[εις επαινον δοξης αυτου] New comment on Ideas Have Consequences, citation #1.
Matthew LaPine has left a new comment on your post "Ideas Have Consequences, citation #1":
Jesse, let me see if I can VERY briefly illustrate where we are similar and where we are different. The way you are defining culture really is an outworking of core values. This definition isn't really how the average person uses the word. We would both agree that Christianity has a "metaphysical dream" (if you will) which the church ought to embody. So in a real sense, using "culture" they way you do, the church ought to have a unique, Christian culture. But in the sense that I am using the word, (very roughly speaking, the ways and manners which people do things and express themselves), each people groups is going to be distinct. The problem as I see it is that people differ both in skill and in expression. You fail to realize two groups of people may express the same "metaphysical dream" in vastly different ways. Someone was telling a story about how Africans dance down the isle when carrying the offering plates. I would look like a fool doing that. You confuse ones values with one's culture. Your definition of culture is fundamentally flawed because religion is not so broadly defined as you make it. Not only this but biblical religion exists in the metaphysical and takes various expressions in the physical. You have no categories for dealing with difference other than to say it's bad. The problem is not in promoting excellence but rather in requiring it for spirituality. I would love to talk literature with you all day, but when you make fine culture the test of genuine spirituality you've missed it. I am concerned about the path down which this idealistic philosophy leads. I would urge you to seriously consider its flaws.
It's late and I've had a long day, so sorry if some of this doesn't make any sense.
Posted by Matthew LaPine to εις επαινον δοξης αυτου at 9:51 PM
Jesse, let me see if I can VERY briefly illustrate where we are similar and where we are different. The way you are defining culture really is an outworking of core values. This definition isn't really how the average person uses the word. We would both agree that Christianity has a "metaphysical dream" (if you will) which the church ought to embody. So in a real sense, using "culture" they way you do, the church ought to have a unique, Christian culture. But in the sense that I am using the word, (very roughly speaking, the ways and manners which people do things and express themselves), each people groups is going to be distinct. The problem as I see it is that people differ both in skill and in expression. You fail to realize two groups of people may express the same "metaphysical dream" in vastly different ways. Someone was telling a story about how Africans dance down the isle when carrying the offering plates. I would look like a fool doing that. You confuse ones values with one's culture. Your definition of culture is fundamentally flawed because religion is not so broadly defined as you make it. Not only this but biblical religion exists in the metaphysical and takes various expressions in the physical. You have no categories for dealing with difference other than to say it's bad. The problem is not in promoting excellence but rather in requiring it for spirituality. I would love to talk literature with you all day, but when you make fine culture the test of genuine spirituality you've missed it. I am concerned about the path down which this idealistic philosophy leads. I would urge you to seriously consider its flaws.
It's late and I've had a long day, so sorry if some of this doesn't make any sense.
Posted by Matthew LaPine to εις επαινον δοξης αυτου at 9:51 PM
posted by Matthew LaPine at
9:51 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home