, and especially when compared to science, is one of magic and superstition.  While this seems logical at first, that knowledge overcomes superstition, and intelligence overcomes old wives’ tales, and science can prove the normalcy of miracle, this perspective is culturally shortsighted.  While science may debunk religion on science’s home turf, in the realm beyond lab coats and sterilized testing facilities, the cultural mechanizations of “progress” quickly become religious.

In The 6th Day, the Arnold Schwazenegger thriller about illegal human cloning, a sci-fi movie is made emotional only through the use of religious metaphor, the sixth day being when God created man.  Watching any number of other sci-fi films or series, like Star Wars and Stargate, one quickly finds that there are religious overtones to these stories as “pure science” is incapable of sustaining a cultural narrative.  Even in such a rigorous scientific culture as Spock’s Vulcan civilization has a sacred place where the elders meet in times of uncertainty and distress.

In the movement of secular humanism, championed so highly by the neo-athiests, there has been questioning as to how to sustain the movement.  In a movement overflowing with irony, many secular humanists are instructing their children in the way they should go with services and “Sunday School” type meetings.

The New Jersey Humanist Network has family meetings on Sunday mornings that have informal adult discussion and the following curriculum for children:

• Study of Humanist values/principles, etc.
• Comparative religions
• Science - critical thinking
• Solstices/Equinoxes - the science behind seasons and celebrations
• Enthusiasm for life - celebrating your uniqueness
• Nature - our connection to it and the importance of taking care if it
• Equality - everyone deserves to be treated well
• Evolution
• Superstition
• And, as the group grows - Maybe even some sort of coming of age ceremony!

Notice the bar mitzah or confirmation like hope for coming of age ceremonies and the inclusion of all basic tenets of the non-faith in a holistic curriculum.

Tolkien, in one of his letters, writes about this facade of a shift from religion to non-religion:

“the sub-creator wishes to be the Lord and God of his own private creation. He will rebel against the laws of the Creator—especially against mortality. Both of these (alone or together) will lead to the desire for Power, for making the will more quickly effective,—and so to Machine (or Magic).”

Magic and Machine are synonymous in Tolkien’s almost marxist critique of humanity’s quest for power.  When the sub-creators (humans) are put in dominion of something, like the Garden of Eden for instance, we will begin to desire power, the power to more quickly assert our will, a rebellion that leads humans to bend the will of natural law and the cycles of the earth into our own dominion.  Humans will do this by either machine or magic, by technology or by alchemy.

How we so quickly dilude ourselves into seeing the mideval alchemist as a looney, but we look to technologists as geniuses.  Both are trying to accomplish the same thing.

Machine and Magic both lead to disastrous, apocalyptic perspectives.  When we try to go beyond our bounds, when we let ourselves catch Frankenstein-syndrome and abuse our God given authority as sub-creators and try to become the Creator the end of the world seems near.

Both science and religion are ruled by ethical and moral boundaries that are passed on through stories and rituals that serve as rememberance, perspective, and warning.  The Apocalypse is a perspective on the coming kingdom that serves as a warning to churches to be on guard and active, for Christ will return one day.  So too, the technologists, the secular humanists, the scientists are using conferences, Sunday meetings, and their own discussions to shape a narrative of rememberance, perspective, and warning.  Thus, sci-fi becomes the narrative that serves as Scientific Apocalypse, a secular warning that when ethics and morality are disregarded, when that which scientists and technologists hold in common is compromised.

This series is an ongoing reflection on quotes from the New York Times article “Scientists Worry Machines May Outsmart Man.”

“The idea of an ‘intelligence explosion’ in which smart machines would design even more intelligent machines was proposed by the mathematician I. J. Good in 1965.  Later, in lectures and science fiction novels, the computer scientist Vernor Vinge popularized the notion of a moment when humans will create smarter-than-human machines, causing such rapid change that the ‘human era will be ended.’”

Enter The Matrix.  In that popular movie (and not so popular trilogy) the human Neo must fight in a virtual world a very real world battle for supremacy over machines that have taken over the Earth and use humans as energy sources in large scale hydroponic farms.  Fanciful yes, but the philosophical questions and science fiction scenarios are starting to seem more realistic, at least to some scientists.  Designing machines that kill autonomously is just one step away from designing machines that will outsmart us and become evil.

Yet how is a machine evil.  Evil is the worst spot on the barometer of human morality, but what is a machine morality.  When we begin to project our own morality onto machines, we are anthropomorphizing something we have made to be “other.”  Machines, if they are as smart or smarter than us, will thus be thinking beings, and following the Cartesian root of thought when something has a cogito ergo sum it is from that point that all other existence becomes validated. That means machines that can think intelligently will, as a machine culture, form their own morality and validate it as a machine culture through traditions and cultural norms.

The irony of Western science is that it always negates culture and community for the individual.  Creating autonomous machines creates philosophical predicaments on an individual machine level—this is naive.  Machines that are autonomous and intelligent will form machine cultures that will be as diverse as human culture, with all the cultural, moral, economic, religious, philosophical, and political baggage that goes with cultural differences.  Creating two machines that are humanly intelligent creates a different culture.  It also creates a whole different world.

The world as defined in Genesis, in the Scriptures, in all literature is thoroughly and completely human.  The world is the world because of its human-ness.  What kind of world is a place that is characterized by machine-ness?  What is the Genesis, the Garden, and the Fall of machine-kind?  It could be many things, but Vinge is not far off base to speculate about the end of the human age.

In Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings Trilogy and the daunting prequel The Silmarillion there is a constant inter-being struggle for intellectual and cultural superiority between the elves and the new humans.   The Lord of the Rings captures a moment in Middle Earth that is not only a climax of good versus evil but also of a benign and peaceful clash between different beings.  Once Aragorn is crowned king again the elves decide it is time for them to diminish and return to the place across the sea they have come from.  Aragorn, as half elf and half human, is the mediator between a great power shift from elves to humans.  The age of man has come.

What will happen when the age of machines has come?  What more does it mean when machines are made in the Image of Human?

This series is an ongoing reflection on quotes from the New York Times article “Scientists Worry Machines May Outsmart Man.”

“Researchers…generally discounted the possibility of highly centralized superintelligences and the idea that intelligence might spring spontaneously from the Internet. But they agreed that robots that can kill autonomously are either already here or will be soon.” (emphasis added)

When the Image of God was tarnished death was the outcome.  It was a philosophical argument for awhile, probably not really understood by the first family.  Maybe it was just an empty threat.  Then Cain beat Abel’s skull into the ground, and his blood cried out.  Cain killed and he knew it.

That’s the difficult thing about machines that are personified.  Autonomously is such a cryptic word, because for machines it means “without human authority” and for humans it means “by my own authority.”  We make ourselves the center of decision making.

But, for better or worse, the reprocussions of lesser beings “autonomy,” like when a person is killed by an animal, remind us that we do not live in a human ordered world.

I had a run in with a bison while at Yellowstone a few weeks ago.  Two of them trapped me, my brother, his wife, and their daughter on a foot bridge.  A jerk in a SUV drove close to take a picture and then spooked them.  They came running at us.  We were starting to talk about jumping over the side of the bridge.  They ran past us and glared, then bluff charged another SUV before running up a hill like nothing ever happened.

The two bison were about four feet away from us, a collective 4,000 pounds of flesh with horns glaring at us with jade eyes.  I thought I was dead.  That’s bison autonomy.

Machine autonomy is different.  They are promethian beings.  We make them.  We are their gods.  We are frightened of our monters trying to kill us.  We are all afflicted with Frankenstein syndrome.  We know in our bones we are not to create what we cannot control.  That’s why we applaud people when they create new music or type fonts.

There is a haunting terror in I, Robot that is both beautiful and horrific.  A good robot amongst thousands of evil ones.  A robot paradise that is an eery collective, a budding civilization of sorts, a second Garden of Eden rising out of the desert of human existence.

We let our imaginations get ahead of ourselves.  Since Cain we humans have learned quite well how to use machines to do our killing.  We have only been getting more creative with ways we mask ourselves from the blood and guts of killing with two bare hands.

The more terrifying prospect is that machines will not become more autonomous but that their progress will cause us humans to become even more autonomous.   Our robot progress may or may not lead to a Terminator scenario.  It will certainly lead to a Wall-E scenario.

Robots will kill us with autonomy, but it will be our own.  We will mechanize our lives to the point that we negate our own existence and live in a fully autonomous state: no community, no help, no fellowship, no reading, no writing, just robots doing everything for us after we trashed the Earth.

We think we’ll be returning to the Garden.  But we’ll be creating anti-Earth: a world void of meaning outside of our minds, our bodies limp and pointless.  That’s when the robots will have killed us.