Posted by: gcarkner | January 29, 2015

Jesus is an Affirmative Statement of Human Existence

Jesus is the Yes and Amen to it All

Screen Shot 2015-01-13 at 10.22.07 AM

Kari Jobe Forever https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huFra1mnIVE

His divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires. For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; and to godliness, mutual affection; and to mutual affection, love. For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from becoming ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. (II Peter 1: 3-8)

In II Corinthians 1, the Apostle Paul writes that Jesus is the Yes and the Amen to it all. Here are some reflections on what this might mean. It is a statement on the multi-dimensionality of the one that billions follow today.

  • Colossians 1: 15-20 speaks of Jesus as the source and “glue” of creation and the purpose or end (telos) of creation, both the alpha and omega. He is more than 13.8 billion light years of time. He is above all things in creation and at the same time the ground of creation (the very ground of being itself), without which nothing would exist, without which this very text would be meaningless. All the fullness of God dwells in him (he is God with us–Emmanuel). He is God incarnate (fully God and fully man as per the Athanasian view); in him, God’s eternity connects with creation’s temporality. It is through Christ that all things are reconciled to God—providing the source and basis of healing relationships, both divine and human, the prince (champion) of peace. He is the cornerstone or foundation of the church, through which he is most visible and present to the world by means of the Holy Spirit.
  • He is the fulfillment of all the promises made to the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Israel, etc.) and the prophetic utterances and longings of the Old Testament, the Jewish Messiah, fulfilling the promise of redemption, renewal, justice and reform. He is the mysterious Son of Man spoken about in ancient Hebrew discourse. Jesus is prophet, priest and king. His is the final priestly sacrifice for the sins of mankind.He is also a poet, firing the imagination with his life-giving, inspiring teaching, causing us to rethink our identity and purpose, our vices and virtues. His represents both a unique and universal story, real story, an anchor for a powerful human narrative (its very architecture). He calls humanity to a new level of existence, a journey upward, calling us to a new level of responsibility for the Other, for personal choices and values and for creation.

Read More…

Posted by: gcarkner | January 29, 2015

Building Bridges…5

Dialogue About Jesus of Nazareth

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 1.10.37 AM

Few people doubt any more that Jesus actually existed historically (N.T. Wright among many of the greatest world scholars on the ancient world). Most people also agree that he was indeed a great moral teacher and miracle worker. Religious and political leaders throughout the world, including many of the great opponents of Christianity, hail the moral superiority of his life. Mohandas Gandhi the Indian reformer aspired to the ideals of the teaching in the Sermon on the Mount, a monument of justice combined with mercy, a trajectory of peace and nonviolence. The philosopher John Stuart Mill thought Jesus a genius and probably the greatest moral reformer who ever existed. Even Napoleon Bonaparte considered him a superior leader (although these two men were very different in character and ambition). Islam heralds him as a prophet. American civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. saw Jesus as someone who could end segregation and bring equality of opportunity between blacks and whites. He could produce the beloved community from all nations and tribes of the world. Bishop Desmond Tutu was assured that Jesus teaching could end the injustice of Apartheid in South Africa and bring reconciliation and healing to a nation torn apart.

There exist today in the minds of people many different versions of Jesus. Cultural interpretation is a key factor in this dialogue. Few would dispute that Jesus is a historical figure, that he is public truth. He is a major culture driver all around the world; his life has had huge impact. But so often, it depends on which version makes a person or group comfortable, which form of Jesus resonates with the cause. Which version do we want to believe? There is the blond-haired, blued-eyed Jesus that Malcolm X despised; to him, this Jesus is a white racist. Others prefer the revolutionary Jesus who looks more like Che Guavera of Liberation Theology, a freedom fighter  keen to overthrow an oppressive government. There is the Jesus who justifies the wealth and hoarding of the privileged classes. Yet others want a Jesus who fits the children’s story book genre: gentle, sweet and loving. Many Global North skeptics, agnostics and atheists are happy with a good moral teacher, a Jesus who is safe and innocuous; this group usually has little concern for the actual content of what he taught (that might clash with their values) or who he actually claimed to be. Let’s not forget the feel good Jesus of the Moral Therapeutic Deism crowd (Christian Smith) who is my Facebook friend, there to make me feel alright, to bless all my desires and gaols and to give me just what I want.  Or worse, there is the Jesus of the health and wealth gospel who will make me rich, if I play my cards right. There seems to be a different Jesus of the political right and left? He is depicted in a variety of motifs in films and plays: Jesus of Montreal, Godspell, Jesus Christ Superstar, The Passion, The Gospel of John. Read More…

Posted by: gcarkner | January 28, 2015

Building Bridges…4

Dialogue Through Language of  the Moral Good

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 1.10.37 AM

How can we talk about morality these days in a civil, rational manner? Opinions can be strong and emotions can be close to the surface. Discussions can be quite heated and many fear entering the fray. Charles Taylor offers a way to recover an ancient but lost language for today in his important contribution Sources of the Self (1989), discovered in the research of my Ph.D. thesis on the brokenness of the self and the crisis of identity in late modernity. His challenge in a day of innovation, radical self-construction or self-invention, is to ask what are the goods that you and I are relating to, and in what community and what historical context? This offers some balance to the current rhetoric of radical freedom—a rhetoric which is often bereft of the good. See Taylor’s template to analyze one’s self-construction (from Malaise of Modernity) below:

 

Taylor’s Moral Self-Construction Diagnostics

Category A (Creativity)

(i) Creation and construction (as well as discovery) of the self.

(ii) Pursuit of originality in one’s self-crafting.

(iii) Opposition to the rules of society and even potentially to what one recognizes as morality, or the moral order.

Category B (Social and Moral Accountability)

(i) Openness to horizons of significance prevents one’s self-creation from losing the background that can save it from insignificance and trivialization (self-destruction of meaning).

(ii) Self-definition needs to be developed in dialogue with significant Others, that is, fellow moral interlocutors within a community and a narrative. (Taylor, 1991, pp. 65, 66)

Tension exists between the quest for freedom and creativity and the quest for the good, as most people feel the need to pursue freedom, first and foremost. Thereby people tend to focus on Category A to the exclusion of Category B. Individual autonomous choice is a high priority for late moderns. The movie: Wall Street: money never sleeps kicks into a great discussion about such values. Taylor believes that there is great potential in recovery of the ancient language of the good for today’s moral culture, and in the reassessment of morality within a communal context. In many ways, radical individualism has run into a wall and led to a number of extremes. Poststructuralist philosophers of freedom are also know as philosophers of the extreme. There is maturity and self-undertanding to be achieved through this discourse. He does in the end raise the tough question: “Does the best life involve us seeking or acknowledging or serving a good which is beyond (independent of) mere human flourishing? This also has serious implications for basic happiness or well-being. In this pursuit, Taylor suggests the need for a recovery of the thickness of language:

Our language has lost, and needs to have restored, its constitutive power. This means that we can deal instrumentally with realities around us but their deeper meaning (background in which they exist) the higher reality which finds expression in them, is ignored and invisible. Our language has lost the power to Name things in their embedding, their deeper and higher reality. The current incapacity of language is a crucial factor in our incapacity of seeing and being; our vision and our lives are reduced and flattened.

 A Fruitful Angle on Moral Dialogue

  1. Try to discover the goods (values, human qualities, virtues, ideals) in your friend or interlocutor (dialogue partner). What are their instincts with respect to the good? Are they embracing or running from the good? What good or goods shape them and their outlook?
  1. Get to know them well enough to understand what is their ‘hypergood’ (dominant and controlling good)—something in their ‘heart of hearts’ or core motivation. This is key to connecting with them at the deepest spiritual level, finding that common ground to talk about, breaking through suspicion and building trust.
  1. Discern what they consider the sources of this good (invented, self, nature, God, fantasy/mythology). Where do they look for inspiration of for an example to follow? Where do they find their metaphor for living? This is the motivation question, the constitutive good. Another way of putting it is their moral driver. Where is their community? Their favourite songs, hangouts or movie offer a clue.
  1. Affirm what you can in all of this, and begin your dialogue on this positive common platform: it might be the value of respect for others, concern for the biosphere, protection of the poor, homeless or exploited, social justice, love of children, concern about global warming. You will also find much that you disagree with, but your common cause is what they consider the good. Spend a good amount of time talking about this and understanding it. The common ground creates the arc for significant dialogue and mutual growth.
  1. Dialogue on sources of the good: Respectfully reveal to them some of your common and also divergent commitments. If you are a Christian, share something of how God’s grace and goodness has transformed you and share the joy you experience when mediating this goodness to others. Share some of the stories you have heard, or been a part of, where the good is motivated by God. Discuss the idea of a gift and how it does not fit normal economic exchange.
  1. In love, challenge the person that maybe they have left out (or buried) some of the most important goods in life, things that could animate their existence, give them hope and deep meaning. The gaps in a person’s moral worldview are telling. Taylor insists that we must see the empowerment of self and identity in recovering the language of the good.

We all attempt to construct and make sense of the world. But ultimately, it is God’s infinite goodness that is the measure of all human attempts, human constructions of the good. This is a major gift to our humanity, our human flourishing, our civilization. His glorious goodness (Psalm 107) is our final or ultimate aspiration or marker; it is a powerful form of inspiration. This should keep us humble in our approach; human standards are always somewhat insecure, transient, subject to will to power, tribalism, self-interest and conflicts of interpretation. D. Stephen Long in his brilliant book, The Goodness of God, writes:

The task of Christian ethics is to explain the church’s relationship to other social formations as they develop, die, and mutate into different forms. It will do this by recognizing God’s goodness as that against which all things are measured (including the church). This task will remain as long as those other formations exist. It is a task where our primary vocation is to bear witness to God’s goodness. Such a goodness is not natural to us, although God seeks to share it with us. It is a gift, the gift of Jesus Christ. He is God’s goodness, for God’s goodness is God’s own self.

See also the recent academic book by from Professor R. Scott Smith from Biola University: In Search of Moral Knowledge: overcoming the fact-value dichotomy. (IVP Academic, 2014); and the profound statement by Jim Wallis, The (Un)Common Good: how the gospel brings hope to a world divided. (Brazos, 2014); and the dialogue on The Qualities of the Will within this blog.

~Gord Carkner

 p.s. Dr. Christian Smith, noted sociologist from Notre Dame University, sees that American university students fit generally into a more or less relativistic frame of ethics. They ought to be open to the above discussion of the good amidst a culture of hyperpluralism.

The individual relativist (sometimes called a soft relativist) often makes up morality as life unfolds, sometimes choosing from different religious and philosophical traditions; it is taken to be a matter for self-construction. There is nothing transcendent, objective or systematic about values; moral convictions belong strictly to an individual’s free and personal choice. Tolerance then becomes a necessary sanction of an individual’s views or opinions, so we can loosely get along within a pluralistic values society. It promotes the outlook that there are no absolutes, no right or wrong, no transcendent source of the good, only individual or social constructions, personal values within a marketplace of possible options. Christian Smith (Souls in Transition) articulates the mood this way in his award-winning study on 18-23 year olds. He notes the following characteristics in this generation:

  • soft ontological antirealists
  • epistemological skeptics (question everything)
  • perspectivalists (various ways to see this; mine is only one among many alternatives)
  • in subjective isolation (following my own unique path)
  • constructivists: building my self and my morality from the ground up (often rejecting the tradition of my parents)
  • moral intuitionists (how I feel about a situation or decision is the most important factor)

 

Posted by: gcarkner | January 27, 2015

Building Bridges…3

Dialogue Concerning One’s Worldview

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 1.10.37 AM

 

The ability to think, dialogue and examine arguments and evidence within the context of worldview gives a tremendous edge, latitude and creativity to any discussion, academic or personal. It liberates and opens up the field of discussion rather than getting it trapped in a corner or dead end. What’s the value of an intellectual tug-of-war between your opinion and mine? Contextualizing a friend’s various convictions can really help focus your discussion, and move it in a fruitful direction of mutual understanding. It is key that we be patient and listen to each other. We begin from a platform of agape: listen, show respect, try to understand, take responsibly for good discussion. Ask some important, provocative or tough questions as well. Analysis can lead to curiosity and pushing out the envelope of the typical campus dialogue.

Three Major Worldview Categories

Naturalism  Matter alone exists; no God exists; the belief in spiritual entities is superstition or myth, to be replaced by scientific knowledge. Examples of this ideology/religious view is Western secular humanism, Marxism, various forms of materialism. Science is the key source of knowledge. It can lead to Nihilism.

Pantheism  Spirit exists; all is God and God is all; Atman is Brahman (the individual soul longs to be united with the world soul); the material world is maya or illusion). Such views are now global but tend to emerge from India, China and Southeast Asia (e.g. Hinduism, Buddhism) 

Theism   Matter and spirit  co-exist; God is transcendent Creator of all that exists: God is separate from the world, but regularly engages with it; God communicates to the world and his supreme goodness grounds human morality. Theism includes Judaism, Christianity and Islam

While these descriptions are radical oversimplifications, they provide a helpful starting point for dialogue and growth in understanding other views. Naturalism believes the least about the world–most minimalist and mechanistic; Christian Theism believes in the most complexity to reality. See James Sire, The Universe Next Door: a worldview catalogue; Arthur Holmes, Contours of a Christian Worldview; Walsh & Keesmaat, Colossians Remixed. In our world, a whole gamut of positions, from the most militant atheism to the most orthodox traditional theisms are represented and defended somewhere in our society. We often move in and out of various worldviews carried by different groups and institutions all the time in the pluralistic West. Learning worldview language is an essential coping skill and can promote peace and mutual respect.

Dr. Dan Osmond, University of Toronto, School of Medicine: “Whether we realize it or not, all university people have some sort of a view according to which they select, organize and interpret knowledge. Similarly, their behaviour is governed by a moral code [or style] of their choosing. Such views and codes differ widely in their validity and content as well as the quality of the behaviour that they engender.”

 Charles Taylor, Professor Emeritus Philosophy at McGill University (paraphrased): A worldview is a picture that holds us captive; it involves our overall take on human life and its cosmic surroundings. It is the background to our thinking, within whose terms it is carried on, but which is often largely unformulated, and to which we can frequently imagine no alternative. It includes aspects or features of the way experience and thought are shaped and cohere. It is something invisible which people inhabit and it gives shape to what they experience, feel, opine, and see. It is like a set of philosophical glasses. Depending on what worldview has taken us captive, we can either see the transcendent as a threat, a dangerous temptation, a distraction, or as an obstacle to our greatest good. Or we can read it as answering to our deepest craving, need, fulfillment of the good life.

 

Tests for a Good Worldview

a. Coherence: justified by internal coherence and coherence with one’s other knowledge and beliefs.

b. Empirical Openness: it is a conviction which maintains openness to new information rather than being based on a limited data base. It is self-critical and open to thoughtful questions from outside.

c. Personal Relevance: must be livable and fruitful sociologically, i.e. to promote the personal and common good.

d. Explains the Existence of other Worldviews: understands them and how they relate to one’s convictions rather than just being rejected out of hand as a system of thought without any truth-value. Other views are respected and not superficially written off or explained away. Each one has some insights into human nature or the world at large.

Important Note: Key books to assist in dialogue: E.F. Schumacher, A Guide for the Perplexed. (reductionism) James Sire, Why Believe Anything at All? (epistemology); John Stackhouse Jr., Need to Know (epistemology); the literature of Dostoyevski, such as The Brothers Karamozov as a point of entry to one’s worldview; Walker Percy (Lost in the Cosmos); Viktor Frankl (Man’s Search for Meaning); or Charles Taylor, (The Malaise of Modernity). Glenn Tinder The Political Meaning of Christianity. The movies Eat, Pray, Love and  The Life of Pi are worldview journeys which reached cult status for awhile.

     Some Questions to Explore a Person’s Worldview

 Could you identify, diagram and define for me the framework of your present philosophical stance? What are your working assumptions? Who is your favourite thinker? Where do you position or locate yourself in the current plural world of convictions? What resonates with you? What influences have shaped this conviction?

Questions regarding its coherence, unity or consistency as a view of reality as per above.

Is your view open to the data of other people’s experience or do you have your mind made up? Do you maintain a closed or open stance? Agnostics are generally more open and less dogmatic than atheists.

Look for the person’s interpretive paradigm, the intellectual grid through which they sift ideas and issues (philosophical glasses). E.g. Marxism, feminism, scientific materialism, environmentalism, Nihilism, New Age, or some form of liberation. This reveals what Charles Taylor calls the hypergood or dominant value. It is vital for you to understand this core dominating and controlling good in colleagues. When you discover this, handle it with appropriate care.

Ask the questions of the livability and relevance of their view: use the Pragmatic Life Test. How does it improve human life or solve human problems, promote more justice or hope, feed the poor, heal racial relations, help with global warming? Does it have power to promote the common good? How far can the assumptions be taken without promoting evil or destructive consequences?

Are you happy with your present views or are you shopping around for something new, more substantial or a better fit? People have emotions around their cherished beliefs, so tread carefully.

Is your worldview naive or deeply examined? (e.g. Is Richard Dawkins your expert source on religion?)

On what grounds have you ruled out the possibility of the supernatural or transcendent? Do you sense any conflict between Naturalism and science as such? (Alvin Plantinga)

Where do you see yourself moving philosophically at the moment? Are you sensing some doubts about your worldview?

One might even explore the need for a whole new human narrative (Jeremy Rifkin, The Empathic Civilization) beyond greed, violence, individualism, aggressive behaviour, biosphere devastation.

What is the explanatory power of your materialistic Naturalism?: David Bentley Hart The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss; Thomas Nagel, Mind and Cosmos; Alvin Plantinga, Where the Conflict Really Lies.

What gives your life hope, meaning, strength and direction? Does the cynicism of many people bother you?

  •  Spark Curoiosity
  • Build Relationship
  • Leverage of Language
  • Show Patience
  • Provocative Questions
  • Build a Connection–Common Good
  • Creativity of Approaches
  • Investigation
  • Intellectual Hospitality
  • Poetics to Help Fresh Thinking
  • Tell Your Story
  • Rebuild Plausibility Conditions
  • Tell the Jesus Story
  • Develop a Platform
Posted by: gcarkner | January 27, 2015

Building Bridges…2

Robust Evidence and Argument that Have Currency Today

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 1.10.37 AM

 

There is a strong heritage of evidence and good argument, a multivalent discourse, to establish the credibility and viability of the Christian faith. It is a several stranded cord which represents centuries of work, research, and debate by scholars. There is a strong rational and empirical ground or space to discuss all the parameters of the Christian convictions and spiritual journey. It offers a rich array of evidence for the seeker and the interested skeptic or agnostic.

  1. Meaningful Religious Experience: This refers to the power of individual stories with God, divine encounters and personal transformation. Where has God met me in my human situation and pain? How has my faith made an impact on my life? Stories of other saints who incarnate love or radical pursuit of God (Mother Teresa, Jean Vanier, Francis of Assissi, Martin Luther). David Adams Richards a famous Canadian novelist has such evidence: God Is: my search for faith in a secular world. (bestseller). Two billion plus believers is quite a number to deceive from all walks of life, all cultures, all careers, and all levels of education and wealth.
  1. Philosophical Credibility Tests These include criteria of coherence, consistency, unity, comprehensiveness (more important in the early modern outlook or those oriented to Anglo-American philosophy and the laws of logic). What is the explanatory range and cogency of  the Christian worldview? How much of reality can it explain? Is it compatible or does it conflict with science and how so?  Natural theology uses the wonders of nature to point to a creative mind, a cosmic artist; human consciousness and moral bent to point to a cosmic mind or a moral ground of the good (e.g. Robert J. Spitzer, New Proofs for the Existence of God: contributions of contemporary physics and philosophy; Faith and Reason: Three Views. edited by Steve Wilkins; David Bentley Hart, The Experience of God: being consciousness. bliss). Critical realism is a key term; it encourages critical thinking and an open mind.
  1. Historical Evidence or Verification Who was Jesus? Can we believe in his resurrection? What about the scholarship behind the Scriptural documents? What evidence do we have from archaeology of the Ancient Near East? (See Rodney Stark, One True God: Historical Consequences of Monotheism. He is a major contributor in research on Christianity’s social impact. See also David Bentley Hart Atheist Delusions: the Christian revolution and its fashionable enemies.) See also the new Christianity on Trial: a lawyer examines the Christian faith by W. Mark Lanier (IVP 2014). This tends towards the empirical test or the integrity of the Christian story.
  1. Practical/Pragmatic Test or Livability We might say to our friend, “That’s a clever idea of reality that makes you God, but can you live it out responsibly without hurting a lot of people?” It is one thing to think nihilistically, another to live it to its bitter end. Reality bites back: this is important for university students who love those all-night residence discussions. One can invent sophisticated views of the universe, but can we build any long-term relationship upon it? You may like the idea of a world without God and without morality, but you may also be the first to cry injustice if you or your family are violated in some way. One cannot have the proverbial cake and eat it as well.
  1. Special Revelation This includes the prophetic and apostolic records in Old and New Testaments. This is a really astounding set of records with millions of hours of top scholarship behind it. Bishop Lesslie Newbigin in Gospel in a Pluralistic Society says we need to inhabit or indwell the biblical story, be embedded and nourished by it thoroughly. Natural revelation in creation is not enough; otherwise Christian ethics would be full of violence and cannibalism, tooth and claw; we need natural and special revelation in balance (Alister McGrath, A Fine-tuned Universe: the quest for God in science and theology) What is the Creator like and what does he have for us, expect of us? What is the storyline, the human narrative of the Bible? Is there meaning beyond mere survival, beyond mere human flourishing? The human narrative is powerfully recast in the Bible; it suggests that we are hard-wired for community and benevolence.
  1. Love, Compassion & Community People need to witness the human good incarnated in Christian believers, a good which is sourced in the infinite goodness of God. Incarnational humanism can be impressive: (Jens Zimmerman, Incarantional Humanism; D. Stephen Long, The Goodness of God)). One’s apologetic has to include words and argument, but also more than words–integrity, hope, compassion. James Davison Hunter in To Change the World articulates a very powerful idea of faithful presence, a commitment to shalom, the well-being or human flourishing of others. Jim Wallis has a new book along this line which includes compassion and the transformation of society in the gospel of Jesus: The (Un)Common Good.People need both reasons of the heart and reasons of the mind: credibility and relevance.” writes scientist and theologian Blaise Pascal.

Our Experience Establishes this Conviction: Intellectual Credibility/Cogency + Personal Relevance + Demonstrable Moral Integrity –> promotes Serious Plausibility and Curiosity in the Mind of the Seeker. Click on the Apologetics Resources button on this Blog to get a taste of some excellent writing in this area and answers to your questions.

This multifaceted approach builds bridges and can rebuild the plausibility conditions for Christian faith in our late modern culture, in order to help people escape from Nihilism (a failure of culture). This is a trajectory of intrigue, attraction and engagement and hopefully down the road a life of faithful discipleship, meaning and joy. Willingness to deal with doubts and skepticism is vital. We are all some admixture or  combination of faith and doubt; it is a question of how we sort through both our faith and our doubt as a journey to maturity: See Philip Yancey, Reaching for the Invisible God. At the end of the day, we all have to make sense of our world and our experience. We can ill afford to keep our head in the sand and hope the issues will disappear.

~Gord Carkner

Posted by: gcarkner | January 27, 2015

Building Bridges to Faith

Six Pillars for a Growing Edge in Apologetic Dialogue

Screen Shot 2015-01-27 at 1.10.37 AM

What are the rules of engagement in dialogue? We assume that you desire to give a calm and reasoned answer for the vision of promise, hope, faith and love within you, the narrative vision that engages you, that motivates you and makes sense of your world. We assume that you are keen and willing to do some fresh work, reading and thinking. You sense the need for the Christian voice on campus and you are willing to step up to the plate, to become part of the answer. You are not going to assume that no one is interested in faith on campus. And you want to know the effective tools that are available to equip your personal dialogue with friends. Here are some parameters for discussion:

Dr. Gordon Carkner will offer a seminar on a Template for Dialogue, a strategic toolkit for engaging one’s friends and deepening one’s faith at Missionsfest Vancouver on Friday, January 30, 2015 @ 3:00 p.m. in Room 3 at Vancouver Conventions Centre. 

  1. Worldview Discernment: mapping the pluralistic landscape of the various spiritual journeys we are likely to encounter in today’s society. Posture: You refuse to be overwhelmed by difference and diversity of convictions. The landscape of campus is a global village and you want to learn and listen much.

 

  1. Investigative Journalism: employing fruitful human questions one can use to make deeper connections and find points of spiritual contact on which to build. Posture: You are a detective or reporter with a heart. You have a need to know what people believe about important questions.

 

  1. Establish Common Ground: finding the best in people as a point of non-defensive and non-offensive conversational entry. What are the assumptions we can make from our common aspirations, our creaturehood and our will to the common good and human flourishing? If Jeremy Rifkin is right, i.e. that we are becoming a more empathic civilization, there is great hope for sharing insights on meaning. We can help each other solve problems and figure out life. Posture: With a level playing field, you will have a just discussion, an exciting discovery.

 

  1. Reckoning with Cultural Barriers to Faith: understanding and mobilizing idolatries, roadblocks, closed world systems, loss of transcendence as leverage in conversation. Every posture known to university students and faculty is vulnerable under critical scrutiny, whether the hegemony is scientific materialism, nihilistic skepticism, or a hardened religious fundamentalism perspective. This involves mapping the modern and postmodern perception worlds (social imaginaries) that people inhabit. There are also moral ideologies that prevent people from hearing what you are saying; one’s moral and intellectual bent are more interconnected than many people often realize. Dialogue invites people to enter an open field of discussion, rather than fighting like a trapped fox, who has been cornered by a group of friends in a residence bull session.

 

  1. Communicative Potential of the Poetic/Prophetic Edge: especially in the aesthetic oriented Postmodern/Late Modern Condition. Here we explore the language of epiphany, agape love and transcendence. Scientific rationality does not work in this arena. Modernism and scientism have been called into question and found wanting. Hermeneutics is more the game and the alternative way of seeing the world. We are on the Continental Philosophy frontier.

 

  1. Biblical Narrative and the Jesus Story: always the fresh opportunity to come to understand Jesus in context of issues, aspirations and questions of one’s interlocutor. Celebrating a robust Jesus story and kingdom teaching for today’s complex world. How indeed is Jesus the Yes and Amen to it all? What is the God of Jesus of Nazareth like? There is a lot more to Jesus than many people think. The incarnation is up there with the most profound events in human history.

Working Proposal

We are suggesting a fusion between cultural research, apologetics and great story telling as a point of leverage for Christian communications and dialogue on campus. We see apologetics as a tool for finessing our approach to people, and a means to remove the violence, triumphalism and narcissism in some forms of presentation. We call this a confident, dialogical, pro-active stance; one needs to take the leadership in raising the right questions, and setting the agenda for meaningful moral, religious and inter-religious discussions. This includes picking up on the discussions and questions that come up every day in every sector of family life, school, work and media. It encourages us to employ our full intelligence, love, creativity. We employ our fullest imagination to say who we are and make the good news understandable and commendable, in order to resonate with today’s university community. We want to help make space for God in the lives of people and to help turn their love and passion towards their creator-redeemer, where we believe there is substantial hope.

 

Observation

 God has left his fingerprints all over creation, from the expanse of the cosmos to the depths and contours of the human heart. It is our task to pay attention, examine the evidence, pick up the trail and discover how to discern the clues. This spectacular universe and the complex nature of humans intimates the possibility of a further knowledge of God, builds in longing for deeper explanation (creatio et anthropos). It is possible to move beyond cynicism and Nihilism, to restore one’s sense of wonder and hunger for discovery. Where does the evidence lead us? What are the possibilities of this all-important investigation? Strategically, we want to discuss ways and means to improve access, correct the misconceptions, confront the stereotypes, and to heighten people’s curiosity and awareness of God’s art, his deep vested interest in each human being and his tremendous offer of  love—a phenomenal gift.

~Gord Carkner

  •  Spark Curoiosity
  • Build Relationship
  • Leverage of Language
  • Show Patience
  • Provocative Questions
  • Build a Connection–Common Good
  • Creativity of Approaches
  • Investigation
  • Intellectual Hospitality
  • Poetics to Help Fresh Thinking
  • Tell Your Story
  • Rebuild Plausibility Conditions
  • Tell the Jesus Story
  • Develop a Platform
  • Answer Tough Questions

Next Big Thing

Apologetics Canada is running a conference this March 6-7, 2015 in Abbotsford and Vancouver, and now also in Barrie, Ontario. http://www.apologeticscanada.com/conference-2015/

Screen Shot 2015-01-13 at 10.22.07 AM

Posted by: gcarkner | January 18, 2015

Medicine and Sustainability, January 21 UBC

Craig Mitton

Screen Shot 2014-09-08 at 10.19.32 AM

Associate Professor School of Population and Public Health

UBC Faculty of Medicine 

Senior Scientist at the Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation

The Challenges of Sustaining Excellence in Canadian Health Care

Wednesday, January 21 at 4:00 p.m.

Woodward (IRC) Room 1

 

Abstract

In this presentation Dr. Craig Mitton will begin by describing the structure of the Canadian health care system and outline where Canada sits globally on several international outcome measures. In assessing the economic dimensions of the system, Craig will review two common myths related to aging and new technologies and will show that more resources for health care are not the answer. He will then put forward two key challenges, one related to the public and one related to physicians and finally he will offer a pragmatic solution to ensure excellence in Canadian health care that includes a number of immediate policy responses. The debate will be lively and the session will offer much time for interaction and audience participation.

GFCF Jan 21, 2015 Slides from Dr. Mitton’s Presentation    See ubcgfcf.com for the audio.

Biography

Dr. Craig Mitton is an internationally recognized leader in the field of health care priority setting. He is a Senior Scientist in the Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation and is both Division Head of Health Services and Policy and Director of the Master of Health Administration program within the School of Population and Public Health at UBC. Craig is the lead author on a book titled “The Priority Setting Toolkit: a guide to the use of economics in health care priority setting” and is the lead or co-author on over 100 peer reviewed journal articles. He has delivered over 150 presentations across many different countries and regularly runs short courses in health economics. He completed both his PhD and MSc at the University of Calgary and holds a BSc from UBC. Craig lives in Vancouver with his wife and two young daughters.

Posted by: gcarkner | January 5, 2015

A Prayer for a New Year

O God, you know our aspirations, our energy, our hopes, resolutions and dreams for this coming year;

You know also our fears, angst and hesitations, our personal burdens and hurt, our complexities, even our self-doubt;

You are the great God of new beginnings, the Alpha and Omega of our existence, the reason and source of all things;

Help us to keep the journey ahead in perspective of your narrative, your kingdom values and your will for us;

Give us wisdom to discern which voices to attend to, and which to ignore, what to question and what to affirm;

Help us dig deep below the propaganda and find the truth, to press beyond cynicism to hope;

Deepen our trust in you and your abundant grace, as we seek out your call on our lives and find our identity in you;

Help us to embrace your deep love, to reach out to others who need support or comfort, to sense your diverse community here at university;

May we know your presence as Trinity, Father of Creation, Infinite Love, Jesus Christ, Truth Incarnate, and Holy Spirit, Wisdom, Understanding and Empowerment;

May this be a year of wonder, joy, new relationships, full of discovery, adventure and surprises, of growing up into maturity in Christ.

Help us to send our roots down deep into the rich soil of your infinite goodness, to build our hope there, on that foundation.

Tuesday Prayer, 12:00 noon to 2:00 p.m., Regent College Prayer Room: Searching out the divine footprints…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPxEYmk_zqg&list=RDoab9giH2cG0&index=5  David Wesley, One Thing Remains

Screen Shot 2014-09-28 at 2.12.44 PM

Posted by: gcarkner | January 4, 2015

Winter Wonder Shots

Screen Shot 2015-01-04 at 6.40.50 PM

Screen Shot 2015-01-04 at 6.40.02 PM

Screen Shot 2015-01-04 at 6.39.36 PM

Screen Shot 2015-01-04 at 6.38.44 PM

Screen Shot 2015-01-04 at 6.37.52 PM

Screen Shot 2015-01-04 at 6.37.10 PM

Diamond Head Squamish

Posted by: gcarkner | January 1, 2015

2014 Highlights in Science and Morality

BBC Science News Highlights

1. We landed a spacecraft on a comet 67P. Bad luck on the final landing spot shaded from sunlight; her batteries died while solar panels languished in the dark. Very bad luck.

2. We discovered the world’s biggest and possibly most complete set of dinosaur bones in Argentina, a titanasour.

3. Loss of  a 44 year old white rhinoceros in the San Diego Zoo leaves only five left in the world, symbolic of the serious threat to species around the world and a horrific multi-billion dollar illegal trade in animal parts. Tens of thousands of rhinos, elephants, gorillas and tigers are egregiously killed each year by poachers.

4. The UN’s Climate Panel has rolled out parts two, three and four of its landmark assessment on global warming. 2014 is in the running for the hottest year yet globally. They highly recommend weaning ourselves off carbon (fossil) fuels to avoid planetary disaster. Will this be a key year to discuss climate change and the human future? One can only hope.

5. Scientists modified an E. coli to include two new synthetic DNA base pairs. Scientists also manufactured the first complete synthetic chromosome for yeast. Genetics continues to be a booming field along with neuroscience. Human brain mapping continues with gusto.

6. Iranian professor Mayan Mirzakhani was the first woman to win the prestigious math prize for her work in complex geometry.

7. This year’s Nobel Prize in Physics went to three scientists  for the invention of blue light emitting diodes (LEDs); the Chemitry prize went to researchers who had used fluorescence  to improve the resolution of optical microscopes.

8. Human Genome: DNA from a thigh bone was sequenced from a 45,000 year old man found near a river bed in Siberia. You can receive your genome map for around $1000. That’s a wow development over the past decade.

Were there any breakthroughs in human morals and virtues or the common good for humanity in 2014? 

Perhaps the new film on Martin Luther King Jr. called Selma will offer some hope for homo sapiens sapiens.

Reading Jim Wallis’ book The (Un)Common Good inspired me in a deep way during the holidays, as did the gripping courage of Naomi Klein (This Changes Everything) to take on big picture political and economic issues as the back story to the discourse/debate on Global Warming.

Jeremy Rifkin gave an inspiring talk on YouTube to Google employees of a way to move towards and internet of everything. He held up the German example of moving 25% of their energy production to solar and wind power in a short time.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-iDUcETjvo

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2014 is to be awarded to Kailash Satyarthi and Malala Yousafzay for their struggle against the suppression of children and young people and for the right of all children to education. Children must go to school and not be financially exploited. In the poor countries of the world, 60% of the present population is under 25 years of age. It is a prerequisite for peaceful global development that the rights of children and young people be respected. In conflict-ridden areas in particular, the violation of children leads to the continuation of violence from generation to generation.

Barack Obama handed out insurance life jackets to millions of underprivileged Americans.

Pope Francis challenges the wealthy and plutocrats of the planet and reminds the world of what matters most: compassion and mercy.

Oxford scientists suggest that the lateral frontal pole of our brain helps us evaluate our decisions. Interesting. Not there in monkeys.

Naomi Klein, in This Changes Everything, shows that the science is only one part of the climate change debate. She is revealing a gaping hole in our ethics and a brokenness in our governance.

~Gord Carkner

http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2014/05/vancouver-time-lapse-video-top-lions-gate-bridge/  Views of Vancouver, B.C.

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

Categories