AZspot

blue bits. red rocks.

theology

☼   ☼      ☼   ☼

The dehumanising idea that illness is connected to sin is a common feature of religious thinking about disease and sickness in general. Periods of crisis, like this one, may empower religious leaders to speak openly about the way that their traditions understand disease, but these explanations are not the product only of such exceptional moments of crisis. They are, rather, deep, long-lived and fundamental aspects of how religious communities think about the sick among them. Both the leaders who present Ebola and other crises as divine punishment and the commentators who attribute this perspective to human nature under stress – and thereby excuse it – are participating in the perpetuation of a dangerous and destructive mode of thinking. Blaming Ebola on God’s wrath is worse than you think

Process theologians see Jesus as a reflection of God’s aim toward creative transformation, calling humankind forward from what is to what can become. Christ calls us to be open to God now and in the future. While God’s aim at creative transformation is present in all things, seeking beauty, intensity, and community, God is specifically present in Jesus Christ in ways that create a life-transforming field of force among those who hear his message. The interplay of divine-human call and response resonates in all things, but Jesus Christ’s life and mission creates an intensified field fo force that transformed persons in the first century and still transforms persons today. Jesus Christ ‘saves’ us, to use traditional language, by opening and empowering us to experience God’s vision for our lives in new and lively ways. Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection do not transform God’s attitude toward us, involve Jesus paying ransom to demonic forces to liberate us, or require his suffering on our behalf in order to appease God’s wrath. Rather, as the model for what we can be in our time and place, in every century, Jesus Christ calls us to become fully human as we embody in a variety of ways our vocation as God’s healing partners in our world. Bruce G. Epperly

The people that I know who love, quote, and believe the Bible the most happen to be the least aware of the Bible’s concern with /critique of Empire. What is fascinating to me is that those who are most unaware of the nature of the American Empire (Imperial reign) are also those who claim to take the Bible the most seriously. E is for Empire

If N. T. Wright and Peter Kreeft want a syncretistic I Ching Christianity, then they need to make this clear and the rest of us can wander off and stop scratching our heads. We will just write it off as another off shoot cult of Christianity, and let it go. N.T. Wright, I Ching and complementarianism

…open theism is, at root, a belief about the nature of the future. Open theism is not, as open theists repeatedly point out, a belief about God’s omniscience. Crudely stated, according to open theism God does not know the future because the future does not yet exist. This does not limit God’s omniscience because if the future does not exist then there is nothing for God to know. In short, the future is “yet to be,” the future is “open” and unfolding. The openness of the future in open theism is generally rooted in a libertarian account of human free will. Because humans have free will God does not know what exact future will unfold in the face of human choices. Thus, open theism is described as a relational view of God as God is waiting upon and responsive toward the free choices of individuals. God, being infinitely powerful and resourceful, will bring about God’s purposes for the world, but how exactly that future will unfold is to be determined. God is playing, so the metaphor goes, a chess game with humanity. God will win the game, that outcome is “predetermined,” but the exact course of the game is an unfolding and relational process given the moves humans will make and how God opts to respond as a consequence. Experimental Theology: Empathic Open Theism

…my assessment is that an evangelicalism that has Ehrman as its chief foe is in better shape than an evangelicalism that has Bird as its great champion. How God Became Jesus: Part 1 In Review of the Evangelical Response to Ehrman

American slavery may have ended more than a century ago, but the theology that evolved to defend it still thrives and flourishes. ‘Having the goodwill of all the people’

Any time your theology causes you to leave hungry children with empty bellies or sick children without medicine, it has ceased to be orthodox theology. When We’d Rather Let Kids Go Hungry Than Be Reasonable On Gay Marriage

The best features of the Christian tradition have valued the common good and the dignity of all people above narrow legalisms. Waving the flag of religious liberty is an attempt to turn the debate away from well-established facts that argue overwhelmingly for making reproductive health care available as widely as possible. There is little dispute that women who can afford to avail themselves of good reproductive health care receive more education, earn a better living, enjoy better health and form more stable intimate relationships than women who cannot. It is abundantly clear that children born to mothers who are able to space their pregnancies are more likely to be healthy at birth, and less likely to experience developmental difficulties associated with low birth weight. The bad theology behind opposing the contraception mandate

A GNT creation ©2007–2014