The Wright Stuff 0.5
My time is limited this morning for all the usual reasons. However, I just read the introduction to N.T. Wright's first volume of The Series; you know, The Series. The first book is called The New Testament and the People of God and entering it has been like reading Plato for the first time. Though the two writers have very different styles, agendas, approaches, cultures, everything, I realize I'm going into not just a book but a philosophical landscape, and a new one at that. My initial reaction is that Wright, whether I agree with him or not, is in fact a genius.
The man has an eye for detail, and I love it. Also, he's fairly postmodern (or whatever he will eventually style himself) with his continual attention to interpretive presuppositions, insistence on blending all viable approaches into an original synthesis, and his apparent unwilligness to accept easy answers. It would be nice if I had read Bultmann, Wrede, Tillich, etc., before Wright, for he covers, and quickly critiques or even dismisses, their perspectives very quickly (but then, this is just an introduction).
As far as I can tell, my own fetal theology has been something like the post-war movement's, something like Stendahl's (apparently famous) essay: the NT is authoritative for the faith because it was written by those close to God's major revelatory act in history. Wright has issues with this idea, providing, in his little intro, only one example from ancient history, Seutonius on Domitian, as an example of how proximity to an event does not guarantee even historical accuracy, let alone authority. Fair enough. According to BW3 anyway, there is no hard evidence of gnostic Christianity in the first century, but what if there was, what if gnostic Christianity developed alongside Paul's theology? I wouldn't toss in the orthodox towel. Far from it. I always go back, in my own head, to the Bruce Lee example: some of his followers understood him clearly (Dan Inosanto), others, who should have known what 'use no way as way' means, failed and continue to fail to do so.
One thing I'd toss out here, and it's something Wright doesn't mention (and truly, a 28 page introduction shows considerable restraint for a book, and series, of this magnitude) is that I also tend to feel (how's that for conviction) that the evangelists, and Paul, had some kind of revelatory experience, a direct insight from God, even if that insight got skewed upon reception and certainly was elaborated on in oral and written expansion. I have no doubt, though, an entire school of Biblical scholars has said just this and Wright will get to it soon enough.
All this said, the Intro alone is staggering for its breadth and, while it leaves scores of questions and offers very few answers, promises to introduce a project of dizzying scope. Dizzying. Wright comes at the end of two millennia of NT interpretation, and two centuries packed with new approaches which still hold influence. Into all this mess, into this vineyard, to use his appropriated Markan metaphor, Wright steps confidently, enthusiastically.
I'm looking forward to this book; it begins my true NT education as far as I'm concerned. My hope is that this leads me closer to God. This is not, for me, an academic project, but one which contains all the desperate energy of life. The need to Know and Be Known.
***
Steph and I joined a karate school about thirty minutes down the hill from our house. I so hope we can go regularly. The little school in our town, run by a sensei trained at the school we're now at, was a great addition to our little mountain community until the sensei got into serious trouble, fled the state, and then got into worse. His old teacher, the owner of our new school, is an intense Christian. By intense I mean he began 'witnessing' to us as soon as we walked in and asked him about the gym. He's Calvary Chapel all the way, and while his awareness of other groups may be a bit naive...when we told him we were Episcopalian he asked us, 'okay, is that father, son, and holy spirit, jesus the only way?'...it's hard not to respect his enthusiasm. He has the 'prayer of salvation' written on a white board as soon as you walk into the gym. I have to admit, as he went on and on, he was actually pissing me off, digging up old wounds with his terminology, but when he asked me about my own faith journey I told him the truth. Yes, I am a Christian and am even considering seminary.
So not only do we get karate, we get Jesus-karate, something I didn't know existed. All I want is to lose weight and get my cardio back. Those elliptical trainers at the gym are about as much fun as a hamster wheel. He also has a few rugged free weights (which work just as well as the shiny kind) so the plan is to quit our regular gym and just go here. We'll see. Karate would never be my first choice; I'll always consider myself an moved-away member of the jeet kune do family (who has forgotten most of his curriculum) but martial arts is martial arts. It's great for anger work, stress release, self-confidence, fitness, a sense of community. Here's to hoping the Jesus gym provides all this.
Love to all.
The man has an eye for detail, and I love it. Also, he's fairly postmodern (or whatever he will eventually style himself) with his continual attention to interpretive presuppositions, insistence on blending all viable approaches into an original synthesis, and his apparent unwilligness to accept easy answers. It would be nice if I had read Bultmann, Wrede, Tillich, etc., before Wright, for he covers, and quickly critiques or even dismisses, their perspectives very quickly (but then, this is just an introduction).
As far as I can tell, my own fetal theology has been something like the post-war movement's, something like Stendahl's (apparently famous) essay: the NT is authoritative for the faith because it was written by those close to God's major revelatory act in history. Wright has issues with this idea, providing, in his little intro, only one example from ancient history, Seutonius on Domitian, as an example of how proximity to an event does not guarantee even historical accuracy, let alone authority. Fair enough. According to BW3 anyway, there is no hard evidence of gnostic Christianity in the first century, but what if there was, what if gnostic Christianity developed alongside Paul's theology? I wouldn't toss in the orthodox towel. Far from it. I always go back, in my own head, to the Bruce Lee example: some of his followers understood him clearly (Dan Inosanto), others, who should have known what 'use no way as way' means, failed and continue to fail to do so.
One thing I'd toss out here, and it's something Wright doesn't mention (and truly, a 28 page introduction shows considerable restraint for a book, and series, of this magnitude) is that I also tend to feel (how's that for conviction) that the evangelists, and Paul, had some kind of revelatory experience, a direct insight from God, even if that insight got skewed upon reception and certainly was elaborated on in oral and written expansion. I have no doubt, though, an entire school of Biblical scholars has said just this and Wright will get to it soon enough.
All this said, the Intro alone is staggering for its breadth and, while it leaves scores of questions and offers very few answers, promises to introduce a project of dizzying scope. Dizzying. Wright comes at the end of two millennia of NT interpretation, and two centuries packed with new approaches which still hold influence. Into all this mess, into this vineyard, to use his appropriated Markan metaphor, Wright steps confidently, enthusiastically.
I'm looking forward to this book; it begins my true NT education as far as I'm concerned. My hope is that this leads me closer to God. This is not, for me, an academic project, but one which contains all the desperate energy of life. The need to Know and Be Known.
***
Steph and I joined a karate school about thirty minutes down the hill from our house. I so hope we can go regularly. The little school in our town, run by a sensei trained at the school we're now at, was a great addition to our little mountain community until the sensei got into serious trouble, fled the state, and then got into worse. His old teacher, the owner of our new school, is an intense Christian. By intense I mean he began 'witnessing' to us as soon as we walked in and asked him about the gym. He's Calvary Chapel all the way, and while his awareness of other groups may be a bit naive...when we told him we were Episcopalian he asked us, 'okay, is that father, son, and holy spirit, jesus the only way?'...it's hard not to respect his enthusiasm. He has the 'prayer of salvation' written on a white board as soon as you walk into the gym. I have to admit, as he went on and on, he was actually pissing me off, digging up old wounds with his terminology, but when he asked me about my own faith journey I told him the truth. Yes, I am a Christian and am even considering seminary.
So not only do we get karate, we get Jesus-karate, something I didn't know existed. All I want is to lose weight and get my cardio back. Those elliptical trainers at the gym are about as much fun as a hamster wheel. He also has a few rugged free weights (which work just as well as the shiny kind) so the plan is to quit our regular gym and just go here. We'll see. Karate would never be my first choice; I'll always consider myself an moved-away member of the jeet kune do family (who has forgotten most of his curriculum) but martial arts is martial arts. It's great for anger work, stress release, self-confidence, fitness, a sense of community. Here's to hoping the Jesus gym provides all this.
Love to all.
Comments
I studied Shaolin-Kempo, a melding of Chinese and Japanese martial arts techniques. But I haven't studied in about 9 months, for a few reasons:
1. I grew less and less comfortable with the level of accepted violence in that discipline. My ethos says that you use the least restrictive force necessary to neutralize the situation. But the Shaolin-Kempo ethos is a little less merciful. In the mind of many at my school, if someone attacks you then you are morally justified in whatever you do, so long as you don't kill them. Eye gouges are OK (sqeeze the grape, pluck the grape), crippling blows to the joints are OK, etc. I can see their perspective on that, but I just can't bring myself to visit that kind of harm on anyone, or to study with people who can justify it to themselves and teach it to others.
2. I hurt my knee. As I rehabbed my knee, it became clear to me that I need to do less kicking, and more grappling. Shaolin-Kempo is almost entirely about strikes, and many of them are stressful on the joints. Our master was constently trying to teach us more ergonomic ways of doing the strikes, but I evidently wasn't very good at that. I kept torque my knees, making my injury worse.
3. Most importantly, after I left ministry I didn't have the money to justify the monthly fee.
I think that after I go back to work I may look for an akido club or something, to try a new discipline. But, like you, I'm philosophically down with Jeet Kune Do. I also, as a philosophy major, love this Bruce Lee anecdote.
Bruce Lee was once asked what he was planning to do with his philosophy degree, to which he replied:
"Think deep thoughts about being unemployed."
Mike
It is so good to 'hear' from you guys!
Mike,
again, I loved hanging out in so. cal. and wish we could do it more. You have the heart of a lion, brave and beautiful. I'm looking forward to seeing you in wash. state.
Sandalstraps,
another thing we have in common, martial arts. A few thoughts:
When you practice the strikes, are you hitting things? Kicking shields or focus mits or heavy bags? It's a simple suggestion, but air strikes are tough on the joints I hear.
I haven't done kempo, but I wonder if that was Inosanto's first system, what was the sensei's name, Ed Parker? Legend has it that guru Dan suggested the poetic names for the techniques. Squeeze the grape. Yikes. You should hear the Filipino guys talk, though.
For me, martial arts channels very real energy constructively. I forgot how much of that I carry until I spent the last two days working out. I'd go back today if the school was open. But I surely need a friendly environment. A place where the body is built up, not torn down. Your system, or at least your school, does sound intense. Quite unlike the philosophy on the old Kung Fu series...it is better to wound than to maim, all that...aikido might be the place for you. But then look at Segal. Famous, among other things, for hurting people right on the set. Again, the man not the system is what matters.
I am a life-long fan of Bruce Lee, the Sijo, Lee Jun Fan, the Man. His insight past the tradition-heavy systems so long in place in martial arts...'we've always done it this way'...probably designed to protect one culture's arts from being taken over by another, also to retain techniques that worked, but co-opted in America into the belt/rank make-money b.s. which can undermine truth in combat and self-discovery.
As my sifu used to say, 'constant R & D, constant R & D.' And the smart ones in the jkd system do just that. Inosanto was always learning a new martial art, drawing from every possible source to see what worked best for him. I prefer this creative, open-minded approach (thinking of Paolo Freire's praxis here) to those who argue that jkd is a style, a system, and that we must do exactly what Bruce did. Sorry, but that was Linda's position as I understood it a few years ago, and the position of others who should have known better and whose motive I suspect to this day.
'Use no way as way.'
Or as Dan Inosanto would say, you guys argue about this, I'm going to go kick the bag.
Good luck M with your move north, and good luck S, finding a paying outlet for your genius brain. Also, best of luck looking for a gentler martial arts path. Very spiritual aikido, traditional jiu-jitsu, highly moral schools, they're out there.
This makes me want to do a full blog on martial arts and Bruce's philosophy in particular. One of these days.
t
I am a musician who has been impacted by Keith Green and I would be honored if you would check out my music, all music is free to download. I just wanted to share my music with People who love Jesus. www.SeanDietrich.com
I don't want to be a pest, so if this really annoys you, please delete it and accept my humble apology.
Thanks so much,
-Sean
____________________
www.SeanDietrich.com
"All my music is free."