Thursday, April 20, 2006

Sidenotes:

These are busy times during which I haven't the time to formulate the well thought out continuation of our conversation that I would like to. That being said, I will throw a bone out there to chew on. I am doing an independent study on Postmodernism and Christian Ethics. I have read much Derrida, Foucault, and Grenz of late and thus have had a chance to ponder some of the proposals they make about epistemology and ethics and such. I think that I can even tie this in to our discussion. We shall see.

I am currently reading Stanley Grenz’s A Primer on Postmodernism and I came upon an explanation that he gave of Michel Foucault’s views on knowledge and interpretation. He said, “Michel Foucault adds a moral twist to Derrida’s call. Foucault asserts that every interpretation of reality is an assertion of power. Because knowledge is always the result of the use of power, to name something is to exercise power and hence to do violence to what is named…. Foucault claims that every assertion of knowledge is an act of power.” (pg. 6) I want to disagree with Foucault here. I believe that although many certainly do use interpretations of experiences as a mechanism of manipulation at times, I also believe that many use those same interpretations, or observations of reality, as an invitation to another. Is that not ultimately what a statement of knowledge is; an invitation to share in the same experience, the same reality? When I name something, I am inviting others to share in that name. When I suggest a description of what some event looks like, I am inviting someone else to agree or disagree with me. I don’t believe that assertions of knowledge are inherently acts of power. I think more than anything they are calls for communication and reconciliation. Can these statements be powerful? You bet! But do they hold another completely captive to their assumptions? No. If they did, then all of God’s original assertions of knowledge to Adam would have been followed and we would not be in the predicament we are in. Rather, God’s assertion of truth to Adam was an invitation to share in the goodness that is present in fellowship with Him. Do I do a flower violence by calling it beautiful? Did God do violence to man by creating him and naming him? Names are invitations to interact, a starting place to discover more. Making a rule does not inherently do violence to another; it spurs the other on to discover why the rule was made.

Taste and see that the Lord is good!

Our statement of belief is an invitation to the lost man, to discover the sweet Lord that we have as our Savior.

I am not attempting to control you by discussing this matter, just trying to invite you to see what I have seen, to think what I have thought. Maybe, in our discussion, the Holy Spirit will help us see rightly; and help us communicate rightly about what we see.

Let me know what you think. Is this just the ramblings of a postmodernly fried brain?

More Interrelation to Come....

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think it is the ramblings of a postmodernly fried brain. I don't even know why you are discussing such a thing. I love you any way. May God bless you.

W. Yadusky said...

My brain is fried well done, like eggs at the waffle house.

J. Truett Glen said...

There is a great drop in blog activity world wide. It must be crunch time.

Malcolm said...

I think crunch time is right. With papers, finals and a child due there is not much time for blogs!

Anonymous said...

I believe that there is untapped power in God's word.(Heb.4:12)God tells us that it will not return unto Him void. It will accomplish His purpose.God's word is active and powerful and it cuts deep.When or wherever it is spoken it effects
God's will.So, if my total vocabulary originates in God's word,I can expect it to be powerful.

J. Truett Glen said...

Great point dad. I'm right there with you. But, do you think that the correct "words" can be spoken without the power that should be present because of the way that the person says them or because the Holy Spirit is not living within the person saying them? I.e., "We prophesied in your name," but "I never knew you." And "Let your speach be always with grace... so you might know how to answer every man." Those scriptures seam to bring some contengency to the power that should be present in communicating the gospel. But I'm just throwing that out there. Don't have a well thought out answer on it.

Anonymous said...

Those scriptures do not say that the word of God didn't carry power to accomplish what it said it would. Jesus was saying that because they didn't know Him they weren't in the kingdom of God. His point was that a person must be born again.

Anonymous said...

Once, when a stubborn disputer seemed unconvinced, Abraham Lincoln said, "Well, let’s see, how many legs has a cow?"
"Four, of course," came the reply disgustedly.
"That’s right," agreed Lincoln. "Now suppose you call the cow’s tail a leg; how many legs would the cow have?"
"Why, five, of course," was the confident reply.
"Now, that’s where you’re wrong," said Lincoln. "Calling a cow’s tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg."

W. Yadusky said...

unless we recategorize all things that are tails into the group of all things that are legs.

But I think we make fun of doing that, usually. That's why the joke is funny.

ha ha hah

J. Truett Glen said...

So, are the words that proceed from our mouths, concerning the gospel, inherently powerful? Does it matter who's mouth they come from and the state of the person from whom they come? Are His words going forth from Him by virtue of our verbalization of them? Something to think about.